People continue to express skepticism of virtual environments like Second Life. This KQED mini-documentary changes things a bit and for the first time I feel like there are some practical applications to virtual worlds. With the use of SL, learning and group interaction certainly takes on a new dimension. Second Life is struggling because there aren't compelling reason to visit the environment, but interacting with a simulation of a real life environment makes learning online much more engaging and dynamic. Visualizing the classroom and your fellow classmates makes the educational experience more real. There additional human element lets peers establish relationships and display personality that will make long distance learning more engaging. This makes me feel like SL has just gotten off to a slow start, and now it's potential is getting recognized.
This spoof was dead on because there was seemingly no purpose to floating around Second Life. There were too many opportunities to realize how ridiculous (and boring) the experience was. I think practical applications like this educational program are going to give Second Life a Second Wind.
Why aren't we allowed to procreate with family members. I know, I know, that's gross, it's disgusting, shunned; but why? Well why would we condone behavior that creates devolved offspring?
Everyone alive today has FoxP2 - it is a genetic mutation that makes humans smart and, well human. Pidedality is one trait that is a product of our larger brains and increased intelligence. I recently watched a film on KQED called "Family that Walks on All Fours" that raises an intense scientific issue.
The episode is enlightening - the Turkish family is difficult to watch, they are like animals, they walk on all fours and stare into the camera like zombies - actually it kind of freaked me out!
The family, however, sparked an interesting question that is more of moral and societal question than a scientific one. Let me set up the issue this way. We don't breed with our family members because of the risk that society has deemed unacceptable. Same family breeding allows negative genetic mutations to become dominant, often resulting in retardation. The good of society, is a good enough reason not to allow this behavior. So then, what are the limits to acceptable breeding policy.
It seems taboo to discuss, but we all tote our IQ around with us and our society is made up of a variety of people ranging from, simply put, smart to dumb. We are trained to think that we are all smart in our unique way, but some have a few more pistons firing than others. A lack of intelligence isn't always as visually obvious as walking on all fours, but evolutionarily speaking some humans are not as advanced as others.
That being said, let's look at the Chinese governmental mandate called the "One Child Policy", and take a look at how it might be compared to social policy about inbreeding. Both policies dictate that citizens should not procreate in ways that are harmful to society. Watching "The Family Who Walks On All Fours" I started to wonder why social policy doesn't favor intelligent offspring over the offspring of parents who are less evolved. See the movie Idiocracy. Maybe it's too hard to draw a line without obvious visual deformities, or Is it because we don't have a good enough way of testing how smart or evolved certain individuals are? Why isn't there a test that evaluates our DNA, determines our biological intelligence and dictates whether we're permitted to have 1 kid ( below par) or 3 kids ( really smart), or maybe not any kids at all?
I think about mandates currently in place to enhance our society, how they will change and what we can do to encourage intelligence without becoming a bunch of Nazis.
People continue to express skepticism of virtual environments like Second Life. This KQED mini-documentary changes things a bit and for the first time I feel like there are some practical applications to virtual worlds. With the use of SL, learning and group interaction certainly takes on a new dimension. Second Life is struggling because there aren't compelling reason to visit the environment, but interacting with a simulation of a real life environment makes learning online much more engaging and dynamic. Visualizing the classroom and your fellow classmates makes the educational experience more real. There additional human element lets peers establish relationships and display personality that will make long distance learning more engaging. This makes me feel like SL has just gotten off to a slow start, and now it's potential is getting recognized.
