22. The Tyranny of The Bookstore

Any college student across the country could tell you how frustrating the textbook system is. Prices are too high, The buybacks and sellbacks are under-advertised almost as if to fool students into missing them, and books are made to be available only through the bookstore. You're forced to play by their rules--rules which are unfair.

If The Bookstore is a profit-making entity, why doesn't competition do its perfect work and drive them to caterer to the customers needs? With a free-market system about "The customer is always right"how do they get away with forcing the customer to bow to their wishes?

The problem lies in the definition of the textbook market: It is far from a free-market system--it actually more closely resembles a government-controlled market with government created monopolies. Much like a government patenting the production of products the University collaborates with the bookstore making it impossible for students to buy books elsewhere--otherwise they fail the course and do not get their degree from the University.

By the way of definition the bookstore is a firm with no private authority over consumers and the University is an entity with real authority over the consumer-students who have willingly surrendered some of their freedoms when affirmatively responding to their acceptance letter. So in essence, because the bookstore collaborates with the University the bookstore can use the Universities authority to impose prices upon consumers. This changes the rules of the economic system meaning that students must live in both a world of free-market rules off of campus as well as socialistic rules imposed on campus.

Looking at the example of the University Bookstore, why do we as rational human beings choose to give up our freedoms to control-based economies rather than playing simply by the rules of the free-market? The answer is rational: Humans choose a system that benefits them now. When people loose or suffer losses playing by the free-market systems rules they seek to recover those losses by changing the rules. Though they lost fair and square they'd rather change the rules to benefit themselves--what they miss is that changing the rules benefits none but themselves. They also miss the fact that placing any type of authority based control over the free-market results in unfettered tyranny. They are like the foolish Israelites who plead with Samuel to be placed under the tyranny of a King.

21. In The End

This semester has been an interesting one. A lot of good things have happened offset by some bad, but overall it has been great. It's neat to look at my progression of thoughts in this blog and even to look at the chain of events that inspired each post. Looking back I can detect growth in my literary knowledge and writing abilities. Also, I've been better able to make sense of the world around me as I have gained the tools necessary to do so in English 251 as well as others classes.

To me, the area in which I have seen the most growth has been in my ability to apply the subject matter of school to the Gospel and vice versa. I'm excited about all of the possibilities that this will open up for me in the remaining years of school. I am developing this idea for my final paper with the example of looking at the Joseph Smith History rhetorically.

On a more specific note, I wanted finish my blog by going over 10 terms that I learned in my English 251 class and what they mean to me.

1. Historical Criticism—How history will help us understand the work? This is a good way to read the scriptures. What was Israel like at the time of Isaiah? What was the apostle Paul’s upbringing? Etc.
2. Formalism—Analysis based on the form. To do this we ignore the historical background or anything that we know about the author and just look at the pieces that make the work enjoyable. What devises are used in Nephi’s Psalm that make it enjoyable?
3. Mythical Criticism—Looking at mythical influence or archetypal patterns in a work. Most common in our time is the archetypal hero that we see reoccurring in scriptures, literature and movies in all periods of time. How does Christ fit in with the Archetypal Journey?
4. Rhetorical Criticism—Looking at what the author is trying to persuade us to do and how are they doing it? What is President Monson trying to persuade me to do?
5. Marxism Criticism—Criticism concerned with how a work effects economics. What was the effect of Christ’s teachings to “sell all you hath”? What is it about Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight that causes so many Americans to buy it?
6. Moral or Philosophical Criticism—ideas and values, truth, forgetfulness, clarity, consistency, complexity, what ideas, values or truths influenced the writer or what ideas has this writer pushed the same values? What Kind of person is the grandmother in Grace O’Connor’s A Good Man Is Hard To Find?
7. New Historicism—Looking at a text from our current view and asking what does a text do. New Historicism becomes a bit of a hodgepodge of all styles of criticism because we look a work from all angles (philosophical, historical, formal, rhetorical, etc.). What does Homer’s The Odyssey do to kids who read it today? What is the effect of Bob Dylan’s poetry on the world as we know it?
8. Organicism—A style of writing compared to a plant; a text takes it’s own unique form. A poem begins with an idea (seed) which is cultivated in the work. The ideas for my papers came as a little seed that I let grow, though I was constrained by the grading rubric.
9. Sonnet—A form of poetry. The Shakespearean form included 14 lines with three stanza’s of an alternating rhyme scheme (abab) finished with a couplet. He also wrote in iambic pentameter and separated the stanza’s subjectively by introducing the problem and ending with a resolution. This was a lot harder to do than I thought it would be.
10. Narrative paradigm—argues that the world is a series of stories that we can choose from; we tell stories not to entertain, but to pass on values and what we see as reality. The idea is that whatever I will write from here on will become a part of a collective "story" that others will write from and add to.

20. Incentives and The Gospel

Many economists will tell you that the whole study of economics is simply the study of how people respond to incentives. If you take any economic theory or principle you will find at it's core that it is based on incentives and how humans interact with them. Take supply and demand for example. The principle of demand is that at a low price people will respond by buying more than when it is at a high price. Why? Because they have more incentive to buy more because it maximizes their well-being. The same can be said for suppliers wanting to sell more at a high price.

This universal truth can be frustrating for one with morals because it seemingly portrays all humans as selfish. But really, is the Gospel any different? Do people do good to others because they chose to ignore the incentive to get ahead? Looking at it from a more eternal perspective, the benevolent Christian responds to incentives just as much as the money-hungry capitalist. What is different is that they see different incentives. The benevolent see the incentive for eternal life and God's approval weighing more than worldly enterprise. The profit-hungry either don't weigh this as a stronger incentive or they do not believe it to be a real incentive.

Indeed people do respond to incentives as economics teaches. What those incentives are and how much weight they carry can only be interpreted on a personal level.

19. The Statistics of Good Parenting

I just read a really enlightening study. In first reading it I was a little put off, but after really look at it I felt like the conclusion fit in well with my beliefs.

This study was a result of an economist, Steven Levitt, who did some statistical analysis based on data collected from a government survey of the Chicago Public School System in the nineties. The survey involved collecting information from a large demographic of children from their kindergarten year to their 5th grade year. This information included test scores and other academic measurements as well as information about the child's upbringing and family situation. What Dr. Levitt was seeking to analyze is correlation between the information of a child's upbringing and social situation with their test scores as a way of determining exactly what contributes to the success of children.

Surprisingly many factors that I thought would contribute to how successful a child would be showed no correlation--things like if parents were involved in the PTA or if they took their kids to museums or other cultural experiences. Factors that did correlate to children's success were parents salary, and if they're mother was over 30 years old when they had them. At first glass these results went against my beliefs of good parenting. Why wouldn't active parents--like the one's who go to museums with the kids and are in the PTA--not have more successful children then parents who are simply rich and old? There is an important statistical concept to consider in order to understand the conclusion of this study.

Correlation simply means that the two factors go together, not that one causes the other. Correlation tells us that snow and cold go together, but not whether snow causes it to be cold or if the cold causes snow. We do not know that mother's waiting until they are older to have children means that those kids will automatically be smart--only that older mothers typically have smarter kids. What can we draw from this? Well, older mother's are typically involved in education or a career and are also much more prepared to raise children than the average teen-pregnancy case. It would make sense that they would be able to raise more successful children. All that this teaches us is that parents who have succeeded in life are more likely to have successful children. They have worked hard to for their larger-than-average salary.

At first glance, this study looks like it's saying parents who do things for their kids (PTA museums) have no advantage over parents who are in better circumstances (more money, older), which is what had troubled me at first. The truth is almost the complete opposite. As we've seen, there are factors that contribute to the parents success. This study simply shows us that it's the things you've done before you have your kids that make you a successful parent. Doing things like PTA and museums will mean little if you are not a good parent to start off with (which is why they show no correlation). This fits in with my belief that good people make good parents. Guess I'd better get started now being a good person after all.

18. The World Shrinking

I know a lot of students hate the general classes required for graduation, but I love them. I think most students want to spend their time focusing on subjects they are most interested in, which I understand. What I love about generals is the feeling I get at the end of the semester. It feels like the world shrinks a little each semester. Not that the diameter of the world physically drops a few sizes like the waist of my sister on a diet, but that it appears smaller to me. I can understand it a little more.

American Heritage has helped me understand more of the basics of our history and our government. I don't by any means feel like an expert in politics, but the things I've learned have helped me feel less intimidated by politics. I could say the same about about my Statistics class or any of the others. I think generals are so important in our education because they teach us how to live in the world we are in, while our majors may teach us how to get ahead in it.

17. Uchtodorf and Ethos, Pathos and Logos

Rhetoric is at the center of the Gospel. The Savior died so that all might be able to repent and his disciples go forth to persuade all to believe in him and repent. Rhetoric is the study of how we persuade--what we are persuading our audience to do or believe and how are we doing it. Conference is the perfect way to see rhetoric in action.

President Dieter F. Uchtdorf's Sunday morning talk on compassion was rich in rhetoric. He utilized emotional appeal, or pathos, by sharing the story of the "canned-food-Mormons." This was the name unaffectionately given to the poor who came into the church after recieving church wellfare. The description of them coming into the church hungering the sweetness of the Gospel causes his audience to feel compassion of these helpless people discouraging us to judge others in need.

His appeal to our ability to trust, or ethos, came most powerfully as he used the example and words of the Savior. He knows his audience are all those of a professed belief in Christ as their ultimate example and so when President Uchtdorf uses Christ's example of accepting all with open arms, he knows this is more powerful than simply asking them to do the same thing.

President Uchtdorf uses logos, or an appeal to logic, brilliantly with a simple story. He tells of an old woman who sees herself as a $20 bill. She says she is old, used and worn, but is just as much worth the same amount as any other $20 bill. What he is teaching us is that everyone has value, though on the outside if may appear differently. Using logical comparison as his tool for such teaching is effective in at least two ways: First, it easy to be understood because all in his audience know what money looks like. Second, as a story it is memorable so that the logical lesson remains long after he has finished his talk.

16. Thoughts On The Formulation Of Thoughts

Have you ever thought about why peoples minds work differently from others? This fact is most obvious in a family situation. If the way your mind works comes from your parents siblings should be pretty similar. In such an environment difference in thought cannot be attributed to a difference in their growing-up environment since they are so intimately similar between siblings. Any differences in opinion whether political, philosophical or moral can be mostly attributed to personal taste and judgment which constitute how an individuals mind works. What influences personal taste is another discussion all together.

One of the reasons I so love to talk to my Dad about my problems is because he is so mathematical in his approach. He's able to quickly see solutions which will bring the most harmony in my life. My Dad's an accountant and so I imagine him thinking through life problems in the same way in which he does someones taxes: always ensuring that liabilities and assets exactly equal each other and always running his solutions through eternal principles as if he's balancing a long equation.

I believe my method of thinking through things comes a lot from my background in art. I have to sketch out possible solutions--erasing here and there and adding here and there until I see a scenario that is balanced and harmonious.