Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Does IQ really matter?

Many are starting to wonder if an IQ test is really the right way to test and measure intelligence. I believe that the IQ test is not really the right way to test kids and people for their intelligence for example some people aren't good test takers so they might not do as well. Also the social categorization it places on kids especially. If you get a bad score then you're labeled as someone who is not smart. Some kids could be good at verbal tests or something different than just the standard test. In some cases there is an immense amount of pressure on the kids to ge a good score and if they don't do well they will feel bad about themselves.

Image result for IQ testImage result for IQ test

The story of Prometheus is a great example of defiance and doing what the right ting to do is. He may have disobeyed Jupiter but he helped mankind if he had not they would starve an turn to cannibalism. As Prometheus was always thinking of the future and he knew what would happen if he didn't help the young civilization. He helped the people gain intelligence and learn how to cook food work with metal and build houses. This  may have gottn him punished but he helped the people. He didn't leave them helpless like the IQ sometimes does.

Question: How many people still feel unintelligent because of the current but innacurate IQ test?
  I would think many people,  from what i've observed from my peer is that it makes tem really nervous and after they take it they feel not smart and their self esteem drops. I believe that the test is inaccurate because it doesn't actually tell you how intelligent you are. It depends on the type of person you are if you are good at tests r if you are particularly good at whatever they are being tested on. Intelligence comes in a wide rage tere is not just one type of it. Some people are artistically talented some are athletically. You can't know what they are intelligent at by these IQ tests. They need to modify the tests for ech person so they will do better.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

My Compelling Three Reasons

  In my opinion I feel that books are better than the movies. However, this time In the Giver  I think that the movie is significantly better than the book. The three reasons why I feel this way are the characters are more developed, you can see and feel the emotions better and  the ending is better.

   The Giver  movie has more characters involved in the main plot and you can really see who they are. For example, the Chief Elder is a much bigger character and is actually like the main villain in the story. In contrast to in the book she is only mentioned a few times. This gives the story more action and conflict making it very fun to watch. Also it gives more on Jonas and his friends Fiona and Asher. These characters are much more thought out in the movie than the book. As sort of another enemy Asher becomes an ally with the Chief Elder and tries to turn in Jonas to be released. Fiona in the book was not described very well. It looked like she was just given a simple bit of information and then king of left out after that in the book. In the movie she is very well described and has more of a big part in the story. This shows a lot more emotion as Jonas and Fiona had a deep passion for eachother as opposed to in the book it was not really a big thing. These characters are way more fun to watch throughout the movie than the book. The movie does a great job developing and letting the audience understand the characters.
My second reason is you can see and an feel the emotions better in the movie. The book may have slowed down and talked about these emotions but it was much more effective seeing the emotions on the screen. Seeing what they looked like and how they reacted in the movie was very engrossing. I loved how the movie did this. The book didn't really show me that much so I was bored at some time reading the book. Another example is the deep loving connection between the Giver and Jonas, it was portrayed in such a way that you could feel what these two characters felt at certain points in the movie. The intense rivalry between Jonas and Asher and the infatuating "love" between Jonas and Fiona were not really present int the book. Jonas and Asher even fought eachother and showed what felt like hate but really wasn't. Asher eventually ended up giving Jonas and Gabriel a chance to live which shows they don't really hate each other. In the movie Fiona and Asher actually kissed  and hugged and showed their feelings for eachother in the book it was nothing more than a friendly appreciation. This shows that you could see and feel the emotions better in the movie
My third reason is the ending. This is probably the most speculated part of the story. Some people hate the cliffhanger ending and some people love it. The book ends it with them sliding down the hill not showing you anything leaving you to imagine your own ending. Although, this frustrates some people including me. Humans in life always expect a happy ending or a dramatic ending but leaving you with nothing is kind of puzzling. it needs to leave you with a resolve, in some cases this type of ending works but for this book I do not believe it works. Lois Lowry makes you want to like Jonas and really care for his wellbeing with this ending it just leaves the readers wondering without an answer and a resolution most people will be mad. This ending was very clever and it makes you glad that she did manage to make a sequel to the Giver because of that interesting ending.

I highly respect Lois Lowry as an author and how she writes so well. But in this case I think that the movie did a better job with the story than the book did. In some times the book was better than the movie and in some places the movie was better than the book. Myself and most likely many others believe the movie is better than the book.

Tuesday, April 5, 2016


In the book chapters 3 and 4 this book got even stranger for me.Jonas and his family go to his father's work place, while they play and care for Gabriel. And then Jonas goes and volunteers at the House of Old with Asher and Fiona. I find it very peculiar on how they are so comfortable with seeing the old people like that and have the maturity not to laugh. For me that's a job I probably could not do. Why doesn't Jonas find a job he likes? Maybe he won't be so apprehensive about his future job.

Monday, April 4, 2016

Very Strange


 I read "the Giver" by Lois Lowry. From the start of the book I can tell it's based on a perfect organized society everyone goes through the same things and nobody is really "different".I think that Jonas should be the person who strives to be different from the rest and be given the job nobody else has. It feels like Jonas is going to do something that changes everything. What will Jonas's job be? Will he be a Nurturer like his father?

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Utopia may be overrated

    The article I read " Dystopias:Definition and Characteristics." It stated that Utopia is  an ideal place or state. A utopia place would so awesome and and appealing at the start but once you live it there is nothing happening. The same things would happen day after day without anything new varying or changing. This would make people just sit around to do nothing and the whole world would just be standing idle. Utopia sounds happy compared to Dystopia but do u want action and danger or happiness and everything to be boring?


Monday, March 21, 2016

Too Good To Be True?

    I read " Utopia and Dystopia Information." It was petty informative. The author mainly said that Utopia is like a perfect environment and it is governed by laws that brings joy to everyone. Also he said it's the opposite of like an oppressive or repressive place. I think he basically meant it's perfect and everything is happy and there is no conflict in anything. I think it is pretty correct living in a Utopian future would be dull and boring, however, in a dystopian future it would be scary and exciting. So I am not exactly sure which future I like better.


Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Are screens really that important?

  I read the article " Media and Children" it was very factual. The author was trying to get across that parents need to step in and not let their kids to be obsessed with their screens. I feel that the author is very correct. From what I see not many kids would give up their screens on their own. They need somebody they trust to step in and do something. The point is we do't have to be on our phones 24/7 life i happening around us and we are not seeing it while we are on our screens.

   Article URL:https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/pages/media-and-children.aspx