Owning People

Why do people want to claim ownership, such as ‘my friend,’ or ‘my mom,’ over other people and is it right to do so? In modern society it seems that many people have the want to claim ownership to people. For example we commonly say phrases like: "my Mom," "my Dad," or "My Friend." But what is out justification. Many times we claim ownership to tings we had labored to create or obtain, like "my House," but unless we are someones parents we do create, or buy people. Instead perhaps, people tend to want to claim ownership over people over others because of the bonds they have labored to create. But is right to claim ownership over people. Often times this becomes a touchy subject. In American culture, we often tend to think back to slavery and automatically reject the idea, and yet still phrases like "my friend" are ever present. 
I think that there is a general, silent, agreement that even though we may say "my friend," we do not actually have any true ownership over the individual, but simply a close bond with them. If that is the case, there is no true harm in the statement but rather a way to show connection. 

Response to Brandon Gaudet

You can find the original post http://nayru-gwlt-philosowater.blogspot.com/2012/04/how-does-american-public-education.html

I agree that in Public education, Marx and his ideas are often criticized and made out to be evil or completely ignored. As far as my own education, I remember his name being mentioned and that he had connections to communism and then he was never mentioned again. I never had to read any of his writings or look closely at his theories.

I also agree that when it comes to education, our society tends to be very gullible. We listen, without doubt, to our teachers, friends, family, or even television, to information and never think twice to question it. We absorb information like it is the absolute truth. When it comes to international dealings, this mindset sets people, and the country, up for humiliation. We can come off as ignorant and extremely biased. 

Alienated Company Owner?

Are the owners, or heads of companies, as alienated from the product as Marx claims the workers are? Marx suggests that workers become very alienated for their work. The best example of this is that factory workers never may never get a chance to own or even see the product that they have been laboring to create. Similarly a worker is also alienated from his or her nature. This is in part because in most jobs the worker is constantly being told what to create and never has any creative choice. I am curious if the same is true for the owner of a company. Unlike the workers, in general, they do see the profits directly and stand to gain the most from productions of goods. However, in a manner they could also be considered alienated because they do not actually create the product. Of course this alienation may very well be seen as welcomed, however unfair, for many company owners, get the greatest profit from the least amount of physical, or even mental, work. 

Seeing What We Want

During a conversation with friends it was brought up that, given history and location, Jesus would look very different than how many western people picture him. In all probability he would not be white or even as tall as he is depicted. The same thing happens when trying to depict God. 'He' is supposed to be beyond humanity's imagination and yet we still try to attach an image with him, and many people never think twice about the idea. I think that it is partially that we see what we want to see, almost like selective hearing. Even though facts may be present people still choose the believe what they already know. In away it is similar to denying that an accident occurred just simply because you couldn't handle that idea that it were true. When looking at religious icons, many followers would be thrown off guard if they were presented with images that contradicted their image of the lord and savior. 

Religion and Holidays

It is interesting to see how far Christian holidays have drifted away from their original purpose.  For instance, this weekend many families celebrated Easter. When I was young, the first things that came to my mind when I heard it was Easter, was eggs, candy and bunnies. It was not until I was much older that the concept of Christ being reborn was even brought to my attention. The same thing can be observed in commercials around holidays, religious aspects are put away and instead we are flooded with commercialism. It begs the question how characters and traditions like the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause became intertwined with events like the death and birth of Christ.
Another question that arises is whether or not it is right to celebrate such diluted holidays. Of course it has become obvious that such holidays are becoming over run by unnecessary commercials and products, but all traditions still have value. Whether religious or not, holidays, however celebrated, have the power to bring together families and remind people of what they are thankful for.

Fueling Sterotypes

Is it possible that stories in the Bible, such as Genesis (3:6), have fueled social stereotypes of the different genders? Many of the Bible's stories depict woman as the cause of chaos, giving into temptation and then persuading her husband to follow. There are also those who say woman was created after man to serve him and many also suggest that man is the primary form of humanity. It is interesting to see how similar these stories are to stereotypes that still exist today. For instant, many thought, and some still do, that women belong at home taking care of children, taking care of the house, and tending to what ever their husband wants. We can see traces of how women led to temptation in who has been elected to positions of power, such as presidents. It would be interesting to know how many stories from the Bible have led stereotypes that still exists today.

In the Image

What does it mean to be made in the “image of God?” It is constantly brought up in the Christian religion that mankind was created in the image of God himself. But there are so many contrary statements to that in the Bible's teachings so what could the statement really mean? It has been made very clear to us that God is in no way human and the visual representations of God that we see depicted in many European artworks is simply a metaphor. So what do we share with God? It can be speculated  that God created human with souls, or the spark of the Divine. In this respect, although we are no where near the power that God posses, we do have dominion over all other living creatures, who, according to Christianity, do not have souls. This idea of having a soul also allows us to live on beyond the time that our bodies perish. What we can say without doubt is that the idea of humans being created in God's image cannot be taken literally but rather as metaphor to another aspects the humankind.