Author Archives: Ava

Sloan from Space

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. Gregory Sloan, a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Radio-physics and Space Research here came to talk to us about science versus religion, a hotly debated argument when it is debated. It is always intriguing when this is contested, especially for me because I am religious to a certain extent, but I am a science major. Often times when working with other to-be-scientists, I am usually the only one who identifies strongly with a religion and I find it fascinating.

While we did not directly address questions that I wanted answers to, we did discuss Galileo’s trial, including the politics, sociology, and religious turmoil in regards to his very scientific discoveries. We focused on whether this was really a debate on science versus religion, or something much more.

We talked about the solar system and its previous models (which was nostologic, because I learned a lot about space when I was little and loved every minute of it. It’s quite unfortunate that I can’t take an astronomy class here.) Galileo came up with the heliocentric model in direct opposition of the geocentric one, aggravating the Church as well, which was very prominent at the time in everything. (It was interesting that Dr. Sloan said that monetary power and social influences gave the church its power because in my seminar on power, inequality and happiness, we touched upon the fact that sometimes “God” reinforces power and social classes due to the fact that some receive it as a sign that they’re doing well, or give them hope. It’s a great class and if you’re interested, I recommend it.)

In summary, Galileo was not attacking the Church; they just wanted the last say. The Church wanted to remain in control of the people, the money and the status. This was wrong of them, especially since Galileo was right and gave new light to what space is actually like. He was not trying to undermine the Church but rather enlighten people.

Don’t mess with me.

Posted on by
3

Friday the 13th was a pretty cool day, I don’t think anything bad happened to me, except the fact that an instructor kept “attacking” me until I could block her move. Let me explain.

There was a self-defense workshop held by Rose House, given to us by the Karate instructor Kathleen Garrity and her assistant Robbie. It was PHENOMENAL. There was so much participation and knowledge that this became one one of my personal favorites. I learned a little bit of self-defense in high school, but having a refresher course was nice.

We started off by working on our stance because the way you stand can either make you appear as an easy target or victim or less vulnerable by focusing all your energy and balancing yourself. It even gives you a confidence boost. We learned some basic moves such as the palm to the chin, pulling the attacker into your knee and even grabbing evasion tactics. Key tips are to have great timing, balance and get away from the attacker after you strike.

I was actually really surprised at a couple of things. One for sure was that we actually got physical. (I guess there is no better way than to do.) Secondly, we can do anything if we put our minds to it. Two girls with no extensive martial arts training actually got a chance to break boards. After only an hour of channeling their inner strengths, they were successful! It was insane and everyone cheered for them! Lastly, and the most important in my opinion, our voices are so powerful. With every strike, we make a sound, but the projection of that sound can startle someone. Using a strong, clear voice makes the attacker know that you are serious and confident in yourself. I think here at Cornell our voices can definitely help us get out of unsafe situations and I’m glad we had this workshop!

It was also pretty adorable that the House Professor’s son came in and gave demos and participated for a little bit. I definitely enjoyed this activity and hope there are more like it!

Why can’t I love?

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, I was intrigued by the seminar called “How do we love?” It was definitely an interesting topic to discuss, especially for strangers to do so, since most of us didn’t know one another or were paired up with someone we didn’t know.

For me personally, I’m never one to talk about my feelings, but this seminar was all about love. It was very difficult for me to start off and express my own views, so I stuck with very generic answers to the questions, drawing from the information in the packet already. However, I was finally able to get comfortable enough to share my actual ideas and thought about love.

My ideas of love somewhat differ from most of my peers. In fact, I felt very jaded at first and doubted myself and my views. My partner was extremely nice and understanding and allowed me time to clarify and get my thoughts together so that I could articulate what I meant and sound less like a cold-hearted person.

We both came to the conclusion that “love” means so many different things; it encompasses different things or people based on each individual. Just because one defines love one way, doesn’t mean that it is wrong simply because it doesn’t align with the majority’s thoughts; it doesn’t make you jaded. In fact, we also discussed that “love” was a commonly used word, even when it other words best fit the scenario. With the common misuse/overuse of the word, I think this seminar helped to create something thought behind the word’s usage. It definitely was a good PSA and it definitely made me re-evaluate my definition of the world love and the nouns I’d use it for.

Secret of the Libraries

Posted on by
Reply

This past Friday, the Rose Scholars got an inside look at the Rare Manuscripts found in Kroch Library. It was pretty cool, to say the least, to learn about how the books were kept and exactly what rare things we had in possession here at Cornell.

We saw some old documents signed by Abraham Lincoln that were important to the nation’s history as well as an engraving of the men all walking to sign this document. After that, we walked into the teaching room where Lance, our guide, walked us through the history of books.

We took a look at some interesting books, like one full of hymns and ceremonial proceedings that had a chain for protection. This book was fascinating because half of it was written by hand and the other half was typed. We also saw the way Charles Dickens first published his books, and they weren’t exactly books, but rather a series in which he just released chapters. This was for two reasons, one to keep readings hooked and increase sales and two, he never really finished his books before releasing bits of it out.

We also got to look at things specific to Cornell history. AD White actually gave his collection of books to Cornell but requested it to be in a fireproof building. We saw the original blueprints to what is now Uris Library. We also saw handwritten letters from the first resident and even Mark Twain discussing admissions to the University.

We also learned cool facts such as the fact that EB White was called Andy and most of his original drafts were left as a note by Andy. He was a writer in the daily sun, who also have copies of his works, which were also drafted out by “Andy.”

If you ever get a chance to visit the Rare Collections, I would definitely recommend that you do. They have new displays every so often; such as the Hip Hop exhibition last year to the new secular religions exhibit right now. You might also get to see a book of Shakespeare’s Plays that is worth over 5 million dollars, so crazy! Check it out!

War’s pretty messed up.

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Ohlins from the law school cam as the guest speaker for this week’s Café Series. We had a fascinating discussion about international criminal law, focusing specifically on war crimes.

In the beginning of the night, we had a poll everywhere question naming war criminals we knew that were/are very terrible. A few big names from the work cloud were Omar, Al Bashir. House professor Garrick was also on the list as a form of amusement (I hope). We started off the discussion by talking about the Afghanistan incident involving the bombing of a hospital with Doctors without Borders workers. The bombing killed 22 people and the question was whether it was a war crime or not.

That led into a discussion of what constitutes a war crime and what happens if it is. Basically a hospital is seen as a protected place, and is not really supposed to be attacked in war. While the main rule is that soldiers cannot kill civilians, they can kill civilians when justified. Justifications are not based on any rule or numerical value, but rather the worth and appropriation of the aftermath. If the target that the military was looking for was extremely dangerous, then killing civilians is justified. If it just one person that is being targeted and a million civilians may not be justified.

We then got into a discussion about the International Crime Court and its power and involvement in war criminal trials. The United States is not a member of the international crime court, interestingly enough. There were three problems mentioned with the pursuit of a war criminal to be put on trial by the ICC. Two of the major problems are that the country must be a part of the ICC and the fact that war crimes happen everyday. There is also no police force so they can’t physically bring the criminal to court. However, if you are a criminal an arrest warrant is issued, meaning that any country part of the ICC must arrest that person.

Yet another problem is that presidents and other world leaders have sovereign immunity so we can’t arrest them. The argument here is the state the country will be in if the leader is removed. I personally think that if the leader is a war criminal, the country might actually be better off with his removal. Diplomatic immunity impeded in another case concerning South Africa and the pursuit of a president committing mass murders of his people. The countries that don’t follow through have no real punishment, as the security counsel does not do anything.

The professor wrapped up with a brief order of the view the ICC has: Crimes against humanity >War criminal > than diplomatic immunity. I completely agree with the ICC view and it’s a shame that their policies aren’t really enforced.

Student Assembly Meetings are Intense

Posted on by
3

Last Thursday, I went to my first Student Assembly meeting. It was a last minute addition to weekly events, so I said why not.

To my surprise, this meeting was very official and intense. The panel of SA members sat in a semicircle facing the audience. They had name cards and there were microphones placed around the room. Speakers who had issues they wanted to bring forth were given a seat in the middle between the SA and the audience, facing the panel. It was very crowded and more chairs had to be brought in.

The first issue I heard about was the table problem in Duffield. A recap of the problem was that students complained that there were not enough tables for student to study at in the atrium. Some observations were made that there was indeed enough tables because there were several big tables that only had one student at each table, resulting in a waste of space. I personally think that it okay to join other students at a table, especially if there are no other seats. Since you’ll both be doing work, there is no need to worry about distracting the other person. Who knows, maybe you’ll make a friend or a study buddy! The issue was not resolved and was actually “tabled” for the next meeting.

The next order of business that was important was President Garrett and Vice President Lombardi. This was the first time I heard the president speak and I was quite impressed. Her background as a female lawyer makes her a very interesting addition to the institution. It was also her first time at a student assembly meeting as well and she was as impressed as I was.

Big themes for the president are freedom and responsibility and that was apparent in her address to the SA. She stated that she wanted Cornell to set the pace for other universities and highlight the interdisciplinary stature of the university. She wanted the student experience to dictate what the university experience was like; incorporating student input and feedback is crucial to this process. She wants to have a freedom of discussion, however this discussion must not disturb the business of the university. She placed a lot of emphasis on having robust dialogue but also maintaining a level of respect for each other and rationality.

I agree with all of these points, especially her point about us taking care of each other as students and peers. I agree with her completely when she said that as students, we have the most influence on other students. The administrations side of Cornell can only do so much. If they pass rules that we must follow, it’s up to us to follow through and respect the rules. She is one hundred percent right in saying that the university can only do so much and go so far. I think it’s a message to us as students to do our best and look out for each other.

Immigration and Art

Posted on by
Reply

Precious Artwork

Art work is usually influenced by the artist’s experiences and observations. The piece that intrigued me the most at the Rose Art Show was the sculpture with the three heads, which was chosen to be displayed because of the historical significance and relevance to events today. When I got a chance to speak with the artist, Nicholas Lawson Carbonaro, about this piece, I found myself in a thought provoking conversation about the quest for a better life.

Nicholas talked about his New York roots and how his family has lived for centuries in the city. Originally from Sunnyside, he moved to Ithaca about two years ago, returning to the area post graduation from Ithaca College. Living in Sunnyside gave him the opportunity to how both halves live; the more privileged folks he identified with, and the immigrants who moved in search of a better life.

The sculpture was almost thrown out, but luckily it was saved and transported to Ithaca. This piece was of great significance to the artist because it made him appreciate all the advantages he had in life. It represents all the struggles immigrants and refugees had to go through in order to find a happier life. Even to this day, there are still people in this world who need to escape their countries in order to attain a better life.

We also started talking about the prices we pay to live, both figuratively and literally. To live in a nice neighborhood it costs a lot. To live in a better place, sacrifices are needed. This conversation made me appreciate all that I have more and the struggles my family faced as an immigrating family. It definitely is an eye-opening piece that makes anyone reconsider just how lucky they are to be in a better position than most people other countries worldwide.