Author Archives: Deepika

Healthcare Rights

Posted on by

This week’s table talk was about the fundamental question of whether or not healthcare is a right. To answer this question, we first had to define what is a right and who should be the one providing this right (the federal or state government? The United Nations?). A lot of what we take for granted are actually rights, like the right to clean water or trash removal. These responsibilities are handled by the government and there is no debate about it. However, the problem with healthcare is that it is so firmly intertwined to employment. One really interesting thing I learned from the article is that in World War II, the government imposed a wage freeze to keep labour costs from skyrocketing. Employers needed to somehow attract desired employees so the government allowed them to increase health insurance benefits and made them tax-exempt. Because of this context of history, health insurance coverage is tied to jobs leaving those who do not have company jobs (low-wage workers, the unemployed, small business owners, children, the elderly, and the disabled) with more obstacles for attaining insurance.

Unsurprisingly, the US is frequently ranked worst in the developed world for the healthcare system. In my opinion, it’s pretty embarrassing that we even have to have a debate about whether or not healthcare is a right. It comes down to the moral question about whether people who are wealthy have more of a right to live compared to those who cannot afford insurance. GRF Sara was telling us about how when she visits the doctor’s office in Canada (where there is a publicly funded healthcare system), she sees people of all different races and socioeconomic backgrounds in the waiting rooms. But in America, she does not necessarily see that. That was really disheartening to hear and as I reflect upon it, my own experiences match up. Certainly there are drawbacks to universal healthcare and I am not informed enough to come to any sort of conclusion but a system based on discrimination against the weak and poor seems fundamentally wrong. The answer to the original question ‘Is healthcare a right?’ was overwhelmingly ‘yes’ by the other Rose Scholars at the table. With our participation in democracy, I really hope we can progress in the right direction.

The paradox of modern primitivism

Posted on by

Last week’s Rose Cafe was about modern primitivism, which dived into nuances of culture and society that I had never really thought about. It was very enlightening and it was clear that GRF Sam was very passionate about the topic which made the discussion much more engaging and enjoyable. We started by looking at various pictures and watching short clips to get an idea about what is meant by words like “modern” and “primitive.” A lot of society’s perception about these things is shaped by the ideas of colonialism. One really interesting example was comparing Pablo Picasso’s racist depiction of “primitives” vs. Josephine Baker (a black entertainer of the 1920s) and her performance of the banana dance. The differences between the two remain relevant today as we have important conversations about cultural appropriation and why it doesn’t necessarily go both ways. This is due to the context of history which is filled with oppression and struggle for minority groups.

Another interesting topic discussed was about the juxtaposition of primitivism in today’s post-modern society. For example, the trend of the Paleo Diet (in which you eat only as a caveman would) seeks to return to a ‘healthier’ time when there were no manufactured and genetically modified foods. In reality, it is impossible to sustain a population of our size without GMOs and with modern technology and medicine, you are definitely better off in today’s age. A caveman’s average life expectancy was only 35 years after all. One of the take-home messages from the discussion was to be cognisant and to think critically about the instances of modern primitivism in today’s society.

Greatest film of all time?

Posted on by

North by Northwest was certainly an interesting film. I’m a fan of Alfred Hitchcock’s television series and after watching this film, I have to say that I prefer his production of shorter episodes. I think this movie was more action-based than what I consider a psychological thriller, so I was left a little bit disappointed. I didn’t think the movie’s characters were that compelling and I found the plot to be a little bit dry and all over the place. It started off as a typical psychological thriller where you don’t know if they main character has lost his mind or if it is in fact true that the entire world is conspiring against him. Somewhere in the middle, it turned into more of a James Bond spy movie, and by the end it was borderline absurdist. I would definitely hesitate to call it ‘the greatest film of all time’ as others have listed it as.

One thing that I noticed was that a lot of the movie’s thematic and plot elements reminded me of more modern films. This speaks hugely about how influential this work is as an art form and I definitely appreciate that even if it isn’t my favourite movie.

An unstable equilibrium

Posted on by

I really liked this week’s table talk on managing stress. I think discussions about mental health really help to erase the stigma surrounding it and I would love for there to be more talks like this.

After two years in university, I feel like I am finally in a place of (unstable) equilibrium when it comes to stress and mental health. I say unstable because a push in either direction will probably send me reeling for a bit until I can find my way back. From my perspective, much of mental health is walking the fine line between two extremes. For example, a small amount of stress can be motivational wheres too much is overwhelming, too little socialising leads to withdrawal and isolation wheres too much may lead to a neglect of self-care, etc. The right balance for each person is subjective. For example, some people do their homework at the last minute because the pressure to finish on time motivates them so that stress can be considered healthy. For me, the presence of a looming deadline leaves me unable to think clearly so stress from that would be overwhelming. It takes time and patience to find the right balance for each person and it also explains why tips for stress management are effective for some people but not for others.

For me, when I am stressed I tend to internalise my problems so as to not burden other people. This is probably not healthy, but I like to seek other outlets, like writing. I also like running because it feels liberating as I’m literally running away from responsibilities (at least for a short while). Lastly, I think it’s important to incorporate fun into every day so I try to read a bit of a book or a poem, or draw, or watch a video online before sleeping. There are still some days where I am so stressed that I want to lie in bed all day and cry, but I find that this system of balance and fun has really helped me get through the everyday stresses of life.

Beans for beef: save a cow, save the environment

Posted on by

This week’s table talk was all about eco-anxiety and the conscious choices we make when it comes to food and the environment. It was a great discussion and we approached the issue from almost every possible angle – economically, morally, culturally, politically, logistically, etc. I especially found the cultural and ethical aspects to be very interesting and engaging.

A lot of people at the table were vegetarians or vegans. I myself am a half-vegetarian as I only eat chicken, eggs, and the occasional serving of fish and chips. Unlike a lot of people there, I didn’t really choose that sort of diet for ethical reasons but rather for cultural ones. No one in my family eats red meat so I never have either and never want to. But on the flip side, a lot of people are unwilling to give up meat for similar cultural reasons. People undoubtedly have a close connection with the food they grew up with and don’t readily want to give it up. On another level, especially in America, eating meat is often tied with being ‘macho’ and being vegan is seen as ‘wimpy.’ For example, the top search suggestions for veganism: ‘unhealthy,’ ‘debunked,’ and ‘is a cult.’ I think it would be impossible to convince most people to trade in their beef for beans and no amount of scientific evidence is going to change that. We’d have to really start with educating young children but even that has complexities in terms of economics and social inequality. As one scholar brought up, choosing to be vegetarian or vegan is a privilege that many people don’t have.

Another aspect that was really intriguing to me was the tie between environmental activism and ethics. For example, if one person gives up meat but the majority of people don’t, that could be discouraging for the person to continue. I think if you are truly passionate about the environment, you can still drive yourself to do what you think is right regardless of whether other people join or not. I personally try to follow Kantian ethics and the categorical imperative which is to act in a way that you would like other people act as if it were a universal law. Maybe two extra minutes in the shower won’t single-handedly destroy the planet, but can it be justified if everyone took longer showers? With such a daunting problem like climate change, I find it alleviates eco-anxiety when you to try to do your part to make a change and to know your conscious would be clear if your behaviour was universalised.

An objective truth

Posted on by

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” This is one of the most memorable quotes from George Orwell’s 1984 and what came to my mind as I attended this week’s Rose Cafe on ‘fake news’ led by Professor Schwarz.

FAKE NEWS!!! is Donald Trump’s favourite exclamation at anything that doesn’t show him in a favourable light. Yet he is the biggest propagator of ‘fake news’ or more bluntly said, lies. It is also concerning to witness how he tries to rewrite history so that he can never be wrong. Most recently, he deleted his tweets supporting the Alabama primary senate candidate who lost. Trump’s attempt to rewrite the past will probably work with his base but luckily, once something is on the internet, it’s definitely still in existence somewhere. I’m afraid of the time when an authority figure will be able to do things like this to try and change history in a society where people will unthinkingly accept everything they see and hear, a truly Orwellian concept.

However, this is not to say this type of falsities from the government is a new concept. Throughout history, the truth has been bent or neglected in order for a group to push forward their own agenda. Some of the events mentioned in the talk included the vilification of Japanese-Americans in World War II, McCarthyism and the red scare, and the government’s clandestine motivations for the Vietnam War.

What I got out of the talk was the importance of citizens to be engaged politically as well as for news outlets to keep their integrity and report unequivocal truths. The bottom line is that there does exist an objective truth that transcends the human mind, no matter how hard certain groups try misconstrue it. We as the next generation of citizens should try our best to not lose the meaning of truth.

The delicate balance of science and ethics

Posted on by

This week, I attended the Table Talk on genetic engineering. We covered a lot of relevant topics like CRISPR, in-vitro fertilisation, and designer babies. A lot of the discussion was fuelled by our thoughts on the ethical considerations revolving around gene editing. For example, all of us agreed that if there were a way to ensure that a baby would never have any neurological diseases, we would approve of such a technique. But if that same gene change induced a change in intelligence for the baby, then we would start to see some of the negative effects of genes editing. For instance, society may start to discriminate against those who aren’t genetically modified, leading to class division and more inequality. This example really illustrated that the ethics of science is never simple because progress on one end could lead to a regression in another.

One of the things that really struck me about this talk was how these technological advances aren’t just something to be wary of in the distant future – it’s already occurring now. For in-vitro fertilisation, the couple can choose which embryo to forward with, effectively selecting for gender. I didn’t know about this previously because I thought there would be stricter regulations against this sort of choosing, but I was wrong. It really highlights the importance of having these discussions about ethics and morality in respect to technology, especially because the technology exists already and will only continue to grow more popular in the future. At the same time, if the US government restricts research and application of genetic engineering, there’s no guarantee other countries will do the same and now the US will begin to fall behind in the competition. It’s an interesting dilemma with no obvious solution but one that will have to be resolved soon.

A Stroll through the Botanical Gardens

Posted on by

I had a really good time at the tour of the Botanical Gardens last Saturday, despite the very hot weather. I went to the same event last year, but as there was a different tour guide this time, I was interested to hear a new perspective.

One thing that I really like about the plantations is how cognisant Cornell is about the environment and their carbon footprint. For example, the visitors centre is a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified building, designed to minimise its energy consumption. The gardens themselves are constructed for efficient and optimal watering and drainage.

Aside from the logistics of the gardens, it’s very pleasant just to take a stroll and read about different kinds of trees, flowers, and herbs. I was able to take lots of aesthetic pictures, some of which I’ve shared below.

I had been to Cornell’s botanical gardens and plantations many times, but I feel as though I get a new perspective and new appreciation each time. I’m definitely looking forward to coming back again, especially in the winter to check out their winter garden. I would also recommend a visit to anyone who has not been there before; it might just ‘blossom’ your interest in flowers, photography, and the environment!

Black Mirror: fiction or prophecy?

Posted on by

This week’s Flora’s Films was an episode of Black Mirror titled The Entire History of You. The basic premise is that the story takes place in an alternate universe where almost every person is implanted with a chip that allows them to preserve everything they hear and see as permanent memories. Like a computer, memories are stored where they can be re-played over and over and shown to others.

At first, I was ambivalent about the idea. I’m quite a sentimental person so I like to try and preserve meaningful memories through writing or photographs. Being able to relive memories would be fascinating. At the same time, having this technology destroys some of the things that makes us humans. When we remember something, we are actually remembering the last time that we thought about that thing. In that way, the brain distorts our memories until it is less rooted in fact and more focused on our thoughts and feelings surrounding an event. The technology proposed in the Black Mirror episode would remove that very human element of our memories.

The other obvious problem about the ability to remember everything is how it can be abused. In my opinion, the anti-technology trope in works of fiction is a bit tiresome, but I like that this episode made its point without being too didactic. I think the technology to implant a chip into our brains for similar purposes could be available in our lifetime. For example, Elon Musk is supporting a company called Neurolink which is focused on designing devices than can be implanted in brains. While this could potentially help ameliorate neurological diseases, it could have terrible effects if a company (or a government) gained the power to literally control your brain. It’s fascinating and frightening at the same time, but one should definitely consider the consequences of having such technology, especially since it could be plausible in the near future.

Some cool articles about memory and brain chip implants:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/am-i-right/201307/your-memory-isnt-what-you-think-it-is

https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/27/15077864/elon-musk-neuralink-brain-computer-interface-ai-cyborgs