Hi everyone, mark your calendars if you want to attend the next Great Issues Forum at the Grad Center on March 10.  And be sure to send in your electronic reservation as well:

http://greatissuesforum.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=77

Hey guys,

Just a short note, I was going to respond to Chris’ response with this, but it’s probably best to make it it’s own post.

My Thesis revolves around only one previously set model, not two.  Thomas Kuhn proposed the first model for scientific revolutions, and Paul Feyerabend criticized it (he didn’t propose his own model).

Best wishes,

-Greg

Hi guys…just a quick question regarding my paper

Would you suggest giving specifics of an abortion law or just stating certain “relevant” aspects of it…by specific I mean as to who can perform the procedure and where (so basically the requirements of an abortion clinic or the type of doctor who can and the level of experience he needs). I am a bit ambivalent because stating all that might be too much for the paper. But then again due to these requirements there is an issue of accessibility of such doctors/clinics which would then impede on reproductive rights of women. Although I mentioned accessibility as an issue, I’ll probably just briefly (in a few paragraphs) or so discuss it during in my solution section since it is not the crux of my essay. 

Does that make any sense? If so, what do you recommend?

Thanks

I’m going to this seminar/lecture/thing about food and New York (two of my favorite things) at the Graduate Center on March 11th at 6:30. If anyone is interested in going, let me know! Sounds fun. The link is below:

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/events/details_landing.asp?EventId=20612

– Jesse

Hi everyone,

I think I have most of what I need to write the paper on the theoretical aspect of why people join, but I’d appreciate it if you could send any information regarding the Army of the Righteous my way.

Thanks. I desperately need it!

Hey everyone,

I received an e-mail the other day from the NCUR committee saying that my abstract was accepted for the conference. =)  I was wondering if anyone else heard back from them as well.

Greg, I definitely agree that the use of diagrams and pictures can be extremely beneficial for explaining different parts of the thesis.  It has been helpful for me to chart out separate parts of my arguments to allow me to refocus my thoughts.  However, the use of visual aid in presenting my thesis would probably not help in clarifying my presentation to an audience.  I think that it definitely would for your thesis though, especially since you are essentially creating a new model.  It would be great to physically see from which points your model builds upon and differs from the two previous models.

Reading up on my research, I came across many ideas about the subjectivity of history.  There are so manys way through which the passage of time and experience can be recalled.  In addition to the documentation of history through grand events and political figures, there are also the memories of details and fragments of culture, even fashion, that could at times shed even more light upon the raw truth of society captured within a certain place and time.  Furthermore, I also came to believe that when we may at times possess idealistic illusions regarding our world, our self, and others, disillusionment can be a very liberating and rewarding occurrence.

See you guys soon,

Chris

So, I’ve been doing a great deal of reading over the past few weeks.  I must say, I wish we had two intersessions just so I could read some more.  I was wondering though, have any of you guys been working on figures or diagrams for your papers?  Given the anatomical portion of my paper I have been working on a few, and I must say images seem to make everything clearer.  I know its trite, but a picture really is worth a thousand words.  I don’t know if Professor Quinby would agree, but I have found drawing incredibly useful in organizing my thoughts and helping to explain the content of my paper.  I know it isn’t too stylish, but I have been working around this timeline that I must say has been immeasurably useful as well.  Do you guys agree at all?

Best wishes,

-GP

Hi to all of you.  I’ve added the new category called “Weekly Reflections” so that you can start posting those over the break as you continue your reading and research in the midst of holiday merriment!

Here’s my abstract as it stands right now.  Feel free to shot me any feedback on it.  It’s really short but I don’t want to give too much more background.

Thanks!

-Greg

This study utilizes Thomas Kuhn’s cyclic model of paradigm shifts and Paul Feyerabend’s criticisms of it to create a new model for the progression of paradigms in the history of science. This new ‘Poly-Cyclic Model’ takes Kuhn’s phases of the structure of scientific revolutions (Pre-Paradigm, Normal, and Revolutionary) and elucidates the effects of cultural and non-rational thought on the progression and regression of scientific paradigms. Through textual analysis of primary source material, this model is applied to classical western fields of medicine, the brain, and the mind—what is now called the medical and cognitive neurosciences, from the fifth millennia BCE to the early second millennia CE.

Hi Nandini, here is an article from the Brooklyn College website that should be of interest to you: http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/spotlite/mondaypaper/current/headline5.php

She might be someone for you to interview–Lee