COVID Warning

Reading about Leadership in small scale societies reminded me a lot of the current pandemic we are living through. Being responsible by social distancing and not physically interacting with others has taken a toll on  our norm of interacting in college. Just like small-scale societies, we humans look for face to face contact and even though our generation has grown up entirely around technology and social media, I believe we all still need that physical interaction. Humans are emotional beings that need interaction from others often. I know for myself personally I look to interact with someone everyday while I’m stuck in my house.

In the midst of this crisis, we all waited to hear from President Crutcher about what will happen with the rest of our Spring Semester. In our small scale society at the University of Richmond, we look towards our leaders for answers that concern the whole population. It is interesting to see how we as humans have our own small societies and how they affect us on a daily basis. Having a complete change to routine is definitely going to take time to get adjusted to.

In Methods of Gathering Scientific Evidence, it brought into my mind the amount of experiments scientists must be doing in order to know more about this virus. I can imagine sociologists studying how the public reacts during a crisis and how ‘panic buying’ has influenced many people across the US. So many questions can be asked during this crisis using various scientific methods to achieve an answer. It will be interesting to read about the results from all these findings once we finally move past this pandemic.

I have heard of Prisoner’s Dilemma before this reading, but never thought about the Seven Deadly Dilemmas that society faces. The idea of the free rider dilemma struck me the most and I feel like it is because we do not know the damage it can cause unless it is a large amount. It reminds me of the situation Wikipedia faces. Even though it is not a reliable source, many people still use it, myself included. We do not pay to access the site, yet we benefit from the information that we find there. Wikipedia pages sometimes ask for donations now, is this because of the free rider dilemma or some other corporation issue?

I also believe that the free rider dilemma is potentially the most consequential. Since we do not see its damage until after the fact, it can cause some serious issues in our society. Absolute cooperation I believe is impossible in our society because we have many beliefs systems, wants, and desires as humans. Maybe not having absolute cooperation is what drives us to have varying opinions and ideas for decisions.

The arguments presented by Flanigan were interesting to me because I am writing my research paper about the access to healthcare.  I believe we should increase access to healthcare, but I also understand the importance of having prescription laws. I don’t entirely agree with Flanigan’s argument because I believe that prescription laws prevent those from abusing medications and drugs, which can lead to an OD epidemic. However, I feel that if people cannot access to prescriptions, they will find any way to get it (i.e, the black market). People will get the medication regardless if they have a doctor’s approval or not. I have very mixed feelings about much access people should have to dangerous drugs.

One thing I believe should be mentioned more about this argument is those who do not have the access to refuse the medication.  If a patient was diagnosed with Diabetes and their doctor recommended them to take Insulin, what would happen if the patient did not have the finances to pay for insulin? They would take the Insulin but cannot afford it- is that risky refusal? Insulin prescription has skyrocketed and has become very expensive for many people to continue to take. This has led to many not taking the medication not because they do not want to but because they are unable to; it has also led many to find the medication other ways than through a doctor, or find a completely other alternative. How does this affect a doctor on giving a patient informed consent?

I knew I had a implicit bias towards things. We are all raised on the beliefs of our parents and as we grow up, we associate different ideas to different topics. As I grew older, I took notice of what I saw in different situations. This has changed the way I see things and what I associate with different ideas.

Based on our experiences, we can change from what we learned from our childhood. I learned from my implicit bias test, that my views have changed than what I learned growing up. I love how our society is changing to shape the varying ideas and perspectives that we all believe. I think it is impossible to eliminate all implicit biases. We would all love to think we do not carry them, but we do. I hope to take this implicit bias test in the future to see whether what I think I associate towards an idea are the same or not.

Women deal with many stereotypes in the workplace. We had just talked about in my Anthropology class that boys and girls are raised differently to fit in gender stereotypes. Boys are raised to be interruptive and dominant while girls are raised to be caring and a follower. I am glad we are moving away from the stereotype of who we see as leaders. Women are now more likely to pursue a leadership position, but still face others thinking she is too ‘bossy’ or ‘mean’. Many believe that they are taking on ‘masculine’ traits, as if women could not be their own boss.

The readings reminded me a lot of the ideas of intersectionality, especially the article by Dr.Hoyt. Women experience a variety of stereotype threats. Other identities such as ethnicities or race can factor into how others see them in the workplace because society’s idea of a leader is a White male. It is difficult to understand the experience of a woman in a leadership position as so many other variables factor into their experiences. I admire seeing women succeed in their field, even against all the obstacles and behaviors of others. It is refreshing to see a woman in power, and I hope there will be an era where we do not judge someone for not fitting a stereotype that has long been outdated.

I have never heard of mindbugs before. I knew that the mind can perceive things differently even after we have analyzed the situation, but I was not sure there was a name for that. It is amazing to know the way our mind processes information. However, it is scary to see how even after knowing and seeing the right answer, our mind can still interpret the wrong information.

It is unsettling to think that we have to question the way our mind thinks. We have our own judgements towards different situations and ideas but what makes us think that we are right about what we believe? This is especially unnerving for court cases, where they can sometimes rely heavily on eye-witnesses accounts. This makes me question the justice system as there have been many cases where the offender was proven not guilty through DNA test or the eye-witness coming forward saying they have lied. This reminds me of the court case in the book Just Mercy, where a black man, Walter, was framed for the murder of a young white girl in Alabama. He was found guilty with only having one eyewitness, a white man who was told by the officers to lie about Walter’s whereabouts during the murder. That was all the evidence it took for the court to convict Walter for the murder. A lie that made no logical sense was held as a belief by the town for years, which an innocent man almost died for. Because of the way the mind works, I think the way decisions are made in court cases should be reevaluated and based more on hard evidence.