Annotated Bibliography

1) Katz, Jeffrey. "Should We Accept Steroid Use in Sports?" National Public Radio. January 23rd, 2008. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18299098

In this article we learn that steroids have become a legal problem in all forms of sports here in the United States. WIth that, Katz takes the liberty of stating a few of the general ideas that involve the debate of legalizing steroids in sports. He states that even until today people are skeptical, and are unsure what to believe. Experts are brought in the article, some in favor and others opposed to the motion of legalizing steroids in professional sports. Big names such a Norman Fost, Richard Pound, Julian Savulescu, amongst others.

2) Schmidt, Michael. "Inside a Tempting World of Easy Steroids." The New York Times. April 11th, 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/sports/baseball/12steroids.html?_r=1&ref=steroids

In this article there is a main focus on steroids being used in the Major League Baseball, which has become a scandal, especially within 2000-2004. The article starts by stating the uses that a baseball player might have for steroids (based on injuries as well as seeking to perform better). Schmidt moves on to talking about how steroids have been banned since 1991 in the MLB, but players continued use (admittedly) even after the ban. Regulations (testing for steroids) in the MLB was only made possible starting in 2003. Basically, the article comes around the topic of whether or not steroids should be used in professional baseball, and if so, to what extent. In other words, the article discusses the use of steroids to recover from serious injuries. The case at hand in this article is whether or not steroids should be allowed in baseball, even if it is only for recovering players.

Thesis Questions

1) Should steroids be allowed for athletes who compete at a professional level?

Sports play a big role in how many jobs are available in society, as well as a form of entertainment for the rest. With this in mind, why are steroids banned completely when athletes take them to better perform at their craft/job?

2) What types of performance enhancers exist in the realm of professional sports?

3) Should there be a strict drug test on Olympic athletes?

Some countries hide the true results of the tests their athletes have, just so that they can compete without penalty (which is usually disqualification).

Intro to Synthesis (not completed yet)

The conceptualization and deep analysis of power in our modern day society is definitely not an easy task. When understanding power and everything it entails, one must approach the topic from various angles and perspectives to obtain a sound reasoning of it all. On one hand, we see people that have managed to obtain immense quantities of power and control, and on the other hand, we see the exact opposite: the victims of such authority and supremacy. This alone leaves for room for debate, simply meaning that whoever is discussing the theory of power may well lie on either side of the spectrum, and thus no conclusive argument should be accepted at that time. A full range of analysis is needed and must be made. There are different tools and methods that can be used to interpret the meaning of power, and throughout the class, three unique works were used, each discussing a different standpoint and inclination of what power is and how it is incorporated and seen throughout society today.

A Note on Panopticism

Foucault begins Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison by explaining the sense of order instilled by fear in the seventeenth century due to the plague. No one wanted to get sick, and with that in mind, the only sense of protection and well-being one had was to stay inside the comfort of their own home. He uses this tragedy in history to present us with his personal ideology on Bentham's panopticon model. He goes on to with a brief explanation of how the structure actually is in theory: "at the periphery, an annular building; at the center, a tower; this tower is pierced with wide windows that open onto the inner side of the ring; the peripheral building is divided into cells, each of which extends the whole width of the building" (225). With this architectural model, we understand that "the surveillance is permanent in its effects even if it is discontinuous in its action" (288). This "permanent effect" is possible because the watchmen in the tower are invisible to the quarantined. Reversely, the inmates are split in separated into individual cells, unable to have any communication or contact with any other inmates. More importantly, the inmates have no notion of who is watching, and when. For this reason, they are to remain in their best behavior. Foucault then moves on by comparing the panopticon to other institutions in our society today by stating: "Is it surprising that prisons resemble factories, schools, barracks, hospitals, which all resemble prisons?" (309). It actually comes as no surprise that governments and societal systems move and work in an invisible fashion, almost as if instilling a fear that we are uncertain and uninformed about. For this reason, we as members of society have to abide to our disciplines and basically play by the rules so no punishment is necessary, what ever it may be.

Pollan Vs. Madsen

There is no doubt in my mind that Kyle Madsen has stated a few concerns that many readers like him would generally have when reading my essay "Why Bother?" His concerns are indeed valid, yet too general and textbook like. I would like to comment of his statement; "This intense angle of vision may leave out some readers. For example, I am left wondering why gardening is more effective than say, converting to solar power." Initially, one could see that maybe converting to solar power is more effective than gardening, but then I'll have to quickly say that you are comparing two completely different elements of society. One produces energy, the other one food. These two topics are on completely different magnitudes, and gardening is something that can be achieved at an individual level. Using solar power is something that we have no access of creating alone, and probably lies in the power of the government and electrical companies to decide upon.

Moreover, Madsen clearly doesn't understand my emphasis on gardening and why I actually took the liberty in doing so. It's not merely to create your own food supply and hope that your efforts alone reduce your carbon footsteps, and with that, slowly make a big impact on the environment. Instead, my goal is to create a sense of good habits that will in turn, generate a chain reaction amongst other people that will collectively make a change in our lives for ourselves, instead of being "passive, delegated, dependent for solutions on specialists."

Deep Play Quote

"Of course, like drinking during Prohibition or, today, smoking marihuana, cockfights, being a part of 'The Balinese Way of Life', nonetheless go on happening, and with extraordinary frequency."


This quote definitely stands out to me simply because the comparison of cockfighting in the Balinese culture to smoking marijuana or drinking during the prohibition is quite remarkable. I feel like Geertz uses this comparison so that we can get a better understanding of what actual value cockfighting has in their culture. Basically, these pastimes are what we choose to do, and they will continue to be enjoyed, despite their illegality, and in fact, with greater frequency. 

OWS

In the article, “Ask Not What Occupy Wall Street will do next; Ask How We Will Change The Status Quo," Fitzgerald offers us the standpoint that OWS is indeed dying down and losing momentum. The movement still remains in the eyes of the public, due to its actual successes, however, it has reached a decline in both its efforts and effectiveness.

Within the text, the author compares OWS to a reality TV series, where everyone is curious to know what the next step will be. He also compares OWS to a brand, one where everyone is caught up questioning whether it is a good thing or not, instead of pursuing the true benefits that could be reaped of the OWS efforts. Fitzgerald is basically stating that those who comprise the OWS movement are indeed fighting against the elitist 1% that have all the power and money. Fitzgerald believes that the movement is definitely reaching a halt, but that there is hope for it to reach its full potential, by resisting reification.

OWS, according to the author, is basically a movement that fights against those at Wall Street, who in turn, have all the power and wealth to do as they please. OWS serves as a vanguard to hopefully one day solving this issue, potentially from the inside out. In conclusion, Fitzgerald commends OWS for its efforts, and sees how it will challenge the status quo, and furthermore, creating a system that involves all.