After Vision Trip

1) MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
-About 4500 undergraduate students
-5 areas: Engineering (58%), Science (25%), Architecture and Urban Studies, Management Science, and Humanities, Art, and Social Studies
-Students are encouraged to cooperate and work together
-Diverse clubs & organizations
-Academics schedule is 4-1-4.
-4~5 courses per semester
-About 20% of the students are double major
-MIT is mean in its wayhttp://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=159180993034252770#editor/target=post;postID=1643282612917471097
-MIT force students to take technical courses
-The spirit of fire hoses --> Force hard information into the throats of the undergraduates
2) U.Penn
-The first business, medical school
-Eniac
-75% of the class is 25 or fewer
-1/3: Major, 1/3: Liberal Arts, 1/3: Free
-10,000 undergraduates and 10,000 graduates
-There are foreign language requirements
-Uses common application
-Takes a holistic  view on applicants
3) Swarthmore
-Engineering course is provided, unlike most liberal arts colleges
-Close to the city
-Honors program: In-depth studies on subjects --> e.g. political science: Chinese politics --> Bring in experts from outside and do a written & oral examination
4) Princeton
-No core: Distributional Requirements
-Juniors write papers and seniors write theses
-Enable students to become an expert in the field that they are interested in
-Only one major, and "certificate programs," or minors
-Professor tries to engage with undergraduate students in researches
-Interdisciplinary studies are possible
-The level of professors is high
5) Stanford

 A Review of <500 days of Summer> (Additional Review)

Samuel Seung Min Kim

A little front note: 

Woah. I just can't believe I've had that much thoughts running through my mind for the last 1 hour and a half while I was watching this movie called <500 Days of Summer.> I know that I haven't revised the review of The Body and mid term is like 2 days from now, but no. I have to write this. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     So to start with, I have never had a girlfriend in my life. Koreans call that motae solo (which means "a person born to be a solo"), and I personally do not know why I happened to have no girlfriends throughout my 17 years of life. It's probably because dating amongst students is considered as a cultural taboo in South Korea. But whatever. The point is that I'm a person without any experience as a lover.

     And Tom in this movie is just like me. He has never had a girlfriend ever in his life, and he believes in "love at first sight." And on this day, Tom sees a girl, and instantly knows that she is the love of his life. Her name is Summer.

     So the movie goes. The director chose a rather special way of proceeding the movie plot, which is to divide the movie into two based on chronological order. The first part is from day 1 to 250, and the other is from day 250 to about 440. The director freely moves from the first part to the second part, showing scenes in between.

      As I said right at the beginning of this journal, I am a motae solo. That means that I actually have no idea about how real dates happen or what lovers really do. But one thing sure is that all those things that Summer and Tom did are not the type of things what just "friends" would do. I basically know all this because I have a plenty of girl "friends."

      Yet, Summer doesn't seem to consider all these actions to be a part of "loving" sentiment. No. Due to her parents' divorce, she just don't believe in the existence of love. Tom is merely a mean that Summer fully utilizes to satisfy her desires.

       But that's not something going over Tom's mind. He is also a motae solo (just like me), and he just crazily believes that Summer is the love of his life.

       And all that fantasy just breaks as Tom sees Summer wearing that marriage ring from a different dude in a party. Tom just go nuts, and he runs away from Summer's house.

       The following days of Tom is covered in despair. He doesn't go to his company, and his daily rhythm just breaks. And in his first day going to the greeting cards company after 3 consecutive days of unprecedented absence, he announces that he quits. He screams out loud: "All these words written in these greeting cards, you know what? They're bullshit. These are words that don't mean anything. Like love."

       And he is right. He is a motae solo and he has absolutely NO idea about what love is, but he has been just babbling on about love and faith and all that in these greeting cards. The things that he just don't believe in.

       So Tom comes home, and starts to think. What is it, then, that makes his heart beat? It is architecture. Then he starts to go crazy about architecture. About drawing things. Love, faith, all those things- they have barely any meaning to him. And his relationship, his belief about love is all finished as he thinks about all those bad things that happened between him and Summer.

       And almost at the end of this movie, Tom meets Summer. And Summer tells him. He was right. Right about all that love at first sight thing. Summer just woke up one day, and realized that she was in love with this man. A kind of feeling that she never felt with Tom. Tom was right, but he just wasn't right about the person. Summer wasn't supposed to be his love at first sight.

       Tom's head is all complicated now. And with all this thought, he goes to the interview that he has with an architecture group. There, he meets a lady. And as Tom talks to the lady, he realizes that she shares the most favorite place with him. Tom thinks, whatever. But as he is just about to disappear from that lady's sight, he thinks. This could be his love of his life. This could be his fate. And when he asks the lady's name. His heart stops beating. AUTUMN.

        Like I said. I am a motae solo. I have never had a love-at-first-sight. To be frank, I didn't believe in such childish things before. I believed that such beliefs were childish.

        But now, I find my beliefs changed. Love-of-my-life actually exists. It's just that I am not observant enough, or my time of loving is yet to come.

        Some might say that such beliefs are too childish. Too fable-like. Too impractical. They might ask me, how do you know that someone is your true love? They might say, stop being too melodramatic. That is not how love rolls.

         But I ask them: Who are YOU to decide? How can you be so sure that such things like love at first sight don't exist? What makes you to be so materialistic in viewing love?

        And how I am supposed to know my love-of-my-life? Honestly, I am not sure. Just like Summer did in the movie. Maybe I will wake up in the morning and realize that I'm in true love with someone. Maybe that would be how I would find my fate.

        Korean society is very materialistic. Everything's about money and success. And such belief has also infected the concept of love, and many people in this country believe that love is something that can be used as a tool to achieve success. And foolishly, I was also drenched in such thoughts, too. 

      But now I find myself hating thoughts. Life is not that dry and acrid. God didn't intend to make our life to be like that. Thanks, <500 Days of Summer>.

The Body Reading Journal

The Body Reading Journal

Samuel Seung Min Kim

I remember my first reading on Stephen King. It was a book named <Dreamcatcher>, and I basically hated it. Not because I didn’t like his style, no, but because I just hated the genre of “horror.” And <Dreamcatcher> was precisely a book that could be categorized as a horror novel, talking about the aliens and grotesque scenes of characters vomiting clustered blood and all that.

So when I heard from Mr. Garrioch that The Body is a novella about teenage boys on a journey to find a dead body, I started to think about all the descriptive, grotesque scenes that were pictured in the <Dreamcatcher>.

However, I was surprised to find the dead body not taking a large part inside the novella. There was hardly no descriptions about the dead body itself. In fact, the novella was a bildungsroman (a coming-of-age novel), dealing with the growth of Gordon (who is called by the nickname “Gordie” throughout the short story).

So what part did the dead body take actually inside the story? The body itself, as said above, didn’t take a large part. However, the journey—the trip, the experience, basically everything that Gordon and Chris experienced—on their way to the body, meant more than just something.

Gordon is a boy with a deep emotional scar. He has recently lost his brother who he didn’t even know well, but he is experiencing indifference and coldness from his parents who are consumed in grief. He is basically a boy abandoned from his parents, a boy born with a great literary ability but is losing his chance to utilize it due to his parents too busy crying about something gone for good.

And through the experience, the journey of seeking towards the dead body, Gordon grows up. His emotional pain is ameliorated and relieved. He realizes his potential as a writer.

The person in the center of all this psychological relief and curing is Chris Chambers. He is the “toughest” guy in the gang according to Gordon, but actually he is the most mature guy in the group. He is surprisingly insightful in analyzing the benefits of Gordon, and tries to maximize such abilities. His endeavor is highlighted in Chapter 17, as he cries out loud “I wish to fuck I was your father!” At last, Chris starts to act as Gordon’s father, a father who leads Gordon’s way.

After all such journey, Gordon realizes that he has become a different person. At the end of the book, Gordon, as a 12-year-old boy, says that “The town looks different compared to that before.” He became mature.

Yet, Gordon doesn’t lose his independence in growing up. In the middle of the journey, when Gordon is standing guard, he encounters a deer. And though there was no aid of Chris in such experience, Gordon takes the encounter as a part of him, and reminds himself of such moments in his times of hardships; he has grown up without the help of Chris.

And at the end of all the trip, is a dead body of Ray Brower. The kid means almost nothing to Lachance to him, but the deadness teaches him a lesson; a lesson about mortality, a fate that every human being has to face somehow, someday. Prior to the journey, Gordon has not been very thoughtful about the death of his brother, for he was just an immature kid without the concept of death. However, at the end of the story, all the sequence of learning and growing up that Gordon experiences, comes to an end; along with the priceless lesson about death.

Mock Trial Opening Speech

This is a prosecution opening speech that I wrote for a mock trial case... There are many other versions, but I think this one's the best..:)

Opening Speech (Prosecution)

Plaintiff Counsel Samuel Seung Min Kim

May it please the court.

A FIVE-SECOND-PAUSE OF DEATHLY SILENCE. That, is precisely the amount of time Ms. Arthurs has given to herself on the morning of June 1^st, 2010.

Picture in your mind a high school newbie teacher. At the very first year of her teacher life, she encounters this naughty kid who always manages to destroy her class atmosphere. He doesn’t listen to her warning to the class to grow up. He doesn’t understand her way of speaking to students, which is to constantly shout “BEHAVE” into the class. His name is Kirwan Rohane.

And on this day of June 1^st 2010, the teacher smells something burning. As soon as she detects the smell, she doesn’t take a second in assuming that this is Rohane’s mischief. She walks toward the desk, but hears Rohane shouting that the test tube is about to explode. So she picks up the tong, but at the same time discovers the handle has been burned to fool her. It’s a trap designed to burn her hands.

She screams out loud. “YOU LITTLE WRETCH.” But before she takes her next move, she takes a pause. A pause that lasted for a grand total of FIVE seconds. Then, she smashes her hand to the face of the “wretch” named Kirwan Rohane.

And today, the prosecution side charges the teacher, her name being Ali Arthurs, for one count: assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to Section 59 of Crimes Act 1900. And it is of our burden, ladies and gentlemen, to prove BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBTS that 1. The defendant has caused Kirwan Rohane an apprehension of an immediate physical harm and 2. The defendant had her full intention in doing such actions.

Now the defense side today doesn’t have to invest a single amount of time trying to prove the kind of “wretch” Kirwan Rohane is. In fact, Mr. Rohane will kindly come up to the witness stand today, and tell you that he has actually received two warnings from the headmaster himself. Tell you that he is not a very good student in school honestly. Tell you that he wasn’t concentrating on the class of June 1^st 2010. Tell you that his actions were actually more than enough to anger Ms. Arthurs.

And after that, Ms. Chris Burnes, Mr. Rohane’s good friend will come up to that witness stand and tell you that in fact Ms. Arthurs isn’t a good science teacher after all. Tell you that simply shouting “Behave” and “Grow up” is all she did to quite her misbehaving students. Tell you that Ms. Arthurs was in fact very angry at Mr. Rohane on that day. Tell you that the blow could be nothing but a deliberate one full of abhorrence towards Mr. Rohane.

And at the end of this trial, when everything’s finished, my co-counsel Sungwoon Si, will come back to you. He will stand at this position, and talk all this through. He will give you REASONS why Ms. Arthurs was thinking of REVENGE and was full of ANGER during that five seconds of UTTER PAUSE. Speak to you that the blow cannot possibly be an accident or a mistake.

Now, before I finish my speech, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to give you a five seconds of UTTER SILENCE, an UTTER PAUSE. Just like the one Ms. Arthurs has given to herself before smashing the face of Mr. Rohane. And during that five second, I ask you to think about basically anything: The lunch you had today, the things you have learned in school, and so on.

And AFTER that thinking, when I say “thank you” and get back to my seat, I want you to REALIZE the amount of thinking you can do for just five seconds of time. The amount of THINKING that the defendant could have done before the moment she took her next move. The amount of DETEST that would have been burning inside the heart of Ms. Arthurs during that FIVE SECONDS OF PAUSE.

(After five seconds of rest)

Thank you.

A Reflective Essay: Samuchim performance at KMLA Sponsorship Concert

          Reformation and revolution always takes costs. Especially when they are big ones that rock the society in a whole. And such change has precisely been the thing that has been prevailing Samuchim (the Korean traditional music society in KMLA) has been experiencing for the last two months or so.

          It all began with the KMLA principal Yoon Jung Il's great interest in turning the KMLA Sponsorship Concert into a successful one. Unlike last year's KMLA Sponsorship Concert (which was mainly consisted of students' parents performing and wasn't really that much successful in making people "sponsor" KMLA), he started to emphasize the students themselves getting involved in the concert, and there were even pamphlets made to advertise the concert.

           And many clubs that were participating in the KMLA Sponsorship Concert started to receive great support from the school. Samuchim, of course, was not an exception to this. An outside teacher named Baek Yong was invited.

The photo of Samuchim at KMLA Sponsorship Concert

           On the first day of his lesson, the instructor asked for our club to "play something." After listening to the music for just two minutes, he called us to a halt, and said that we had to "start from scratch." The seven months of practice we did prior to meeting him was considered as nothing.

          That was how the frantic preparation for the Sponsorship Concert has started. Samuchim received permission to not participate in the first self-study period in every Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. Every week after the mid term exam, 6 hours of time were sacrificed for learning Korean traditional music beats.

          The beats that he taught to us, they were literally "eye-openers." So far, Samuchim has been playing a beat that was extremely simplified so we could easily learn them over a relatively short time. Now, the instructor was feeding us with truly "traditional" beats that are passed down in rural regions of South Korea.

           And in the process of such revolution taking place, I have to admit, there were pains. A large chunk of Samuchim was angry with the instructor being so demanding and the practice taking away too much of their self-study time. Everybody was so nervous in memorizing the beats, and those who made errors in their beats were severely criticized by other Samuchim members. 

Members of the Samuchim (After the performance in Minjok Festival)

          Two months passed with such nervousness and reign of pain. The time of KMLA Sponsorship Concert performance has finally come. On November 19 2011 at approximately 4:40 P.M., in the backstage of Gyedang Hall were the Samuchim members, solemnly preparing themselves for their turn. 

         The performance was a great success. We were welcomed with fervent applause from the audience. The teacher, who has been so cold and harsh to us until now, hugged each and every one of us after the performance.

Samuchim after the concert (The adult standing at the last line is the teacher)

         The KMLA Sponsorship Concert meant something more than a mere "experience" that taught me how to do hard Korean traditional music beats to me. 

         Samulnori (the name of the Korean traditional art that Samuchim performed) is a form of music that require harmony amongst instruments based on high level of individual performance. And throughout the two months of practice, Samuchim has taught me how to be a member of a team and the importance of each and every constituent in bringing about harmony inside the society.

         Also, after two months of pain, the members of Samuchim found the bond amongst themselves to become much stronger than before. The group that used to be so cold and disconnected before is now planning to have a meal together after the final exam as a celebration for the successful ending of the music performance.

[Mr. Moon] Cosmological Argument

Cosmological Argument

Samuel Seung Min Kim (111021, 10b1)

The root of the word “God” comes from the Sanskrit vocabulary “hūta,” which stands for “to invoke, to call.” Indeed, to most Christians, God is the one who “invoked” and “called” the universe into life. And one of the most important tasks that theologists have been holding ever since the creation of Christianity was to logically prove the existence of the “invoker of the universe.” Out of the tens and thousands of theories and arguments proposed for verifying the presence of god, the Cosmological Argument is acknowledged by most philosophers for possessing a firm logic.

According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Cosmological Argument, proposed by the genius philosopher Thomas Aquinas, has its base on the logic that every existing thing has its cause for existence and that there is no omission in the cause-effect linkage amongst existing things. So since every single thing on Earth has its cause for “being there,” the universe must have an origin that caused its formation, named God. Such meticulous explanation based on the endless reign of causality bond was indeed more than enough to nod the heads of contemporary skeptics. However, viewing the Cosmological Argument as a citizen of a world nine hundred years after its birth, it is not hard to cast doubts and find the holes inside the logic of the theologists.

The first problem with Aquinas’ logic comes from the fact that not every existing things have their causes for existence. Back in the 1200s when scholasticism philosophers developed the Cosmological Argument, they were unaware of the concept of “time travel.” However, in 1905, as Albert Einstein invented the Relativity Theory, the gates of possibility for moving back and forth in time widely opened. In other words, a person from the future could possibly “rewind” the time and erase the thing that originally caused its existence. In such cases, there is no longer a cause that brought about its existence, and the link between the cause and the effect that was assumed to be solid is now broken.

Furthermore, another question arouses from the absence of the origin of the “origin of the universe.” In short, if the causality link is infinite, who created the God, then? Until now, the philosophers have not been successful in providing an adequate explanation on why the reign of causality has to stop at God’s turn. Plus, there’s a lack of logical evidence to prove that things will work as they do for things around us (that everything has causes and effects) when the causality link gets near the origin of the universe.

The Cosmological Argument is indeed a great work of logic and variations are still being fervently formulated by numerous philosophers. However, a fundamental problem lies in the argument: that it is outdated. The advent of high level technology was not put into consideration by the scholasticism philosophers, consequently making premises that were scientifically wrong from its very first beginning of formation.

TED Video: Andrew Mwenda Takes a New Look at Africa

 

Mr. Garrioch's directions

     So this time, when I visited TED, I decided to click on "Resize by .....persuasive" on the left column. After skimming through the titles of the appearing images, I chose a speech with the title "Andrew Mwenda takes a new look at Africa."

     Before I began watching the 17-minute-speech, I skimmed through the comments that were written on the post. Surprisingly, there were some disdainful writers asserting the speech to be dogmatic and provocative.

     After listening to the speech, though, I found myself in dissent with such criticisms. The overall speech was lucid, his discernment being acute. Though his argument that financial aid of supercilious developed countries to African countries actually results in aggravating the infamous corruption in Africa and makes the continent more dependent was rather eccentric and ironical, the speech was elaborate in overall, supported by credulous evidences.
     His saying that many African countries are in fact not in the state of anarchy was also interesting. He contributes the formation of such stereotypes to the media's solicitation  for impressive, but many times biased, stories. 
     After seeing the speech, I did some scrutiny about the speech giver, Andrew Mwenda. Mwenda is a founder and owner of The Independent, an Ugandan newspaper that is renown for its caustic criticisms on the authoritarian bureaucratic government. And even during his writing career in The Monitor and in his quotations for diverse media such as the BBC or CNN, he was well known for his astute visions that financial aids on African countries do nothing but aggravating the stagnation of the continents' countries economy.
(The 20 word burden is off finally. I will write with my voice, my vocab use from here.)
      However, while I was watching this speech, one question came to my mind: The methods that Mwenda proposed, do they really work? He talked about promoting growth in high level scientific technology. Well, how exactly are the "developed" nations supposed to help the countries out? By providing some advanced technology out of a mist for free? Or build a high-tech scientific facility in the center of a desert, when the security of the country is so vulnerable so that the expensive scientific facility is nothing but a piece of ice that would be destroyed if let alone? Are these measures really supposed to stimulate African entrepreneurs and improve independence? Is spoon-feeding of high level technology rather than "letting them grow" after building primary education really something that other countries should do? What does high-level technology supposed to do to entrepreneurs? Aren't other matters such as the vulnerability of politics in the nations or the security issues more urgent? Such questions couldn't be answered by the seventeen-minute-speech by Mwenda.
     I liked the speech. I myself do not believe in spoon-feeding African nations, and it was really nice to see a real Ugandan scholar explaining to me why the nations shouldn't be just given away financial aids. But, unfortunately, there were some holes in the logic of Mwenda that couldn't be answered sufficiently.