Cover Letter

Greetings Readers!

           "Sweet Disposition" is a blog I made for my subject, ENGLCOM. This blog is mostly composed of the essays required for ENGLCOM. Two of which are the extended definition essay, which explains the different interpretations of integrity, and argumentative essay, which shows my stand on GM-food. This blog also has an entry essay and an exit essay, which shows the improvements I have made in writing, and a documentary analysis, which provides an interpretation and understanding of the film, Food Inc. However, it also contains some random "shot gun" writings, which are basically my personal views and opinions. By reading this compilation of writings, readers will be able to get peek of what goes through my mind.

          The purpose of this blog was not only to complete the requirements for ENGLCOM. It also aims to inspire readers and fellow amateur writers and show them that having the will and right mindset will be able to make a person better at something he/she is not good at (in my case, writing). :)

With Love,

Meg Rutaquio

A New Perspective (Reflective Essay)

           Through ENGLCOM, I have learned a lot about academic writing, which not only improved my writing skills, but also changed my perspective on writing. Before taking this course, writing for me has always been hard work. I also find myself unsatisfied with my writing which is why I always hated doing it. Learning that I was required to take ENGLCOM, I immediately told myself that I was going to have a hard time in this course. However, as I went through this course, slowly I learned to like it. All the knowledge I have picked up from this has definitely helped me improve and be more confident in my writing. With all the techniques and teaching that was provided in this class, I learned that with a good organization of ideas to guide me and the presence of a thesis statement, which I lacked before taking up this course, writing was not hard as I thought.

          In writing my extended definition essay and argumentative essay, I had a difficult time in expounding on the topic of the mentioned essays. Often times, I found myself being redundant in my writing. Some sentences were just being paraphrased and repeatedly written. For this reason, the process of writing my essays always took a long time. Being the perfectionist I am, I always tried my best to rid my essays of errors. As a result, I always ended up sleeping past midnight. On the bright side, comparing my entry essay with my exit essay, I am happy to say that I have made some improvements. Looking at my entry essay, I noticed how scattered my ideas were in the paper and how I was being redundant, repeating the same idea over and over again. As opposed to my entry essay, a thesis statement was present in my exit essay and the ideas were very well organized. In both essay, I also noticed that I have made some improvements in writing formally.

           Based on the said improvements, I can say that I have achieved the objectives in ENGLCOM. I was able to enhance my writing skills and also develop my creative thinking skills. I was also able to change my views on writing and learn to like it. (Perhaps, in the future, I'll learn to love it.) Due to my increasing interest on writing, I promised myself to improve more and more on my writing. All of these new found knowledge and interest is all thanks to ENGLCOM.

Corruption in the Philippines (Exit Essay)

           Nowadays, we hear several news about politicians stealing money, cheating their way to power, and committing other corrupt deeds. It makes us wonder why and how our government has turned into a dirty work. Taxes are being used as a means of earning more money. Elections are hijacked. Our government has turned into this greedy and selfish money lover, which has caused them to become corrupt.

           As seen on the news, many reports are now revealing how corrupt the government is, and these reports mainly consists of how politicians have been "earning money." These past few months, politicians who are said to be using funds for personal use are now being revealed. Among that category of politicians are Enrile, Revilla, and of course, the famous Napoles. Someone who used to work for Napoles revealed that Napoles has been putting funds from the PDAF into her personal account. Other, such as Enrile, are also reported to be invovled. Instead of using these funds for the benefit of the country, they have been using them for their own pleasure. Probably, over 100 million pesos has been taken by these politicians. That amount of money is enough to lessen poverty in this country. Instead, the rich becomes richer, and the poor becomes poorer. This shows how the love of money has made the government corrupt.

           As years pass by, the government is revealing is true greedy self. As seen on television, many donations are now coming in for the Yolanda victims. However, it is said that the donations that are coming in are being taxed. Futhermore, Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) of the Philippines, which is part of the Philippine government, are also reported to be selling relief goods. It is really baffling to see how many ways the government will find to get their hands on money. It just shows how much greediness has made them corrupt.

           Selfishness has also taken its toll, continuously growing in the heart of the government. It can be said that it is the root of it all. All the afforementioned events are evidences of their growing selfishness. Why else would Napoles steal money? The only answer to that is that she wanted it for herself. From that statement, it can be said that the word "self" has become the government's favorite word, and this has led to their corruption.

           Through current events, the people can see that love of money, greed, and selfishness have caused the government to be corrupt. Though this does not apply to all politicians, this applies to the government as a whole. It's time that people take a stand. This is only possible if all unite together and let their voices be heard.

Behind the Curtains (Documentary Analysis)

Food Inc. is a documentary that criticizes the food processing industry in America and shows what is “behind the scenes” of the making of American processed foods. The documentary aims to show the audience what is the food industry is hiding from them. It lifts the veil that prevents the people from seeing the process by which the food they eat is made. Through interviews with various people, the movie presents the controversy behind processed foods. Visuals and other techniques are used to show the problems hidden from the eyes of human race. It opens up the eyes of the audience and makes them conscious of the secret world of the food industry. Through different scenes, the film was able to present the different rhetorical appeals—ethos, pathos, and logos.

The film starts with the narrator saying how the “fresh food” we see in the market are not what we think they are. The narrator gives out many statements about how the food we buy in the market are not the same as the food being sold before. He gives a detailed background on how the food industry has evolved over the years. The film then shows an interview with a farmer named Carole Morison. Carole gives the audience a first-hand account on how the chickens are kept, fed, and treated. After asking dozens of farmers, she was the only one who allowed the Food Inc. staff and team for a look inside the barn. Inside the barn, chickens are scattered everywhere. The chickens can barely walk due to their large heavy bodies caused by the GMOs that were injected in them. Some even died because they could not cope up with the fast growth of their body. Carole then mentions that all farmers are under a contract that keeps them from saying anything about how they handle the farm. To add to that, the company that Carole works for, Perdue, refused to be interviewed, making it even more obvious that the food industry does not want people to know what is behind the curtain. All of these add to the credibility of the film and yields an ethos appeal.

The film continues by introducing the Gonzales family, a family suffering from what has become the food industry. The audience are shown the scene where the family buys from Burger King, a fast food restaurant. The film then shows on the screen the money that cost them to buy the fast food, showing how cheap those foods were. The camera then follows them to a market where they struggle to buy and choose vegetables and other healthy foods because they we’re all too expensive. In this particular scene, the film aims to raise the question, “Is health a luxury that you can’t afford?” This raises sympathy toward the struggles of the family. The audience are then told the story of Barbara Kowalcyk’s son, Kevin, who died from Escherichia coli after eating from a fast food restaurant. In segments of Barbara’s interview, the film shows pictures and videos of Kevin, showing how full of life he was. Both of the stories of the Gonzales family and Kevin Kowalcyk appeal more on to pathos because both accounts create sympathy towards their story.

Throughout the documentary, the  logos appeal was prevalent. From start to end, the film gives facts, such as the texts that appear on the screen, as an evidence to support their claim. Though some parts of the film bends toward the pathos and ethos appeal, they are also examples of logos. One example of logos is when the film explains the bad conditions of the cows. The film shows that the cows are fed with corn instead of grass because it is cheaper. To add to that, an expert in the film tells that cows are not designed to eat corn. For this reason, this increases the risk of food poising, such as E. coli, in cows. Furthermore, one particular text that appear which said, “The average human consumes 200 pounds of meat per year,” show how much dangerous the risk is.

In conclusion, the film was effective in not only persuading the audience, but also supporting their claim by giving evidences and using the three rhetorical appeals—ethos, pathos logos. However, the film was slightly bias because it was only a one-sided argument. As seen in the film, the companies refused to be interviewed. Their voices were left out, not letting the audience know their side. Regardless of this fact, the film gives an effective criticism against the American food industry.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs): Harmful or Helpful? (Argumentative Essay)

Food has been one of the basic needs since the birth of a person. Back in the olden days, production of food only consists of hunting, harvesting, and farming, and usually it would take a long time before these foods arrive at the dining tables of families. However, today, technology has allowed the mass production of food. Unfortunately, the market has taken advantage of technology, not letting us know how food is made, leading to the birth of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). GMOs are widely used in most foods today. Though most people are unaware of this, GMOs even exist in some of their favorite food products and especially in fast foods. Many reports and stories tell that diseases, such as Escherichia Coli and Salmonella, have been caught from GM-foods, specifically meat. Furthermore, researchers and doctors believe that GMOs carry a huge risk although some scientists claim that GMOs are completely safe for human consumption.

Pro-GMO say that GMOs have greatly increased the food supply today (“Genetically Modified Foods...,” 2003). Crops and plants are now pest and disease resistant because of GMOs. To add to that, they are now modified to tolerate herbicides sprayed by the farmers and to survive the cold and drought (Whitman, 2000). This has resulted in an increase in production of GM-crops. However, according to Dr. Leigh Erin Connealy (2013), genetic mutations among plants, insects, and animals arose because of the production of GMOs. One example of this is the “superweeds.” Crops that are engineered to be herbicide tolerant crossbreed with weeds, transferring herbicide tolerant genes to the weeds, which they dubbed as “superweeds.” (Whitman, 2000). This has caused problems among farmers since it is hard for them to remove these weeds.

According to pro-GMOs, GMOs have also helped underfed nations. (Kantor, 2013). Because GMOs has greatly increased the food supply, more GM-foods are produced to be given to underfed nations. On the other hand, however, many studies show that there is no long-term testing to be sure that GMO products are safe for feeding (Asaff, n.d.). This raises problems and doubt on the safety of GMO products or GM-foods. How can people be assured with the safety of GMOs if there is not enough testing? Without sufficient research and experiment on its safety, GM-foods carry a dangerous risk. So, why feed them to billions of people in the first place?

Some pro-GMO scientists claim that GMOs are safe because they give additional vitamins and minerals to food. For example, rice can be modified to contain more Vitamin A. (Oklahoma State University, n.d.). However, according to researchers, GMOs carry health risks (Whitman, 2000). Furthermore, studies show that GMOs carry a risk of life-threatening allergic reactions. One study verified that GM soybeans contain a unique, unexpected protein, not found in non-GM soy controls. According to scientists, this protein reacts with an antibody called IgE. “This antibody in human blood plays a key role in a large proportion of allergic reactions, including those that involve life-threatening anaphylactic shock. The fact that the unique protein created by GM soy interacted with IgE suggests that it might also trigger allergies.” (Jeffrey M. Smith, 2007, p. 10) Moreover, many accounts have stated that GMOs have caused diseases and deaths in humans and animals. One victim is the son of Barbara Kowalcyk. In an interview, she told how her son died. Hoping to just fill their stomachs and have an afternoon snack, the family decided to eat at a fast food restaurant. From there, it all went downhill. Barbara’s son caught a disease that has been diagnosed as Escherichia Coli. A doctor then told Barbara that this was caused by the fast food they ate (Robert Kenner, 2009). Other reports and stories have led to the same fate. In India, thousands of sheep, buffalo, and goats died after grazing on GM cotton plants while others suffered poor health and reproductive problems. Meanwhile, in Europe and Asia, reports from farmers say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating GM corn. In the US, about two dozen farmers report that GM corn varieties caused pigs or cows to be unable to produce. In the Philippines, people in at least five villages fell sick when a nearby GM corn variety was pollinating (“Health Risk,” n.d.) These reports question the safety of GMOs. In addition, they also debunk the claim of pro-GMOs that all GM-foods are completely safe.

In conclusion, the safety of food is still hanging on the balance. With reports of diseases from GM-foods and the lack of testing, GMOs pose a great risk for the health of the people. Furthermore, genetic mutations caused by GMOs have caused problems among farms. Since the GMOs are so prevalent in the food industry, stopping the production of GM-foods is very impossible. However, regulating the number of GMO products being produced every year can help reduce health risks. Commencing a long-term testing on GMO will also be helpful. Perhaps, through this testing, scientists may find a way to remove the negative effects of GMOs.

References:

Asaff, B. (n.d.). Pros and Cons of GMOs. LoveToKnow Organic. Retrieved from

http://organic.lovetoknow.com/Pros_and_Cons_of_GMOs

Connealy, L. E. (2013). GMOs: The Pros & Cons of Genetically Modified Food.

Newport Natural Health. Retrieved from http://www.newportnatural

health.com/2013/07/gmos-the-pros-cons-of-genetically-modified-food/

Genetically Modified Foods (Biotech Foods) Pros and Cons. (2010). WebMD. Retrieved

from http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/features/are-biotech-foods-safe-to-eat

GMO Facts. (n.d.). Okanola. Retrieved from http://canola.okstate.edu/gmofacts

Health Risks. (n.d.). Institute for Responsible Technology. Retrieved from

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/health-risks

Kenner, R. (Director). (2009). Food, Inc [Documentary]. United States of America:

Magnolia Home Entertainment.

Kantor, K. (n.d.). GMOs - Pros and Cons. Southern Foods at Home. Retrieved from

http://www.southernfoodsathome.com/my_health_info/GMOs_-_pros_and_cons.pdf

Smith, J. M. (2007). Genetically Engineered Foods May Cause Rising Food Allergies.

Institute for Responsible Technology. Retrieved from

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/health-risks/

articles-about-risk-by-jeffrey-smith/Genetically-Engineered-Foods-May-Cause-

Rising-Food-Allergies-Genetically-Engineered-Soybeans-May-2007

Whitman, D. B. (n.d.). Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?. Brown University.

Retrieved from http://brown.edu/ce/adult/arise/resources/docs/

GM%20foods%20review.pdf

The True Meaning of Integrity (Extended Definition Essay)

            Nowadays, integrity is commonly described as a moral trait. It is even interchangeably used with honesty. According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, integrity is “the quality of being honest and fair.” The Latin root of integrity says otherwise. The Latin root of integrity, integritatem, means “soundness” or “wholeness.” (“Etymology and Definitions,” n.d., p. 1) This shows that integrity is much more than being honest or moral. “A person with integrity has the — often rare — ability to pull everything together, to make it all happen no matter how challenging the circumstances.” (“Etymology and Definitions,” n.d., p. 3) Thus, a person with integrity is able to make everything complete. He is able to make everything work. Saying having integrity means being honest is inaccurate because a person with integrity is not necessarily honest all the time. There are many ways to define integrity other than honesty. According to Damian Cox, Marguerite La Caze, and Michael Levine (2001), integrity can be viewed in many different aspects. Three of these most common and important aspects are integrity as self-integration, integrity as maintenance of one’s identity, and integrity as a virtue.

            Integrity as self-integration views integrity as something that combines the various parts of a person’s personality into one undivided whole (Cox et al, 2001). In other words, this particular view of integrity promotes the wholeness of character of a person. This view of integrity is the closest to the Latin etymology of the word. When it comes to this view of integrity, Harry Frankfurt’s theory is often mentioned. Frankfurt states that desires and volitions (the power to make choices and decisions) arranged in a hierarchy contribute in achieving self-integration. Frankfurt calls these desires and volitions first-order desires, second-order desires, and so on. There are certain desires and volition that a person identifies with, which contributes to the elimination of the divided, non-integrated self. “... [This] explains the consistency of word and deed that intuitively characterises the person of integrity.” (Baxter, Dempsey, Megone and Lee, 2012, p. 11) For example, a person may have a desire to do his homework and a desire to go to a party. He then chooses to study instead. This shows that he may value success over fun. The person’s sure decision makes him integrated, meaning knowing what he really wants to do and identifying with this particular desire contributes to self-integration.

            On the other hand, rather than choosing between desires or volitions, the identity approach of integrity pertains to a person’s faithfulness to his commitments which are fundamental factors to his identity (Cheshire Calhoun, 1995).  According to Bernard Williams (cited in Baxter et al, 2012), these commitments that the person identify with most deeply are called “identity-conferring commitments.” For example, if a person identifies himself as a daily task achiever and fails to finish his homework (thus, he fails to stay true to his commitment), his identity is questioned. Therefore, integrity in the view of identity is “acting in a way that accurately reflects your sense of who you are…” (Cox et al, 2001, p. 14). However, criticisms against this view arose. One particular criticism says that it is going against the aspect of integrity as a virtue, which is probably the most popular perception of integrity. According to Cox et al (2001), the identity view debunks the idea that integrity is acting from motivation (integrity as a virtue). Thus, the identity view gives a message that a person with integrity may commit unacceptable deeds as long as it is parallel to his core identity and commitments.

            Integrity as virtue is probably the most common aspect of the word. As mentioned above, integrity as virtue is acting from motivation. My teacher once told me that integrity is doing the right thing even without anyone looking. This is a good example of viewing integrity as a virtue. What motivated the person to do the right thing without any audience? Integrity motivated him to do so. From the definition of my teacher, it can be said that integrity is the virtue of doing what a person believes is right. Thus, it is obvious that the beliefs and values of a person are involved in practicing integrity in this particular aspect.

            In conclusion, the true meaning of integrity is still unclear. There are so many theories made as to what integrity really is. Many researches were written about integrity and they are highly subjective. Thus, the meaning of integrity really depends on a person’s view. However, based on the theories and interpretation mentioned above, it can be said that integrity is somehow a way of acting morally and a means of relating to self. In other words, integrity is something a person does for himself and for the people around him. For this reason, integrity is considered to be the important core quality of a happy and successful life in a way that it somehow results in a harmonious relationship with people and, most importantly, the person himself (self-relationship). A person with integrity then does what he believes is true and when told otherwise, he will learn from his mistakes. Thus, it unites people together, affecting society positively.

References:

Baxter, J., Dempsey, J., Megone, C., & Lee, J. (2012). What is Integrity?. Real Integrity (pp. 11-

15). London: Chartered Accountants Worldwide.

Calhoun, C. (1995). Standing for Something. The Journal of Philosophy, 92(5), 235. Retrieved

from http://faculty.arch.utah.edu/benham/readings/calhoun.pdf

Cox, D., Caze, M. L., & Levine, M. (2001, April 9). Integrity. Stanford University. Retrieved

from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/integrity/

Etymology and Definitions. (n.d.). Real Estate. Retrieved from

http://integritatem.com/?page_id=10             

Integrity. (n.d.). Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/

dictionary/Integrity

Misconceptions on Love

          Nowadays, people have been led to believe that love is all about holding hands and kissing, especially teenagers. Most girls have this typical mindset that a prince charming will come into their life and have a happily ever. Some people also think that love is something that "just happens" and can happen at first sight. They do not know how wrong they are. They are just adding to pile of myths about love. Real love is not all about physical attraction or physical contact with the other person. 

          Though I have never experience being in love, I have always believe in one thing. Love takes a while. For you to really love a person, you have to know him/her inside out. True love is loving someone despite his/her flaws. True love is being with someone you think is worth all the ups and downs and downs and downs and downs and a lot more of downs. True love as described in the Bible is unconditional and unfailing. Love is not for you, but rather for your partner. It is not all about making yourself happy. It is about making your partner happy because love is never selfish.