Fallacy # 1

“There are numerous examples of botched painting restorations that have occurred across millennia, though only in about the last century, with the advent of easier means of technological communication, has the debate begun to pick up.”

This is an example of biased language, as I used the unnecessarily harsh word “botched” to describe some painting restorations. I can correct this by using a much blander choice of words, such as:

“There are numerous examples of painting restorations that have been widely criticized as poorly executed, though only in about the last century, with the advent of easier means of technological communication, has the debate begun to pick up.”

Fallacy # 2

“It is reasonable to believe that most anyone would want to help preserve such an integral aspect of humanity’s culture; however, if this preservation is being done in a manner that detracts from the artist’s original perception of the piece, then all that meaning and worth is lost.”

This is an example of an either/or fallacy. Not all meaning and worth of a painting would be lost if its preservation were being performed in an inappropriate manner. By adding in “could” to the sentence, it displays the potential gravity of the situation, while refraining from making it a clear cut “either/or” position.

“… however, if this preservation is being done in a manner that detracts from the artist’s original perception of the piece, then that aspect of the painting’s worth could be lost in the process.”

Poster

For my poster, I intend to display pictures of the Sistine Chapel before its restoration and afterward. Accompanying that, I’m going to make short descriptions of the two sides of the debate over painting restoration and how the Sistine Chapel is applied to that (on two panels of the poster) as well as my conclusion concerning this debate (on the third panel).

Primarily, putting together the my research presentation helped me to realize that a lot of my sources arguing against painting restoration originate from the same man. I will definitely have to expand upon that number of viewpoints against painting restoration if I want to find out if I can legitimately validate that side.

The post-presentation questions mostly helped me realize that I need to expand my knowledge on my subject so that I can more aptly answer any questions that are posed to me.

This statement is meant to mean that there is no such thing as “originality”. All thoughts and ideas are derived from other people and other experiences.

In terms of relating that statement to the research project, you should not be striving to come up with some supremely “original” idea that can be applied to your topic, as that is impossible. Allow what is said about the  research aid you in formulating your thoughts, and, in turn, formulating your paper.

I am interested in researching negative impact of caffeine on the mind and body because I want to find out if the long-term consumption of caffeine could lead to unfortunate health issues. This is important because a great many people (including myself) drink caffeine on a regular basis, and it’s always nice to know if what you are consuming is going to lead to some long-term adverse side effects in the future.

1.       Are you going to research the modes in which caffeine is ingested? What about the different types of drinks that caffeine is found in? Vastly different amounts of caffeine are found within soda and coffee, after all.

2.       What is the science behind how caffeine affects the brain? Will I actually be capable of understanding it? That could be somewhat problematic.

3.       Does caffeine affect adults differently than it affects children? Should the research be confined to a single age group?

This controversy brings to mind the concept of a museum being a temple, to be regarded with some vague respect, from a distance, or a forum, a place that provokes intense, thoughtful discussion about a piece of art, or, in this case, an exhibit that could represent a war that culminated into one of the most devastatingly destructive events in human history. Now, with something so controversial as the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the curator, from the very beginning ought to have made a presentation that was much more comprehensive of the whole event, taking into consideration how massively it affected the Japanese. He also ought to have provided multiple viewpoints from America’s side relating to the event, both for and against the bombing. Unfortunately, because of the controversy the exhibit sparked, the end result of the description of the plane was equally unacceptable. By attempting to maintain a completely objective view by simply describing the Enola Gay as the plane that “dropped the first atomic weapon used in combat”, the Air and Space Museum cut out most of the human and emotional aspects of the event, leaving only the fact that the Enola Gay was a piece of technology.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/1-29-2005-64987.asp

According to buzzle.com, the “official story” of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart spans his years as a child musical prodigy and beyond, throughout which he enjoyed immense popularity. His funeral, though not well-attended, was not a reflection of his popularity with the public, as his work was played quite frequently after his death.

While the site does describe his “official” life as a popular composer rather well, it does omit Mozart’s partiality towards incredibly lewd humor, generally of the scatological variety. It also avoids mentioning the composer’s tendency towards gambling and other extravagances, often forcing him to borrow money from his friends.

Studies for the Piano

Frederick Douglass kept a book of piano compositions by Albert Loeschhorn, throughout which he made basic notes, reminding himself to “watch [his] notes”, and so on. The book was a compilation of easy compositions, meant to be used by a beginner piano player.

I believe that the most prominent information that can be derived from the book is the date in which it was published, 1895, which also happened to be the year Frederick Douglass died. This reinforces the idea that Frederick Douglass was a man that continually strove to better himself, both intellectually and culturally, very late into his life. Though this book was published post America’s period of slavery, it was still a time in which African Americans were imposed upon with immense disadvantages and prejudice. Frederick Douglass fought against that grain, proving again and again that African Americans were capable of the same thoughts and talents that Caucasians possessed.

One question that might arise from this artifact is whether or not Frederick Douglass’s talents actually did extend to music. Despite my extensive Google researching, I have found nothing indicating that it did. Perhaps this could be attributed to the fact that Frederick Douglass had discovered his desire to play the piano rather late in his life. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to discover whether or not Frederick Douglass was simply an exceptional writer/orator, or if he was a budding musical virtuoso as well.