Name and explain a myth about the human brain. Why did the debate arise in the first place?
One myth about the brain is that alcohol actually kills brain cells. First of all, it is important to know that the brain loses a panoply of cells daily, and must use sleep to regenerate the brain. Alcohol, is a neuro-inhibitor, which means, in simple terms, that the exchange between neurones is slowed down, at levels dependant on level of intoxication. This inhibition process slows the motor skills of the person from thoughts, speech, physical sympathetic movement as well as parasympathetic system. In other words, the things the person does consciously, such as talking, walking, and even breathing are slowed down and more difficult to accomplish. Moreover, the things that the person does subconsciously such as thoughts, emotions and inhibitions are also slowed down. This would explain lack of responsiveness, slowness or lack of reflex, loss of inhibitions and so on. What alcohol does is slow down the overall functioning of the brain, which will subsequently slow down the brains process of neurological regeneration. With this come a lot of fatigue (also caused by dehydration that alcohol brings) largely caused by the brain not having had the time to regenerate properly. This requires more sleep to "catch-up" and regenerate the regular daily loss of neurological cells. In conclusion, alcohol does not kill brain cells, it simply slows down the natural neurological process. You have more chances of killing brain cells by falling and getting a concussion due to intoxication.
In educational psychology, there were many debates about whether or not it was harmful to teach children more than one language when raising them. What has research proven about this topic and how has it changed the way we see and address the development of children?
Though in the past, it would have been seen as harmful to teach children more than one language, today we know differently. When the brain of a young child is developing, it is creating what we call grey matter, which occurs when certain marts of the brain develop (turning into white matter) and other parts become dormant (grey matter). The brain will shape to the needs of the person and with regards to language, this pat of the brain will shape itself to the sounds and pronunciations of said language. Moreover, when learning any language, there is a sense of association between the work and the thing which it designates. The more shaping that are created, the more white matter the brain will have and the more links and associations it can make. This is very important for the development of children on an immediate level, as well as for later on. For instance, knowing more than one language, properly that is, and processing a brain that can make the different intrinsic associations that come with the mastering of these languages, can delay the early symptoms of Alzheimer's disease. Due to the extra white matter and the myriad of different associations that may act as "back-up", there is more leeway for the brain to make sense of things and subsequently remember.
Discuss the unresolved question of authority and leadership in Richard Wagner’s “The Art-Work of the Future.” Does it support or undermine Wagner’s argument about the revolutionary potential of the gesamtkunstwerk?
In his The Art-Work of the Future, Richard Wagner discusses the gesamtkunstwerk as a way for uniting the different art forms, and how this would unite the people of Germany and thus, create a united Germany. He states that Drama, in the true sense, “is only conceivable as proceeding from the common urgency of every art towards the most direct appeal to a common public” and goes on to argue that “for the purpose of each separate branch of art can only be fully attained by the reciprocal agreement and co-operation of all the branches in their common message”. In other words, the importance and value attained by each art is based on its contribution to the common goal, the greater purpose for the art, which is when they all come together in one presentation: drama and in one space: the theatre. I argue that there are important limitations to this claim because the relinquishing of freedom that each artist must succumb to is present all the way through drama and beyond. If each art that comprises the drama has had to limit itself and its purpose to a common goal, then the end result is one of limitations as well. Moreover, if the aim of this common goal is to aspire to an art that is received by one person made up of many, then the drama itself has been limited in its conception and delivery. This in turn, eliminates the segregation of different peoples to create the Folk, another concept that Wagner brings forth. However, when proceeding with this elimination of segregation, we limit the reception of the art. Wagner mentions in his account that the orchestra “whose unmeasured bottom is the great sea of feeling itself ”. If this holds true, then are we saying that feeling is objective or universal? If there are so many people in this world, then there have to be as many different feelings, which by putting them all in one category would be to strip them of their authenticity and purity, once again for the purpose of the greater goal. In the case of feeling, I would venture to say that this greater goal is more political than anything else. In any case, no one should decide what the greater purpose for art is, much less what the greater purpose or goal of feeling is. This authoritarian stance that Wagner takes supports his argument about the revolutionary potential of the gesamtkunstwerk, in the way that he sees the latter because in this view, the collective purpose is a mosaic rather than a melting pot. He emphasizes the fact that each separate art would be enhanced and more relevant as it rises to this greater level. He expresses strongly felt correlations and draws a myriad of conclusion as to how and why the gesamtkunstwerk would revolutionize Germany and bring everyone together. Similarly, with regards to the Folk, he strives for interdisciplinary artwork that trades the egotistical and elitist mentality of the artists for a collective solidarity.