Euthanasia: A Cure of Mercy, A Cure for Desperation

Euthanasia is never a easy topic to bring up. Yet before talking about the legalization process of euthanasia, we have too many questions to answer. When we define "ill people", what exactly group of people are we talking about? It seems hard and unqualified for us to decided. The term euthanasia is open to interpretations. And it is simply too cruel to think about "slippery slope" from euthanasia to murder now, for me. Perhaps we should go back to the very beginning of the idea to euthanize: why would people ever want to end their lives? For the life itself is absolute the most precious gift one could ever get: it's a blossom of possibilities, a journey of unlimited miracles and even a chance to further yourself by giving birth to another wonderful life. 

The debate on euthanasia has to start with an emotional perspective. To be honest, I feel myself a pessimist when in my early teenage years. I was such a cynic girl who buried herself in fantasies and sad peoms. I found excuses to escape from schools and peers and was always easily annoyed. As I matter of course, I took life as granted and even imagine that sort of romantic scene in which I can die for my beliefs -- if the world itself is an assembler of miseries, would it be easier to escape from it? 

Yet that glist of thought never really led me to suicidal behaviors, for the fear of death simply beated my sentimentality and pessimism. And it works the same for patients in incurable conditions. To think about does euthanasia dehumanize patients and undermine the palliative care that would reduce the perceived need for euthanasia is too simplificate. Because even the pain in desease, both physical and mental, is huge, the strong will of keeping alive can never be underestimated. Euthasia takes troumedous courage, which can only be given by ultimate and endless desperation. I can't imagine the hardship when a patient decide to euthanize his/herself, for the will of living is definately the most powerful desire in humanity. Again, as I stated in the class, the right to euthanasia can only be held in the hands of patients themselves, not their doctor, not their family. The process of dicision is after all a lonely conversation between the patient and his/her inner soul. With all the respect to life and love, one thing human should try unconditionally the best to do is to fight agaist death and desperation. However, if -- unfortunately, we lost the battle, maybe the last thing we can do is to embrace a merciful end of desperation.

G.U.Y. - I'm Strong Enough To Know The Truth

Lady Gaga - G.U.Y. ← Click to see the MV, lyrics attached in the bottom of this post:)

I was always a fan of Lady Gaga since the first glance of the song Bad Romance, I can still recall the willies when I watched and listened to the MV some five years ago. Those overwhelming bold expressions, exposed figures, uncontrolled wild shouts definitely opened a new world to me -- before that, I was a chinses classical music lover, all that I admired are soft tones and elegent lyrics. Can girls be brave and rebelling like this? I don't know, but I started to love the feeling in her songs.

The song G.U.Y. first reached my ear upon my arrival at NYC. Commentaries were curious about the title, as I did, what exactly does G.U.Y. refer to? It is said Gaga created it as an abbreviation for Girl Under You. It seems the theme of this song is erotic, as well as the whole lyrics (God of sexual desire...Touch me, touch me, don't be sweet...), however I felt something implicit deeply inside of it.

To me, the keys to interpret this song are those lines:
I don't need to be on topTo know what it does, I'm strong enough to know the truthI just want it to be hotBecause I'm best when I'm In love, and I'm in love with you

It was just upon a cold war between my boyfriend and I when I heard this. As I was then in NYC and he back in China, we could only expected to see each other in X-mas vocation. In this interval of meeting, suffered from the distance, time difference, and the sense of insecure, strangely, we tend to act mighty to each other. I didn't understand why we would do so at that time, but now, somehow I figure that probably we were too pride to convey the sense of insecure and seek for reassurance in each other. We wanted to be on top, and took whole control of this love, without the courage to care and somehow show weakness to each other. This epiphany striked me that I didm't really need to be on top as long as I was confident in this relationship. Then I invited him to a good talk, expressed how much I cared for him and was willing to face any challenges we may encounter in the future along the side of him. It really worked.

Also, I consider this song revolutionary, as a vehicle to spread the idea of new feminism: females need to man up sometime, and express their desire directly.

Lyrics.
Greetings from himeros
God of sexual desire, son of aphrodite
Lay back, and feast as this audio guides you through new and exciting positions
I wanna be the girl under you (oh yeah)
I wanna be your g. U.y (yeah)
I wanna be the grave and earth you (oh yeah)
Our sexes tell us no lies
I'm gonna wear the towel, the power to leave you
I'm aiming for full control of this love (of this love)
Touch me, touch me, don't be sweet
Love me, love me, please retreat
Let me be the girl under you that makes you cry
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
The girl under you (guy)
I'm gonna say the word
And own you (oh yeah)
You'll be my (g. I.r.l)
Guy, I'm romance and love's to hold you (oh yeah)
Know, you wear my make-up well
I'm gonna wear the towel, the power to leave you
I'm aiming for full control of this love (of this love)
Touch me, touch me, don't be sweet
Love me, love me, please retreat
Let me be the girl under you that makes you cry
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
The girl under you (guy)
I don't need to be on top
To know what it does, I'm strong enough to know the truth
I just want it to be hot
Because I'm best when I'm In love, and I'm in love with you
(Guy) touch me touch me
Natural goddess (guy) touch me touch me
A soul comes into full phase (guy) get on top of me
And mars were in spirit rams into the atmosphere (guy I want to be that guy)
Touch me touch me, don't be shy
I'm in charge like a G. U.Y.
I'll lay down face up this time, under you like a G. U.Y.
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
The girl under you guy
I wanna be that guy (G. U.Y.)
I'll wreck you right up guy (G. U.Y.)
I'll lie down face up guy (G. U.Y.) (achtzehn)
The girl under you guy! (sechzehn)
Fourteen
Vierzehn
Drei, eins
Nein zedd
Nein zedd
Nein zedd
Nein zedd

How to Interpret Partial Justice

As it is mentioned in A Definition of Justice, Aristotle states out that when people argue about justice they usually are “speaking of a limited and partial just”. For people tend to agree about the equality of the things, but dispute about the equality of the persons. In other words, people’s recognition of “justice” is limited by their own position and interest, so they become bad judges of their own affairs. To illustrate this situation, Aristotle cites the example as follow: for one party, if they are unequal in one respect, for example wealth, consider themselves to be unequal in all; and the other party, if they are equal in one respect, for example free birth, consider themselves to be equal in all. It wouldn’t be just that one party who paid one mina should have the same share of a hundred minae, whether of the principal or of the profits, as he who paid the remaining ninety-nine. As for people have different concept of the “absolute justice”, it is so difficult to talk about justice in the larger sense of word rather than to discuss a limited aspect of just. In Aristotle’s respective, if people talk about taxing the rich very heavily to help to poor as a form of justice, it is partial justice from the party of poor—they are bad judges of their own affairs. But a state exists for the sake of a good life, people should have share in happiness or a life of free choice, if the rich choose to act good and just by paying higher tax, they will be reckon as high in virtue.

When Artificial Intelligence Issue the Declaration of Independence

It is said that the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson stands among the great political treatises of the Western world. However, in the long run of history, politic has been proved to be part of the crystallization of human civilization, as well as the conspiracy of achieving extreme purpose. In the context of today’s fast-developing technology, would it be possible that one day, Artificial Intelligence (AI) issues their Declaration of Independence and therefore gets rid of human control, even becomes a counterpart or threat to human race--- as America is to Britain now?

By what right, or does it even have the right to do so theoretically? Here I make comparisons between those two pairs, in order to deepen and widen our understanding of the original Declaration of Independence.

To start with, in the original Declaration of Independence, Jefferson made use of the term Creator to indicate a supreme authority, which commends beyond the reach of the power of social --- government. Therefore, it is said Creator endowed all men unalienable Rights --- Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Yet to some extent, this Creator is not so convincing in today’s people’s mind; however, Artificial Intelligence do have a Creator --- human race. Acting as a similar pattern of manifestation to human mind, AI is created to accomplish complicated intelligence activities and to assist human. Human do not endow it any right. It is very likely AI is created and furthered merely as a advanced tool.

Secondly, the Declaration of Independence is forced to form in the condition of American requested equality and fairly treatment repeatedly and only to find repeated injury and Tyrantly behavior. In the case of AI and human race, although human aimed to create a form of intelligence which could think just like themselves --- even independently --- currently the technical obstacle simply couldn’t enable AI to develop independent thoughts. After all, even AI can beat the top chess player in the world; it still has a long way to go for them to ask for fair treatment if not been taught to.

On top of all that, the Declaration of Independence is famous and inspiring because of Americans are not along, they called for alliances from other colonies, lived in which those people shared the sympathetic visage with Americans. Yet AI is such a new born “race”, with such unique definition and solitude. It requires far better writing skills for them to find alliance.

But did winners or conquerors need “right” to justify their war? If one day AI start a war towards human and win it, all this “right” thing can are open to interpretations. And they probably don’t need alliance, since they may be able to duplicate themselves geometrically. The question is , when AI issued their Declaration of Independence, do we need to worry, or live in the fear of slavery? Personally, I don’t think so. After all, we seemed lack of use value --- after all, neither can we dig coals faster than robots, nor do math problems more accurate than computers.