Oregon Undergraduate Research Journal: Vol. 19 No. 1 (2021)
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26382
Spring 20212024-03-29T02:18:05ZThe Anthropocene Commons – A New Paradigm of Scale Variance: Commons Frameworks and Climate Change Theory
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26392
The Anthropocene Commons – A New Paradigm of Scale Variance: Commons Frameworks and Climate Change Theory
Aghel, Parsa
The term Anthropocene, denoting the era where human activity is the greatest influence on the environment and climate, marks a new era of climate change theory and understanding. This paper, though, looks at existing promising works surrounding the Anthropocene and argues that the dialogue lacks holistic conceptions of agency and spatial and temporal scale variance in order to fully grasp its complexity. Agency refers to the flawed understanding of the Anthropocene as simply human without consideration for other assemblages, which denotes the other stakeholders apart from humans. Temporal scale refers to the need for a varied consideration of time and the creation of assemblages. Spatial scale refers to the different levels of interaction (national, international, socioeconomic. This understanding of scales, or scale variance, relies on Derek Woods’ theory that multiple scalar levels are necessary to encapsulate the Anthropocene. This paper will approach scale variance by constructing the Anthropocene Commons model. The model, based its theoretical framework on Garrett Hardin’s Tragedy of the Commons on resource, will utilize the three levels of scale absent in other scholarship. The paper will examine other models used to address climate change and discuss their lack of the necessary scope and holistic framework and how their prescriptions for addressing climate catastrophe fall short. Using scale variance in the Anthropocene commons, then, will seek to correct it and offer a standardized but flexible framework to better address the ongoing and impending crisis.
2021-06-01T00:00:00ZHow Egocentric Biases Maintain Social Anxiety: A Literature Review
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26391
How Egocentric Biases Maintain Social Anxiety: A Literature Review
Mingus, Kyra
Biases and heuristics are mental shortcuts that help guide our daily decision making and cognitive processing but can often lead us astray when they account for inaccurate or misinterpreted information. In this review I aim to understand how the spotlight effect (Gilovich et al., 2000), the overestimation of how attentive others are to our actions, and the illusion of transparency (Gilovich et al., 1998), the overestimation of how easily others can discern our internal state, maintain social anxiety by disrupting the anchoring component these shortcuts rely on. Through a detailed analysis of major research conducted by Brown and Stopa (2007) and Haikal and Hong (2010), I was able to synthesize the empirical findings, discuss clinical implications, and propose future directions for research.
2021-06-01T00:00:00ZBurning Woman: Sexualized Robots and the Vilification of Women in Metropolis and its Precursors
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26390
Burning Woman: Sexualized Robots and the Vilification of Women in Metropolis and its Precursors
Grove, Cassian
The vilification and subsequent destruction of feminine robots is a surprisingly common trope in film and literature. This essay draws connections between three very different works—Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, Villier’s Tomorrow’s Eve, and E.T.A. Hoffman’s The Sandman—and posits a shared narrative reason for the deaths of the three artificial women: male projection. Comparing and contrasting the three death scenes with each other as well as other texts on feminine literature and projection demonstrates how little substance there is to these “out of control” women/technologies beyond the faults of the men who create them. Furthermore, this essay brings up a prudent question: could these artificial women have become something more if it were not for the displaced guilt and projected egos of the men around them?
2021-06-01T00:00:00Z“Don’t Kill My Buzz, Man!” – Explaining the Criminalization of Psychedelic Drugs
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26389
“Don’t Kill My Buzz, Man!” – Explaining the Criminalization of Psychedelic Drugs
Sproul, Conrad
In the 1950s, psychedelic drugs were the subject of extensive psychiatric research in the United States. By 1960, they had been found to be non-addictive, to have remarkable safety profiles, and to potentially be able to treat a range of psychological conditions. However, in 1968, the possession of psychedelics was criminalized by the US federal government. Consequently, medical research has been stifled, and today the possession and distribution of psychedelics are punished more severely than for more dangerous recreational drugs such as methamphetamine. Most scholars argue that psychedelics were criminalized due to a “moral panic” in the late 1960s. However, this theory overlooks several important aspects of the political process that led to psychedelic criminalization. This essay takes an alternative stance. First, early 20th century temperance advocates instilled an anti-drug moral framework into the American cultural consciousness. Then, in the early 1960s, safety concerns and professional biases led most mainstream psychiatrists to reject the therapeutic use of psychedelics. These factors interacted to cause both a moral panic and severe criminalization, but the moral panic did not itself cause criminalization.
2021-06-01T00:00:00Z