Colloquia

When does life begin? When does it end? In what circumstances is it appropriate to experiment on human subjects? What is the relationship between human rights, social justice, and health care? This course will use readings in history, bioethics, and political theory, and current events to explore issues surrounding the beginning of life (abortion, stem cells, surrogacy and cloning), the end of life (euthanasia, assisted suicide, and organ donation), the ethics of research (including the Tuskegee Syphilis Study), the nature and meaning of disability, and health care in relation to the larger issue of social justice.

What is History? Is it the sum total of what has happened? Is it the summary of what we think happened—or simply what we have been told that happened, by books, teachers, parents, friends, and the internet? What can we really know about the past, both the world’s and our own, and how can we really be said to know it? Is it even possible to get at historical ‘Truth’? These questions are not new. They have vexed curious people at least since Herodotus in fifth century B.C. Greece. Now we can take a swipe at a few answers. Together we will read and discuss some major as well as a few minor, offbeat works of history, embracing first-person chronicles, detached narratives, diaries, and even letters—a couple in their entirely, most in excerpts—in order to get at the heart of the matter.

So you want to be an entrepreneur and get rich? Doesn’t everyone? This seems to be the prevalent mindset within the Millennial generation. This course examines the origins of the entrepreneurial movement in the 21st century and tracks it through the maker movement, to its contemporary manifestation. Examples from both 20th and 21st century entrepreneurs are examined as we view this phenomenon through the lens of multiple environmental forces, including, but not limited to: (a) cultural and social changes, (b) competition, (c) government policies, (d) demographic shifts, and (e) technological innovations. The course embraces readings in history, business, and current events to explore this most fascinating topic. The course culminates in a personal entrepreneurial journal for those brave enough to pursue life as an entrepreneur. This course employs a blended format with regularly scheduled class time as well as digital instruction.

Popular culture has often reflected, and even fueled, discussions of ideology, national politics, and social change. We will study the themes of war and protest, race, and work/employment, through the genres of film and popular song. In addition to their significance as part of the fabric of 20th century America, these themes offer a wealth of information about the changing descriptions (and stereotypes) of women and gender roles. We will view such films as Birth of a Nation, Dr. Strangelove, The Green Berets, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, Nine to Five, Thelma and Louise and Norma Rae. Musical selections will mirror identical themes including, “I Didn’t Raise My Boy to be a Soldier,” “Union Maid,” “Strange Fruit,” “Eve of Destruction,” ”Born in the U.S.A.,” “Where Have all the Flowers Gone” and “The Pill.”

“Science attacks our most cherished opinions,” observed Stephen Colbert, but what happens when scientists allow their personal views to get in the way of doing science? Facts drive scientific investigation as a way of accurately making sense of the natural world, and researchers are called to reject conclusions not supported by the results of multiple, independent investigations. While scientific status is built on credible results widely distributed and understood by others, scientists are human, and, therefore, can and do fall into the trap of ego over logic. When a particularly influential investigator holds sway over interpretation of facts, lower status scientists’ work often gets dismissed out of hand, with the consequent retarded advances. In this colloquium, we will examine cases of un-objective science: situations where a particular scientific sovereign’s influence impeded the recognition of correct but contradicting work accomplished by those less in favor in the scientific community — women, people of different ethnic origins, researchers with less than blue-ribbon academic pedigrees, and, perhaps worst of all, individuals with no formal scientific training but the innate ability to observe, document, and reach conclusions supported by evidence and not colored by dogma of the day.