College Writing

I felt since far too long has passed since I posted something of at least some meaning, that I would give a crack at some school work to pass the time, until I can regain a steady flow of though again.

This paper was written without using the following word(assuming I didn't miss any instances): is, am, are, was, were, be, been, it, thing, get, gets, got, gots, goes

The highlighted words are weaved and connecting sentences(or at least supposed to)

So without further a do(mind the error in transition around the middle, that is not supposed to be highlighted):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sailor’s Integral Command

Ascribing a concrete integral definition to sailing presents an enigma. Sailing encompasses an ancient skill that spans back to some of the earliest men. That very skill, born out of navigation needs of the time and evolved accordingly. The skill and my love for the subject evolve far too broadly to ascribe solid concepts. Sailing bears little evolution of concept, historically amid growing technology. The practice has fundamentally remained unchanged throughout the historical lifespan, other than advancements in knowledge of mechanics.

Sailing knowledgably would come about pegged by most as a hobby being that not many professional options for employment exist. This notion further informed by professional organizations such as the Heart of sailing foundation which spends time informing others about sailing and such respective merits. Magazines such as Sail Magazine, including at times National Geographic also do quite a bit inform readers.

An object or idea being said to posses integrity or appear integral implies necessity. The integrity or integral parts of modern computer hardware for example partake the following subjects: mathematics relating to geometric concepts and arithmetic’s, and sciences relating to hardware material. Whatever the subject, integrity presents success or failure relating to the “big picture”. Imagine trying to attempt successful medicinal tasks without the fields of biology or sister fields. The task would appear daunting, even if standard. No one picks and chooses; standards being the reason. Many reasonably backed fields navigate as such.

 The integral structure of sailing and practice go hand in hand. Professional’s community website A-B-C of Sailing suggests: “Navigation seems to be a complicated subject, but you just need to understand the basics.” Recommendations would follow a miniscule complication path; such as the knowledge of terms, navigation tools, beacons and buoyancy devices, and pilotage. While true that these appear as standard terms within the field, at the same time one has difficulty. The wind for example, appears necessary if you plan to go sailing, but remains difficult to master. The Yachting organization of Western Australia approaches hands on fundamental to mastery with the fields of: rigging, practice sessions, close hauling, how to jibe, and towing procedures. These two sites slowly introduce a universal “practice makes perfect” method. These methods remain mandatory. Without this mandate, one cannot sail. To sail reveals a single universal. That universal appears as adaptation. Adaptations do not mold the concept nor skill, but the practitioner.

Such molding of the sailor while sailing hopefully leads into integral consistency. Not all conditions in sailing become consistent with expectation. Thus nothing presents a situation expectantly to similarly reflect past experience. Instead, experiences should serve as a tool for the future. Many can demand from many futures, but few shall receive. Although receiving appears great, that signals no reason to stagnate.

I hope to refute stagnation and push only for growth. The path of growing largely does present opportunities for abstract application. These abstract lessons include what I someday hope will teach me lessons far beyond the reach of a boat. Teaching ensures the passing of such knowledge towards forward disciples who may yet utilize these concepts in ways I could not.

This I believe.......Parents and the Media

This was an old writing of mine when I was a sophomore in High School about 2 or 3 years ago. Though I might share it and any others I found of interest. Primarily this was for the crowd that feared letting their children watch TV, listen to certain music or play video games would turn their kids into psychopath murderers.


It was written in a bit of an upset tone, due to parental figures who simply refused to watch what their kids where doing, so instead went crying to the government who they would later criticize for getting too personal, about their kid's activities 


----------------------------------------------------------------
I believe that media and creators should be able to distribute their content in a suitable manner without interference from parents. Creators are just trying to make a living and they shouldn't have their creations, which help the economy, shot down by overly zealous parents, although they have reason. If parents don't want their kids exposed to media, then they should simply bar the outlets of said media within their premises. In my opinion, they have a right to voice their ideas as many ideas of the same caliber that are modernly accepted. Media does create influence, but that is the purpose of rating boards, to make sure that content inappropriate for a certain age group stays away from that group.

Creators are just trying to do their job, the same as parents sometimes have to punish their children for something bad that the child may have done. Creativity is a gift that should be cherished, not criticized left and right by every able person. Art is good for culture and there are certain arts that deserve attention, however most arts criticized are simply attacked in an exaggerated manner. The value of an artist's vision is a great one and should be valued...for whatever reason. I myself dislike many forms of modern art, but I respect them for what they've done.

Parents don't want the art? Don't take your kid to the store, block the website, activate the V-chip on your TV, the possibilities are endless if you don't want your children exposed to it. I'm sure that many artists did not intentionally create their products knowing that some more severe side effects could be observed. You cannot blame the creator for his faults, He/She is only human and makes mistakes. Never judge a book by it's cover, as artists are capable of much more than one product.

One artist does not mean one genre and, most parents find themselves supporting the same artist that created some other product that the parents disliked. Media is simply creativity expressed and the creator attempting to entertain the masses. He/She is only doing what it takes to survive in a world. The law itself represents the concern of parents on a massive scale, so parents should be happy with the large influence they have regardless and stop attempting to further reduce creativity.

This I believe strongly and suggest be upheld for the bettering of culture and the spread of understanding. Art is an expression, and to deny expression, period, would be to deny the artist's or any basic human being's freedom of speech.......