Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Blog response #1
When deciding if something is the best in its category, we must realize that the definition of the best is something of the "highest quality". Not once is the word value used or even implied in the various definitions of best because, though it may not be fair or just, the way we obtain the best does not take away from which one is the best. The item with the best qualities or features is simply the best no matter who created it, its effects on the environment, or whether it will harm humans because we are not attempting to buy an item we are simply assessing which device or item we consider to be the best. On that note no item would be harmful to the extent that it would be endangering lives because we must meet certain guidelines when manufacturing products so i believe that argument is a bit unrealistic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you're right. Just because something is considered the best, it doesn't mean that everyone has to buy it, or that everyone has to agree that it's what they SHOULD buy. What's best and what's valued are often different, so it's unfair to ask anyone to blend the two together and say that what makes an item the best should also make everyone in the world value it more than anything else in the world.
ReplyDeleteFrancine, I agree that a good working definition of "best" is "something of the highest quality." But so what? You haven't shown why it makes sense to say a product's high quality rating should be completely divorced from how it is made. You simply say it should be.
ReplyDeleteThat you hold this view was made clear in class. The point here is to explain your position. Not doing suggests you have no idea why you believe what you believe and just do so blindly. I don't sense this is the case, but you need to provide an explanation. For instance, the current iPhone is made with Phthalates, a plastic softener banned in European toys thanks to its apparent impact on hormone levels in children--explain to me why I'm supposed to ignore this when deciding if an iPhone is better than a Nokia phone, which uses no Phthalates in its material?
Your final claim that harmful products that endanger lives never make it to the marketplace is unsupported. Each year, there are many product recalls for this very reason. In addition, it wasn't long ago that some of the most beautiful diamonds sold in this country were mined by people who were enslaved. If people tried to leave the camp where they were held, they'd be hunted down and shot. Much of what is sold in our country isn't manufactured here.
I agree with you overall idea of something being the "best" because of its qualities. However that single item alone can not account for the millions of workers who put their time and effort into the companies products. Many products here in the US are made in under developed countries where although there may be guidelines they are not regularly enforced and although they claim to be humane they may not be telling the truth.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Francine because no one is able to strictly identify the "best" product and their reasoning off the top of their head. Also, who is one person to decide if the "best" product will hurt others or even themselves? Things like this are not up to one consumer. Also, another good point is what consumers asses a product to be the best.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Francines statement. If something is considered the best, than i believe that is your opinion based on your criteria on what is the best, and what should be valued within the product in which you consume interest in buying. If someone believes that something is the best, that does not mean that it should be valued by everyone and that it is the "best" becuase they feel this way. Everyone is entitled to their own opinon. Simply identifying what is structurally the best is wrong becuase it would be a bias definition.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Mr. B:
ReplyDeleteIf we continuously debate who made the product, where it was made, what went into each product, etc. we will endlessly be searching for what is the best. I do not believe the making of the object, no matter who made it, goes into why it is the best because it does not take away from the actual product. Though the diamonds came from a slave camp, which is horrible, it does not take away from their beauty and value.
I believe that if we include everything that happened before the final product, we will not only get varying results that may or may not be accurate, but we will also end up with the "best" being only decent because we will be forced to give up the best due to its creation.
The iphone could have been made any where in the world by any number of people for various amounts of money. For all i care its creation could have been illegal. That does not change the phone.
Just because it is sad that some things are made in horrible circumstances, does not mean we should take away from their value.
What you are suggesting Mr. B is that we then take all the items that were created in safe, etc. environments and put them on a peddle stool while all the others are discriminated against. Where the item is made does not have anything to do with what the item is. For example if an iphone was made in India and sold in the US and another was made in the US and sold in the US, please explain to me how these are different.
I am curious as to why you do think the creation is important.