Zeus' Origins: A Kahoot

https://create.kahoot.it/share/zeus-origin/194911b0-9da9-4276-b5af-ddaecab97604

The overthrowing of Ouranos by Kronos and his titan brothers brought in a new era of ruling. Kronos ruled over all with his sister and wife, Rhea, and each of the four brothers who assisted him now ruled a different corner of the world, the north, the south, the east, and the west. Upon the birth of Kronos’ first daughter, Hestia, Kronos’ own mother, Gaia, foretold that one of his children, a son, would overthrow him as he did to his own father. In his paranoia. He swallowed his first child, despite them being a daughter and not a son. This continued until Zeus was born and the defeat of Kronos was on the horizon. This Kahoot is designed to challenge the general knowledge of those generally interested and force them to think critically about what they’ve learned of the story of Zeus. This challenges the story of Zeus’ heritage, marriage and children, and how he came into power.

Between Māori Myth and Greek Titan Myth: Comparing the Birth of the Gods

The myths of Ranginui and Papatūānuku, the Sky Father and the Earth Mother of Māori legend, and the creation myth of their godly children can be compared to that of Kronos and Rhea, the Greek titan of time and titan of fertility, and their own children's birth.

Upon their birth, Ranginui and Papatūānuku’s sons were held tightly between the two, with no space to move or roam as the parents held each other tightly. Soon the sons began to anger as they wanted to have their own space to grow beyond the limitations of their parents, and they began to try and push their parents apart. Each son tried and tried by themselves, until their son Tānemahuta, who became the god of the forest, separated his parents from each other by pushing them apart with his legs rather than his hands like his brothers had tried. He forced his father into becoming the above and the sky, while his mother stayed as the earth, and with their separation came light.

Before the birth of Kronos’ children, he was told of a prophecy of his son overthrowing his reign. As his next child was born, a daughter, in his paranoia he ate the first child, Hestia. He continued to eat each child as Rhea birthed them. Upon the birth of Zeus, Rhea decided to instead present Kronos with rocks swaddled in blankets, while her newborn rested safely on the isle of Krete. He knew nothing of it, and years later, Zeus, his son, would return to free his siblings. He tricked Kronos into digesting poisoned wine and in turn, his father regurgitated all of his siblings who returned to Zeus’ side to oppose the titan's reign.

These myths can be compared through their messages of how the godly children escaped their parents to come into their power by separating them and defying their father. Their mother, who are both at least associated with the earth, are left to be close to their children, while the father is cast away. It is only once one specific son in each of these myths defies their father on their own do the siblings become free of imprisonment to escape and come into great power as they leave their parent's shadows to become greater than them.

The Relevance of Hierarchy in Society Through the Eyes of Shakespeare's Working

     A day of lectures has left me with one particular thought in mind. Shakespeare inadvertently instilled religious beliefs into his plays, which instilled religious beliefs in his audience. This was discussed during one of our periods today with an English teacher, on behalf of preparation for English Scholarship Pathways in our near future. 

    We attended four of these sessions, however, the discussion about Shakespeare was the most interesting to me. This may be because of my previous involvement in performing his plays as a regular member of the Shakespeare performance team, however this time around, my interest was piqued by the discussion of the hierarchy that was discussed using the examples of Shakespeare's plays. When the hierarchy was upset, the play descended into chaos. This hierarchy did not feature man at the very stop, instead, it held God as the figure at the top. This heavily aligns with the Christian or Catholic beliefs from Shakespeare's time period.

    During the era in which Shakespeare existed, God's existence was not questioned. It was simply a fact. Shakespeare, who was religious to my knowledge, wrote stories using existing stories and turned them into plays anyone could understand. Religion is mostly not explicitly discussed, besides in the Merchant of Venice, only the speculation of God's actions is discussed in detail. This can be taken into account on many occasions when side characters who are not even written into the play with names allude to situations and wrongdoings. Several occasions have characters alluding to these through the actions of those not human. The roosters crowed through the night, not at dawn. The crops died of disease. The waters are no longer safe to drink. And finally the ever famous line, a storm is brewing. Each of these sayings alludes to something out of the control of any of the characters and is instead believed to be the result of God's punishment of sinners. The worse the outcome, the worse the crime.

    This clearly displays the relevance of hierarchy, and religion, within Shakespeare. God is not a wholly loving being and will punish those who have done wrong, no matter who they are. This hierarchy that was created picturing God at the very top within Shakespeare's plays may not have been as relevant to us now as it previously was among religious Europe, but now with the surge of varied religious people having access to Shakespeare's work, we can now assess it through a non-religious perspective or assess how the people of Britain particularly perceived God. 

Personhood?

    The definition of 'human' is having the qualities, faults, and feelings that people have, as opposed to gods, animals, and machines. This complicates the idea that 'human' is a species, where it is more defined as a title that could be given on the behalf that something is 'human' enough. This leads to what and who can be defined as a 'person.' A person is a being that has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness. This again complicates the idea that a 'human' or 'person' is simply a matter of being a species that is held in higher regard because of the consciousness or intelligence held. 

    Both of these definitions lead to the idea that one could be 'human' or a 'person' without being biologically human. This has led to an animal being given the title of personhood. An orangutan named Sandra was granted 'personhood' in 2014 by a judge in Argentina. She was termed by the court as a 'subject of rights' and later a 'non-human person.' This allows freeway where the term 'person' is loose and only requires certain capacities.

    When an animal can gain personhood, why can't artificial intelligence gain the same right? In the near future, where artificial intelligence can develop emotions and have advanced cognitive processes, would we be able to consider artificial intelligence 'people?'

Identity Questions

 In researching the identity as a whole and as humans, we have been asked about the theory surrounding the ship of Theseus. The theory questions if every part of a ship is replaced, is it still the same ship? This question relates to the idea of human identity and how it exists. It poses the question of if there is an answer at all. In human biology our cells are replaced and recycled regularly, does that mean we are the same person with the same identity?

I believe the answer is that identity is ever-changing within all people, but as a whole, we are the same person as long as we retain parts of our identities we have had over time. This can relate to the memory theory in a way but is more similar to being able to recount how we once were and remembering it instead of it letting our identity as a whole.

The memory theory is the idea that memories we retain create and influence the identity we hold. As long as we remember something, there is some way we are influenced by it. This is obviously flawed with circumstances of incorrect memorisation of things or amnesia. There are many questions that can be offered along with this. Would you still hold the same developed fears and trauma? How would mental disorders affect you? Would you retain mannerisms, vocal tics, and accents?

Multiple Intelligences and Growth and Fixed Mindsets

 What does multiple intelligences mean, and how do they tie into growth and fixed mindsets?

The idea of multiple intelligences proposes the idea that there are more facets of intelligence rather than the standard ability. As defined by Gardner, there are eight (sometimes nine) facets of intelligence such as:

1. Kinesthetic
2. Interpersonal
3. Visual
4. Linguistic
5. Mathematical
6. Naturalistic
7. Intrapersonal
8. Musical
9. (And occasionally) Existential

This is highly different than how people usually categorise intelligence. To others, intelligence is reading and writing, maths, and science. While being intelligent can include this, it is not the only form of intelligence, especially since reading and writing, and maths are not even categorised as the same form of intelligence.

Personally, I find that after a self-reflection and three different quizzes, linguistics is my highest level of intelligence. I also found intrapersonal, existential, and mathematical to rank high. Two of my lowest ranking intelligence types are naturalistic and musical. 

If an aspect is low ranking, it does not mean that you cannot improve upon these skills. This is where the idea of growth and fixed mindsets. A growth mindset is where someone is willing and capable of developing talent through practice and can acknowledge that failing is a step to success. A fixed mindset is where someone believes that talent is something you are born with and that cannot be changed, most often these people are scared of failure so they do not try or attempt new things.

By having a growth mindset, one can acknowledge what they are bad at and practice to improve themselves. This is why it is better to have a growth mindset. Someone with a growth mindset can set to improve themselves and see failure as something good; with failure comes the knowledge of what not to do when you try again. Having a growth mindset allows someone to be capable of improving at what they are bad at without the fear of being bad or needing to improve for the sake of others, like how someone with a fixed mindset may feel.  

It's been a while...

It's been over a month since I have updated my blog about my artboard. Since then we have had holidays and have entered the final term of the school year, this week is the last week left for the term before study leave. During the holidays I was able to come in 3 of 4 days so I could begin a new series with a new art style as well. I have created more than eight pieces that are all connected with the subject of the Black-eyed Susan flower, fractures, and eyes. I used sketchy and untidy lines (no matter how much it annoyed me in the beginning) because of the rough sketch that I originally used when I sketched the ideas out during class and did not have access to the actual application I use. From this sketch, my teacher gave me the advice to use this as my art style and continue to build off of that with my given subject matter. The next few pictures are a few of the pieces from this that will be going onto my board. 

This was the first piece I sketched and coloured with the new art style. You can see later how I have changed the colouration of the flowers to better suit the actual flower and how I've changed how I highlight the eyes.

This is the second piece done in the art style I changed to for the series. It lacks the fracture, which is one of my board's subject matters, but it shows the development of the flower with highlights and shadows. Additionally, there is a rough sketch line then a thicker baseline with all parts of the piece unlike before.

This piece was done much later on as I moved onto shifting from one set of art pieces to another. Again, this does not include the fracture subject. For this piece, I wanted to focus on the asymmetrical face with two matching eyes. As well, I wanted to experiment with a new form of background which I would use later on to make a singular eye based piece. I found that the purple contrasted well with yellow in the petals and eyes.

These next two pieces were ones I worked on for my first board that were not part of the subject matters including the Black-eyed Susan flower, fractures and eyes. These were made to continue with the subject matter of the feathers used in earlier pieces. I like working on these two since I was able to experiment with how to create the texture of the feather. The idea of white ink near the end of the quill was a result of me experimenting with the invert filter on the background.