Things I’ve learned:
1. I think “domestication” (which is the key word of my concept map), naturally leans the map toward a human perspective.
2. When constructing a concept map, it is better to have a precise term in order to advance the research.
3. the relationships between two keywords, are rarely one-way connections. Often have mutual effects on both sides.
Concept Map:
Feedback Map:
I’m interested in exploring the concept of division and connection when researching canals as borders. Waterways help funnel water through the many different divides that split land and water supplies while also ultimately draining into oceans to funnel back into watersheds.
Below is a systems map for my topic, Bark.
For my concept map, I focused on the different stakeholders for bark and each stakeholder’s use for bark. From the concept map, I’ve learned that bark has many uses for any different stakeholders that operate in a system of survival. From the feedback loop below, we see how regenerative bark is, which is why it works for the survival of many different stakeholders.
White creating this map, I had to think more broadly about the skin itself, rather than the basic definition of taxidermy. Taxidermy is specifically used for animals only, which made me also think about a dead human body being “stuffed” with fluid for a funeral. It would be a human”taxidermy”.
While adding to the flow chart, I realized how deeper skin really is, between animals and humans who share similar traits. Humans and animal skin have both been used to make clothing or weapons. According to ‘skybound.com‘ it state “One of the earliest accounts of wearing human skin, in 440 BCE the Greek historian Herodotus wrote about the ancient Scythians and their tendency to scalp their victims. The Scythians would sew together their human scalps to make cloaks. This was the ultimate form of boasting and wasn’t for practicality so much as it was to show off how many people they had killed.” Humans have always used this method of skinning an animal and using it as rugs or clothing to boast of their kill or wealth. They also hang up the head in their homes to represent the number or the “greatest” kill they had made.
Human and animal skin can share different textures. The pattern of an animal and the pigmentation of a human can change to adapt to the environment.
https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVPVaEnkA=/?share_link_id=249068453514
Wearing Human Skin Throughout History – Skybound Entertainment
The system that Easterbrook identified that aligned most with is “A system of ecosystems and contaminants that weaken them”. I think that the effect GMOs have on so many other ecosystems besides crops and farming. There are so ecosystems that touch farming, which includes human survival, that GMOs can cause too much harm to. Spreading GMOs has already proven to negatively effect neighboring ecosystems, so to attempt it again, the scientists conducting the experiment would need to prove what steps are being done to prevent similar mistakes. A stake of this stakeholder is creating balance between interacting ecosystems, which means promoting scientific research that does not effect neighboring ecosystems and can be recalled if needed.
For my topic, “bark”, some stakeholders include:
With bark, trees are operating in a system of survival. It protects them from the outside world, transports nutrients throughout its system, and maintains moisture in dry temperatures.
Certain animals are known to strip tree bark for food, which includes beavers, black bears, mice, and squirrels, also operate in a system of survival.
Some of the earliest medicine created were made from bark. They have active ingredients, such as alkaloids, essential oils, carbohydrates, vitamins, and antibiotics that can be used in ointments, rubs, hair fluids, and other mixtures. Therefore, humans operate in a system of health and economic benefits for the human race.
Things I learned:
I learned that the more I thought through the various outcomes DMZs cause/create the more complicated the web would become. It was very disorganized at first, so creating subgrouping and combining certain outcomes helped me clarify the topic and see areas of opportunity to explore.
I also liked the spiraling nature of the causal loop. Wars lead to DMZs which in turn lead to fewer wars then fewer DMZs etc. Very cool and simple visual to have!
Captives of the Cloud, Part III: All Tomorrow’s Clouds
I feel like my key takeaways from this one is that adding borders to a seemingly borderless space may actually make it safer for the average person on the internet. I never really thought about the internet as a borderless space, but with concepts like the “cloud” and even something as simple as WiFi, it does make sense to frame it that way. I found it interesting that this borderlessness is also precisely what makes the internet so vulnerable to exploitation. The idea that subdividing and localizing the physical servers that comprise the internet to protect individuals that reside in distinct jurisdictions is super interesting. I feel like the use cases cited of China and Russia show the potential downsides of government control and restricted internet access while the potential for governments to regulate how corporations gather and analyze data on the internet is more hopeful. It seems like an interesting double edged sword. I wonder if it will lead to digital demilitarized zones where countries need to allow for a grey area between local servers!
Borderlands/La Frontera
This piece was far more emotional for me, and I loved the way it touches on the invisible nature of borders themselves. While some border may appear physical like lines on a map or a fence, they are often hazy, blurred, and outright invisible. The changing nature of borders highlighted in the first chapter with the expansion of the US border and the diminishing of the Mexican border, shows how arbitrary many borders are. People might wake up one day to find that the place they call home is now something else entirely, and they are now labelled as the “other” when they had been living there for generations. It’s honestly heartbreaking. For the second chapter, the highlighting of the way we separate “others” using social and cultural borders was fascinating. Even the simple act of labeling someone or something as “other” creates a kind of border around that person/place/thing that not only bind the “others” to each other by giving them a sense of community and commonality but also ostracizes them from communities that seek to reject them. It’s a really interesting dynamic that shows the ways in which the concept of a “border” extends beyond the division between two physical places.
Question responses:
1. I will be honest and say that I don’t know much about GMOs, but most of my understanding aligns with the stakeholders in group 7. The idea of “frankenfoods” is definitely something I have heard of, and, for the most part, people that I talk to and have been exposed to worry about the risks GMO foods pose to their health. They (and I) see organic and locally sourced foods as better for their (my) health and the environment overall. I worry about GMOs in general mostly because I don’t know much about the science that goes into them. Not knowing what my food is made of and what kinds of processes went into creating it makes me nervous. I think the majority of their stakes for these stakeholders deals with human health. It’s unclear if GMOs can have serious impacts on health. The reading cites allergies as an area of concern which definitely lines up with some parents I have talked to who worry about their kids being affected by GMOs.
2. Three stakeholders for DMZs:
1. The countries at war. They operate in a system of conflict with each other. Each believes they have a claim to the territory. Usually one side is the aggressor, trying to assert it’s claim to more territory, while the other is the retaliator, seeking to defend it’s land from outside forces.
2. Neighboring countries. They operate in several systems. One is systems of commerce and trade. Often neighboring countries are engaged in trade agreements which can be impacted by war or even the formation of the DMZ itself which may disrupt trade routes.
3. Wildlife. DMZs offer opportunities for wildlife to return to areas which otherwise would have had a greater human presence. This allows for the reclamation of lost territory, and even allows for certain species that may have been on the verge of extinction to flourish. One of the surprising results of several DMZs is the formation of wildlife preserves.
When I hear the acronym “GMO,” my mind immediately goes to the environmental/health arguments laid out in system 7. I am not well versed in the topic, and I believe this association is mainly due to media coverage and the increased advertising of the term “non-GMO.” The main stakes are for immune-compromised people, who may be more susceptible to allergic reactions, those who have reported health effects that are not taken seriously due to the lack of science behind the topic, the GMO/food production companies who want to not only keep consumers safe, but also ensure they are staying up to code, and the public; people like me who may not be as educated on the topic, but have preconceived notions due to the PR around GMO, organic, and natural foods.
My topic is Canals within the larger topic of borders. The 3 stakeholders I can identify using this ready as context are:
Governments – the people in power to determine Transportation committees and assess economic impact. They uphold border agreements and the governance around how and who uses these waterways.
Environmental Groups – Canals are man-made structures/waterways and have an impact on the wildlife and pollution in the area.
Traders/Business Logistics – Canals transport goods, and businesses depend economically on their successful operation. I am immediately reminded of when the Panama Canal was not operational for some time over the summer of 2021 and how that impacted the global supply chain for months.