I’ve decided to respond to Alec’s post under the February 1st discussion. Both of us wrote about arguments of definition and how defining a term or situation can breed controversy and conversation. I see a lot of similarities between our responses because each of us connected that this argument came up due to a class experience. I think seeing it through the lens of a classroom with many voices involved and chiming in showed us how easily a single word and the significance it caries can spark a good argument.

The key idea I got from Alec’s reading was that the way in which we define something can sort of be like the first domino in the domino effect. We base our decisions off of the guidelines we are given. Therefore, as he said in his response, people will base the morality or logic of their decisions depending on how they define the elements involved. “Normal,” could hold a variety of meanings, so depending on how everyone’s mind works, these individuals could be basing their opinion off of very different scenarios. We agree on our definition of Kairos and I believe Alec followed reading response guidelines well.