HW 9

What intellectual moves serve as the basis of "Freakonomics"? Just as Allen Iverson relied on his crossover dribble to beat bigger and stronger defenders, intellectuals such as the protagonists in "Freakonomics" have a "tool box" of particular ways of looking at the world: figuring out topics, asking questions, finding evidence, and evaluating truth. Please describe the 3-5 "tools" that the film repeatedly shows in use, with an example of a moment from the film for each one.

- They focused on using scenarios, every single opinion or statement had a dramatization added along with it. When they were talking about how the name of a person could effect their lives they showed different outcomes and situations (temptress, loser, winner,) The film wasn't bias either, they showed both opinions and viewpoints but never said which one was "right" or "wrong. An example of this was the debate between the two men being interviewed about the names, they showed both of they're opinions on the matter, switching back and forth to each answer giving during they're interviews.

- They also used statistics for example when they were speaking about the corruption in the sumo wrestling industry they gave examples with statistics and showed actual stories of matches that were discovered to be fixed.

What sources of evidence do the Freakonomics authors most rely on? Why is this innovative?

- They relied on research and statistics and real world examples.When addressing the issues of the outcome of your life based on your name they spoke about, statistics and the percentage of success when you live in the projects vs a nicer area or being raised by your mother and father or just single parenting. 
- For the real world examples they showed two students that were apart of the program where they pay students to get good grades, they interview two boys with the same requirements and showed the audience the outcome. Nothing (I hope) was fake it was all real examples

Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore the "hidden-in-plain-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices.

a. Agree or disagree.

b. Explain why.

c. Use an example or idea from Freakonomics and relate it to our investigation of US foodways.

 

 a) Agree

b) The movie showed things that happen daily but we just dont realize or want to realize the negative side to it. It showed how oblivious our nation is, we dont question things or try to change things because it isn't the "norm" without even realizing that what were doing or what were letting happen is negative or a contradiction.

c) Paying people to eat right, they already have plenty reality shows and game shows about being fat and winning money after you loose the weight. Relates to paying kids to get good grades