week one a reflection

I have several points to make in this reflection.
To start the book How Soccer Explains the World was not what I thought it would be. This book was talking about the similarities between soccer and whatever the subject of the question was. With the title, I thought the author would be explaining how soccer could explain why something was. For example the book talked about oligarchies. I thought he would have soccer explain how oligarchs came to exist in the world. Instead, he just talked about how oligarchs and soccer complement each other. I was disappointed by this book.
My next point is the class itself. While I did not talk, it was an interesting discussion. I thought that the fact that several people who were talking said that they did not claim to be a professional in the subject matter were still trying to influence us in their opinion. To make a good argument do not say "I am not an expert." Just go with what your saying and make people believe what you are saying.
My last point is the blogs that we have written. One of my comments said that my blog, on apathy, and James's blog on intolerance were similar. Similar yes, but they are different enough that they could not be combined into one with a different title. The reason is in mine I'm saying that inaction is the main problem. People just sit idly by and say "oh someone else is going to do the right thing." But, because they all say that no one does anything. I think what James is saying is that hate (intolerance) makes people not do anything. The scapegoat is made to be hated and so people do nothing. I believe that is the difference between my post and James. Is that for mine people do nothing because they are to lazy and do not want to do what is right whereas in James's post he is saying that through hate people do nothing. So while the two posts are linked, they can not be blended into one post.