Fun Facts

Todays morning meeting was led by Majo. She showed us three videos that are supposed to have fun facts, or in other words, have a whole bunch of facts. The videos we watched today were: You don't type alone (about  the statistics of how many other people are  typing at the same time you are), What is déjà vu? (it talks about déjà vu and other things like it) and What color is a mirror? (trying to figure out the true color of a mirror.

I have to say I enjoyed the videos but I think they could've been much better, I got bored by the third one. I guess they are just not my style.

Thinking Fast & Slow. Ch. 7-8

During our dialogue we came up with some subjects that these chapters talk about that we wanted to emphasize. We only discussed tree of them deeply.
These are the subjects we came up with:

• Finding someone attractive or not (basic assessment)
• Automatic procesing in visual system / internal chatterbox,
• Halo Effect.
• Objactive judgemnt.
• WYSIATI.
• Principle of independent judgement
• Matching sounds and music. 
• Mental Shotgun.
• Framming effect /  colors. 
• Oil / Splash. 

The first subject we really talked about was the Halo Effect. We agreed that this effect was difficult to stop this from happening. This effect happens because we associate things.

The next subject we talked about was how we cant help pour visual system kicking in. We have automatic feedback and this makes us chose or have options. If we listen to our internal chatterbox, it won't let us listen to our system two, so we cant really make rational decisions. Mindfulness means being aware of everything; one can be aware, present, concentrated on what one is doing, or the other way around.

Museum

I gave a tour of the museum Popol Vuj. I dont have much to say, so I will just copy he letter I read at debriefing.

Dear MPC-ers:

What are the standards we want to model? Do each of you want to be free and responsible? Are you really being honest with yourself and with others? Do you really value and understand what we are doing here? Do you remember in the traditional classes when no one or only a few listened to your presentation…? Everyone just paid attention to the teacher, and not even always to the teacher. Are we still waiting for an authority to tell us what to do?

 Today during the visit at the museum Isa, Mabe and I noticed our real standards, rubrics and culture. We simply don’t practice what we preach. Today while I was giving the tour only five people were really paying attention, the rest didn’t seem to care or appreciate the knowledge I was sharing with them. It was like if they were waiting for someone to put them in their place. I was supposed to be a facilitator and once I called for MPC rubrics, which the majority ignored.  Even Ingrid wasn’t really present. In the middle of the tour I got really frustrated and somebody told me that it was because I was giving a lecture. Number one, I told you could interrupt… it wasn’t a lecture, you could have asked questions and made comments. Number two, it was a tour and that’s why tour-guides exist. If not, you could have gone by yourself to the museum and not wasted my time. And number three, we are learners who adapt to ANY resource available of learning: even lectures. It made me feel really bad because I thought that this would be the best tour group ever, I had high expectations because of our rubrics, because of who we are, because we are learners and we ask questions. And it turns that it was this was the worst tour ever, even 9 year old children are more respectful that you guys, we should follow their example.

On the other hand, today in the group of choir we noticed that everyone was really engaged and organized. It was a big challenge and we know we have a lot to do, but you all were really excited and passionate to make this true. Why can’t we apply this values that we showed today in other stuff as well, like the museum? I mentioned today that there are ways to failure, and how we acted today shows the gap that could lead us to failure. How I saw it today, the MPC is more prone to fail than to succeed unless we get our act together. If we want to be independent learners we must be authentic in every single place and situation, we don’t need anyone to tell us. And guys we already practice these standards and values here, they are great, why can’t we practice them everywhere else?

            Sincerely, Isa, Mabe and Katarina.

Consilience 5 & 6

We had a special guest today in our dialogue, Chris Lingle. We started out by telling him what the MPC is all about and our rubrics, amongst other stuff.

We mostly talked about chapter 6. Starting out by how consciousness works as a spontaneous order. None of us really had a choice to have a  consciousness or not, and if there is an actual purpose for it?

We also talked about how we are hard-wired with preferences, so we really don't have free will. We believe that we are really choosing things, but we are really not because all of those inclinations and preferences come with us. So do we really have free will? Wilson says that because he mind can't be fully known and predicted, one believes that we have free will. Wilson also believes that if we find the truth about the mind, it will deteriorate us and slow us down.

The last thing we talked about was memory. If one has no memory, one is not capable of making decisions. What are the limits to human action without memory? Without memory we wouldn't really be able to tell reality.

A Not So Morning Meeting

Todays morning meeting was different. We didn't assign a facilitator so no one led it, but I still think it was one of the best ones we have had so far. We started by saying some announcements and then moved on to other topics. There were 6 people missing, so we talked about ideas to implement ways or to talk to them in order for them to stop missing morning meetings. I made the comment that I feel like our culture is actually becoming worse. I wonder if it is because we are all tired or people just don't take it seriously.
For agora we followed up on our family time. Instead of talking 30 seconds we started asking questions. We ended up talking about the security that the university brings us, with its morals and everything.

3D Illusions

Todays morning meeting was led by Javier Tabush. He had planned for us some optical illusions, that when you don't really focus on the picture, you can see a  3D image. I found this activity very interesting, although I didn't really quite get it at first. It took me while (until the 3rd image) to see the 3D object.

After todays morning meeting, we decided that we were going to get to know each other a bit more, so we had 30 seconds to tell something about ourselves that no one else really knew. I said where and when I was born, that I traveled a lot as a kid, that I am missing 5 states to have seen them all and that I am afraid of crickets.
Some of the stuff that the rest told that I found interesting are these:
-Alejo likes to snowboard.
-Javiers Tabush´s last name was changed.
-Mabe´s family was escaping the mafia.
-Lucia is afraid of frogs.

I really liked this activity because although we have been with each other for 40 or more hours a week for two months, we dont really know anything about each other. I think getting to know everybody more personally is a step that we can take to make us feel like a real family.

Arne Dietrich

Today we had a surprise visit from Arne, the lecturer from last weeks conference Nailing Jelly To The Wall. Arne is a neuroscientist who specializes in creativity and consciousness. He is also a professor of theoretical neuroscience at the American University in Beirut, Lebanon.

We started out by talking about the MPC. We went over our rubrics, our books, our essays and our curriculum, amongst many other things. We were all impressed because he was the first visiting professor who actually commented specifically about our rubrics.

We then started talking about his career and how we came to study neuroscience. He told us that he had always had an interest for human behavior and he has always had a scientific mind. He ended up  in neuroscience because it is the most scientific area in psychology. He got interested in creativity because it is the highest of all cognitive functions. It is what makes us higher  and smarter that the rest of the animals and also because human beings barely know anything about creativity and consciousness.

We later started talking of how neuroscience and told us a few spoilers of what might happen in the future (such as people control in our brain).

Apology 1.

Our classical studies dialogue today was The Apology by Plato. It is the text that follows Euthyphro. We spent most of the dialogue trying to figure out what Socrates was doing in these first couple of pages (until page 5). We agreed that in these first couple of pages Socrates is establishing the backgorund and context of his accusations in order to start his defence. He is making a claim that what he is saying is true and what the rest are saying is untrue. 

More specifically he agreed that these where the things he was doing during his opening.

• -Separating accusations into two. (defense structure).
• -Stating his accusations
• -This is a debate, not a dialogue. 
• -Trying to put everyone on the same page.
• -Making a case that the whole event that they´re going to have is illegitimate. (parragraph 18 b)
• -He is stating that he is not eloquent and is not trying to impress people with facny words. He says that he is only eloquent if eloquent means speaking the truth. 
• -Socrates says that we need to see him as a stranger. 
• -Brings us to a notion of justice. 
• -People were raised on storys and rumors about him, so they are arguing against their conception of him, not really on their experience with them.  Same think kant is telling us.... Why is it so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians? Because we are in nonage. We are unable to use our own understanding so we rely on the understanding of others. 
• -He tells us what a proper teacher is. "what is a good teacher?"

Advices Socrates give:
1. do not speak ornamented, speak the truth, speak what you really know.
2. when you are  really listening to someone, listen to him as if he were a stranger. (because they become blind to what people are really trying to say).
3. What we think we know will be an obstacle to hearing the truth.

Is the truth automatically just?
the first thing for good judgement is that you need the truth, though he gives no standard for justice.
So socrates job is to tell the truth.

Claim socrates makes: he is a human.
He is a human being. The only wisdom he can have is the wisdom a human being can have. So what is human wisdom?

Classical Music

Todays morning meeting was led by Johan. At the beginning I was kind of frustrated because Johan wasn't really ready, he didn't check the sound when he came in, and of course it didn't work, so we had agora first and then we had the morning meeting.
Once we got the sound working, Johan showed us a TED talk about classical music. I have to say, this has been my favorite video so  far. I really enjoyed it. The main point of the video was how people don't really know how to appreciate classical music. Personally, I love classical music so I think I enjoyed it even more.

Nailing Jelly To The Wall

On reposition friday we went to a conference by Arne Dietrich, who is a neuroscientist. The name of his conference was Trying to nail jelly to the wall, where in the brain is  creativity? 
This is an investigation he has been working on, hunting for cognitive and emotional mechanisms. and how creativity distinguishes human beings from other animals. He divided his presentation into parts: theoretical duds, the evidence and the 4-fold path. 

Theoretical duds:
Creative people are not only those who can paint, compose music or create new things. In economics, technology, history and many other fields, creative people made things happen and made advances and discovery. 
As commonly believed, creativity is not on the right side of the brain. One can´t actually locate creativity in the brain, it is a holistic brain function. 

The evidence: 

• Divergent thinking: generating as many answers as one can. The problem with divergent thinking is that one isolates the process that generates the creativity process. 
• Artistic creativity: design, music and painting. What makes these creative? There are no findings that they come from creativity. 
• Insight events: active and passive insight. Understanding the problem.

The 4-fold pass:

The same neural networks that compute non.novel information are also those that compute variation or novel combinations of that information. Creativity is embedded in every neuro circuit. Everything generates novelty, that is why we cant locate creativity in the brain. 

There are two criteria for creativity: novelty and usefulness. 

There are two ways to have creative ideas: deliberate and spontaneous. 

Thinking Fast & Slow. Ch 5-6

We started off with a remark I made about how the system 2´s cognitive laziness even affects names. Long names are usually avoided and that is where nicknames come in. Dylan said this was true but that humans also have neofilia, so they look for the new and different (this sometimes includes long and weird names).

We also talked about the base of priming, which is that priming activates concepts by making them more renowned in one’s mind.

After this the conversation got slightly off track, but that didn’t stop it from being interesting. We talked about depression and how sadness evolved as a way to force us to think. How it is a time to stop and think and how there is a myth that people who have a tendency to be sad are usually wiser. Then we started talking about depressive realism, which is when people have more accurate perceptions when they are depressed. When people are happy, they are more optimistic and are always overestimating the good things and underestimating the bad things that could happen. This makes depressed people more realistic and grounded.

To conclude our dialogue we discussed the main point of these few chapters that we have read so far. These chapters are mostly talking about or identifying system 1, they are demystifying the way we think about our thinking, of which most of the time we have bad conclusions of. (Metacognition). 

Thinking Fast & Slow Ch. 3-4.

Our main topic of conversation was will power. We would ask questions such as: is using will power good or bad? Does time burn it out or just make it stronger? Do we use the same quantity of will power every day?

The only question we got a real concrete answer for was the last one; Do we use the same quantity of will power every day? The answer was that we don’t. Having the same amount of will power every day would not be biologically right. Some days we are in a bad mood or in an extremely good mood. Factors of this kind affect our will power. We should expect our will power to be affected by everything, this is why it is important to retrospect; to find out the things that make our will power stronger or weaker. 

FlatBox

Today was Alejo´s morning meeting.  He has been participating in many entrepreneurship competitions and in this morning meeting he introduced us to one of his projects. This project was the one he and 5 other people developed at a competition called Start Up Weekend, where they won second place. I thought his idea was very interesting and very useful, I mean it would be something that I would buy. Even though his idea was great, the thing that astonished me the most was the fact that Alejo, apart from doing all of the work at the MPC, is also working on various side projects. I had always known that he liked entrepreneurship, but I hadn’t really given it much thought, and with this presentation he just blew my mind. I started thinking that he was actually really good at all of this, and he is definitively going somewhere in the future. 

Consilience 4 & 5

To discuss these two chapters we went back to the basics of the book by talking about the main theme of the book and these are some of the conclusions we reached.

What is Wilson trying to do?

He wants to find a way to link the sciences and the humanities, and to find out how this linkage is important to human welfare.

Wilson is trying for us to return to the values and principles of the Enlightenment in order to solve the metaquestion of the book. These are some of the values that we went over during the discussion:

• Humans can always be perfected.
• Progress is inevitable.
• We should be driven by the thrill of discovery.
• Power of science.

A question that came up during the conversation that I found interesting was this one: Will we learn from the attempt to link sciences from humanities or will we learn from the actual linkage? This was one question we didn’t have the answer to, but I hope I will be able to once we read more of the book. 

Music For The Soul

Mabe led todays morning meeting, and let me tell you something. It was AWESOME! She divided the morning meeting in half. For the first part she required four volunteers, so of course I volunteered. We each got a piece of paper with an emotion on it and we all had to make a sound representing that emotion and the rest of the class had to guess what emotion it was, but there was a catch, we had to do it with our backs to them so that they couldn’t see our faces. The first emotion was played by Javier Tabush  and it was nostalgia, the seconds by Isa and it was sadness, mine was anger and  the last one was made by Javier Parellada and it was happiness. It is really interesting because all of our classmates figured what the noises represented.

The second part of her morning meeting was the best one. She gave all of us a piece of paper and she played seven songs, on the piece of paper we had to write the emotions or anything that came to our mind while a specific song was playing. After we had heard all seven songs we discussed one by one what we had written down. I loved how sometimes everyone got the same emotion from a song (being love, anger, etcetera) and sometimes there where groups of total opposite emotions. Here is the list of songs that Mabe played for us:

• Melancholy by Poulenc
• Cello Concerto by Eldar
• Swan Lake by Tchaikovsky
• Saeglopur by Sigur Ros
• Winter by Vivaldi
• Silentium by Arvo Part
• Symphony 10  by Mozart

           

  

Bert´s Morning Meeting!

I kind of thought it was weird at first, because he didn’t really start it out, the rest of the students did. He showed us a video called A Conversation by Steven Pinker and Ian McEwan.

 . I actually enjoyed the video; I had seen part of it yesterday while talking with Bert. Although it was entertaining for me, I found a lot of my classmates bored and distracted. I think the cause of this was that the video wasn’t actually a video, it was just the audio. At the beginning I found it hard to concentrate. I guess it is harder to listen to something without a visual image, my eyes tended to get distracted very easily. This is what might have happened to my classmates.  

                            

Euthyphro Part 2

Answers that Euthyphro gives about piety:

1. To do what I am doing now (Euthyphro), prosecuting the wrong.
2. What is dear to the gods is pious and what is not is impious.
3. The pious is what all the gods love, and the opposite, what the gods hate is the impious.
4. The godly and the pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the gods.
5. Pious is knowledge of how to sacrifice and pray.
6. What is dear to the gods. (it goes back to the second one)

These are some of the ideas that we discussed:

• Gods are like a universal moral standard (what is good and what is bad). Universal moral standard as an objective view on what is good and what is bad, or as an institution and the rules that they consider good or bad.
• This relates to our rules of ethics at the MPC, this is what we are aiming at in this program. The aim is not the right, but those who don’t have an action to do wrong. Our values won’t let us choose wrong. We strive to get to the point at which we don’t even think about things, we don’t even choose, being good is already a part of us, an authentic part of us. Just like Euthyphro said at the beginning “pious is to do what I am doing now”.  

Euthyphro Part 1

Basic story of Euthyphro: two men meet outside of the court. They are each going somewhere; Socrates is going to his own prosecution and Euthyphro to prosecute his father. They both join in conversation.

What do they talk about: Piety. Socrates is trying to understand what piety is and trying to get Euthyphro to explain it to him. By knowing what piety is, Socrates thinks he can make a case against his prosecution. They also talk about the structure of Euthyphros´s claim and use syllogisms to do this.

Background: this is the trial that sends Socrates to his death. He is trialed because Meletus thought that Socrates was innovating the gods instead of following the old gods.

There are two ways to interpret Socrates: 1) like if he knows everything, he is cynical and manipulative. 2) He has intellectual humility and integrity. He is honest in not knowing certain things.

Answers to what piety is:

1) What us dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious.

2) What is concerned with the care of the gods.

2) What is pleasing to the gods.

In this dialogue, I got really annoyted because I had read a quote trying to give an explanation for what piety was and then someone else said it again and everyone related to that one. It was like if no one listened to what I had said before.  

Optical Illusions

In todays morning meeting Isa presented us some optical illusions. She told us that she wanted us to do this because of the book we are reading, Thinking Fast and Slow. I really enjoyed it, and was amazed at mi mind because I saw the illusions very easily, while others didn't.
Here are some of the illusions:

MPC presentation

Remember the presentation we were working on? Well, we presented it, but before I start talking about the actual presentation I will tell you what happened before.
We had lunch, and it was delicious. While we were having lunch we each sat down next to a teacher in order to tell them about the MPC. I sat down next to a doctor and next to a guy who runs the economic experiments here at  the university. We chatted over what the MPC was about, and I think I gave them a good idea.
So then it was time to present. I was the first one to start so I gave the introduction. Afterwards I remained as the person who changed all the slides. I think everyone did a great job. After the presentation we had a dialogue with everyone in the room, and I also thought it went well. We also gave a tour of the MPC space.

Wayne A. Leighton

Our guest today was Wayne A. Leighton, and he came to talk about his new book Madmen, Intellectuals and Academic Scribblers: The Economic Engine of Political Change.

His books main question is: where does political change come from? By political change  we mean political outcome, change within a society or the rules that certain groups have. His book is mostly about how changing rules (or institutions as he names this) affect human behavior. Rules create incentives and by changing incentives you can change behavior.
The three main question of his book are the following: 1) why do democracies generate inefficient  and unjust policies? 2) why do failed policies persist, even when better alternatives exist? 3) why do failed policies sometimes get replaced with better ideas?
The framework of the book is: ideas determine institutions, institutions shape incentives and incentives matter.
the main characters of his book are 3: the Madmen, Intellectuals, Academic Scribblers.

Things happen when ideas and circumstances meet.

I really enjoyed this dialogue,  now I want to buy the book and read it.

Math in the Morning.

Today was Diego's Morning Meeting. I really liked his presentation and you could tell he put a lot of effort into it. He started out by giving a small presentation on how to double and quadruple numbers easier. He showed us two methods and had us do some exercises. When one of us got an answer right Diego would give us a candy. I really found this entertaining.

He later showed us a rap video of Hayek vs. Keynes. I had already seen this video when I used to be in business. I have always enjoyed this video and learned a lot from it, but this wasn't the case for everyone. Those didn't have an economy class in their background didn't get it. There were only about 5 of us laughing at the video and shaking our heads.

The last thing he showed us was a video about the right way to eat cupcakes. I found this hilarious. I never had really thought that there were certain ways to eat a cupcake. As a treat and to practice, Diego brought us some cupcakes to eat.

John Blundell

Today we were joined by John Blundell and Giancarlo.
John is the author of Margaret Thatcher: A Portrait of the Iron Lady and an honorary professor at UFM.         We were supposed to explain what the MPC was about, in order for John to get an idea of what we are about, but instead we we talked about the rubrics and never really got around to the subject of the MPC.  We talked about the importance of rules and more stuff about rules. I tried to intervene once by saying that the MPC was a college for students created by students with hopes that someone would see that as a start to talk about the MPC, but this didnt happen.

All I can say is that, for me. this dialogue was a disaster.

Consilience 1,2 & 3

The first couple of chapters in this book are a bridge to really start getting to know what the enlightenment is about, this was the beginning of our dialogue. We related this book to the MPC, in the sense that it talks about unifying knowledge and different fields of study in order to see them as a whole. This, I think, is really the heart of the MPC.
We also discussed that one of the main points or reasons of why the book was written was to discover why we are here. When we have unified enough certain knowledge, we will understand who we are and why we were created.

We found out what Wilson's Metaquestion was. It is What its the relationship between science and humanities?

TED Morning Meeting

Today we had a TED morning meeting. We were supposed to watch more than one TED talk but we ended up watching only one. The one we watched was a great one given my Steven Johnson titled "Where Do Good Ideas Come from". It made me see things differently, specially in the way of generating ideas. Now I understand why Bert likes us to have Agora. I really enjoyed most of all the anecdote of the GPS.
This was actually the fist TED talk I have ever seen and I do think it is a good idea if we have more TED Morning Meetings.

Thinking Fast & Slow Ch. 1, 2

Our dialogue started out with the flexibility of system 1 and we came to the conclusion that it depended on the person, for example, not everyone can intuitively play chess. Other times people become lazy even though their system 1 is very developed, maybe it is because they think so much already.

One of the things that I found interesting  was that something that was part of your system 2 becomes part of your system 1. Like driving a car, at the beginning one has a hard time driving, one thinks about everything going on and the technicalities of how to drive. After driving for a while and consecutively the driving system becomes automatic and it becomes an intuition (system 1).

Another thing I found interesting is that after using your system 2 too much you have less will power, meaning that it is harder to decline a cookie or a cupcake  after working on math problems. 

Presentation

Nov 5

We have to do a presentation for the Business School about was it the MPC. So we divided the presentation into 6, so that each group could have a part. My group got the part that I wanted: The introduction. I really wanted this part because it is the same thing that I had to write for the handbook.

Here are the 6 parts in which the presentation was divided in:

And this was my slide:

Remember Remember

Nov 5

Javier Parellada lead todays morning meeting. He showed us a couple of videos about the 5th of november. Honestly I had no idea what the fifth of november was about, so I thought his morning meeting was very interesting. I still don't completely get what it is about, but all I know is that some people have the wrong idea about the fifth of november.

The Trivium Discussion

This was a really chaotic and disastrous dialogue for me for many reasons. It was the first time I have actually felt frustrated with people and with the MPC.

So, I worked my butt off this weekend in order to finish the book on time, and when I got here only 4 other people had read the book. I got upset and asked them for their reason or excuse for not reading the book. Their answer, I think, was not a valid one. They answered that they didn't read because they didn't have any time. I really find this ridiculous. We all had more than 2 weeks to read the book, more than enough time, and if they didn't read it then, they could've just done what I did. Last thursday, Bert asked us how far ahead we were in the Trivium and most of the people were way ahead of me, so I decided to sacrifice my week end and just read and catch up on the Trivium. But no, people here give more importance to parties, boyfriends/girlfriends, dinner etcetera, I mean I had other things to do also. This gets me really annoyed, because fist of all, they were not responsible and left thing for the last minute (like me), and secondly because they complain about it. It is their fault and no one else's that they are not up to date.  more than a week has passed since then, and people have still not read the book.

Once in the dialogue I got even more frustrated because we only discussed chapter 1 and 2. So I read the whole book just to discuss 2 chapters and we had already discussed chapter 1. Our conversation was getting way off topic, we had already discussed most of the things we were talking about. I just wanted to leave because I really wasn't feeling productive.

There was a really big turn point for me during the dialogue. At the end the ones who had read actually started talking about the last chapters and we actually we made some great discoveries. I believe only a few of the rest were paying attention, since they hadn't read they didn't follow the conversation.

Here are some of those discoveries:

• Logic is correctness in thinking which is the normal means to reach the truth, which is the conformity of thought with things as they are - with reality. 
• According so Sister Miriam we can also reach the truth by Theology, the "knowledge of God" which is availabe through revelation. 
• Inference comes from deduction in order to conclude the premises which come from induction. 

Philosophy of Capitalism

We went to this conference about the philosophy of capitalism. This was a conference that I really enjoyed, I believe that the guy who gave it talked really well and you could tell he knows about the subject. He started explaining us the basics of capialism and them went on explaining us the basics of socialism. At the end he made a nice comeback to capitalism with Ayn Rand. I really enojeyed this conference for the fact that he didnt only give us one perspective (capitalism), he gave us both perspectives for us to try to understand everything better.

Self Reliance 5

In this discussion we understood better what Emerson is complaining about. He thinks that one of the hardest thing in life is to be vulnerable. Emerson also introduces us to non-conformity. These non-conformists that Emerson explains have sour faces everywhere and we should not respond to these with another sad face, this would only hurt him more because these sour faces have no real cause.

On of my personal conclusions that i learned from this dialogue was that to stand up or to be firm in front of a mob, we need something to help us stay up, for me that is religion. By this I don't mean religion in the sense of church or christianity, I mean religion in the sense of belief. One needs to believe in themselves and be true to oneself and practice your values, this is what I mean by religion.

Another thing I learned was that we, human beings, distrust ourselves when we learn something new or when we change our opinion in something, because we don't want to be inconsistent. Through this 2 of the most common fears appear: to be inconsistent (with a mob) and to be ourselves.

"To be great is to be misunderstood."

Greek

We haven't had Greek class for the last couple of weeks and this week we found out that Moris is not coming back. I wonder if he just wasn't up to this new system. The only thing that I didn't like about him leaving was that he did not even come to tell us, or to give us an explanation, he just disappeared. It also makes me believe that he is a quitter. This is purely an assumption though and it might not even be true.

Schedule so far

This is my schedule so far. I will have to change it because I just found out that there have been some changes today.  So I will be posting that later.
If I follow my schedule correctly I wont have any work for the week end and I will be up to date in everything.