11 Gems Honours Programme Essays

Socrates was executed for questioning. How important is it to seek answers instead of
accepting answers without questioning?

Socrates upset social norms by posing difficult philosophical questions that caused people to
examine their lives and beliefs. This created a tension in the mind that had the effect of liberating
individuals from the bondage and influence of socially accepted half-truths and myths. For these
activities, Socrates was tried in an Athenian court on charges of corrupting the youth. Although he
had the opportunity to escape and run from his fate, Socrates refused and he was sentenced to
death. The condemning of Socrates because of his unswerving commitment to truth and his
philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace to make him drink hemlock.
However socrates sacrifice to the scientific method of questioning first raised questions of
academic and personal liberation.
Humans have always had a drive to better their given situations; to pursue greatness and
transcend their dreams. To question what is handed to you on a plate is necessary for disproving
fallacies and perfecting ones knowledge of fundamental matters. Additionally the power of curiosity
and challenge is the cornerstone of liberty and freedom. Without seeking answers and questioning
the status quo, man would never have been able to combat the monstrosity; ignorance.
Taking example from history, revolutionary growth of industry, technology and medicine through
time had its biggest revival in the age of the renaissance or rebirth. The name itself speaks of the
revival of the hunger for knowledge. This resulted in the famous and legendary Galen being proven
wrong by Vesalius about his anatomical discoveries, those that had been referred to for over a
thousand years. This shook people and suddenly everything started being re-evaluated. Since
then, progresses in all fields have resulted in the human life expectancy doubling in the last
hundred years and left us contemplating. Thus it shows, that the act of questioning and seeking
knowledge through experiment has been far more beneficial to society with many positive
externalities.
Wisdom begins with wonder. - Socrates.

If science could find a way to transplant your brain into the body of someone named John,
would you then be you or John?

You are who you are no matter what you look like. Or are you?

My name is Devina. I love French food, vacationing in the Mediterranean and visiting art galleries.
I have recently been in a car accident with my friend, John. All my internal organs have ruptured.
He is pronounced brain dead.
In a desperate, experimental procedure, my brain is transplanted into his body, with permission
from my parents. All my friends and family are aware of this transplant. As I wake up, I hear my
name: Devina!
Everyone who knew me in my previous body, and were aware of the accident refers to me as
Devina.
So why is this? Maybe it is due to the fact that they associate their perceptions of me in relation to
my likes, my interests, my hobbies. My brother never simply thought of me as the girl with curly
hair. We share memories and experience that dont solely involve material looks or features.
However, over time I may start to refer to myself as Dev in order to adjust to my new appearance,
I may have to give up my love for wearing dresses and stop applying lipstick. I may even pick up
an affinity for basketball, given my ridiculous new height. This would be my brain adjusting to the
circumstance it is exposed to. Adapting.
Overall, I feel that a persons physical characteristics do affect the way a person interacts with the
wider world. Physical traits especially, contribute to the fundamental aspects of identity and
individuality which in turn, massively impact ones behavioural characteristics.
And isnt the mentality with which we approach life the very thing that can change who we are? I
can definitely change from a Devina to Dev. I might not become a total John, but I sure wouldn't be
myself anymore.

200-word blurb for Jim Al Khalilis book Pathfinders

Pathfinders brings to life the forgotten Golden Age of Arabic science when the curiosity of the
Islamic world flourished, and led to numerous groundbreaking discoveries. Ranging from the
sciences to the mathematics, Khalili explores the influence of rich Arab heritage and culture, upon
the pursuit of academia and the improvement of society. Given the authors own Iraqi roots, the
depth and breadth of knowledge presented comes as no surprise. Motivated by a longing to
celebrate exceptional Islamic minds, Khalili pens a detailed account of the most significant
contributors of the Arab civilisation.
The book expertly approaches the manners in which information was communicated during this
era. It shows the spread of information by explaining and delving deep into the Translation
movement along with examining the importance of The House of Wisdom built by MaMun. It
illustrates Ibn Al Haytham as a hero and a pioneer for the study of refraction by deciphering
Haythams Book of Optics.
Jim Al Khalili recognises the many and significant, underappreciated Islamic pioneers, and gives
them a platform to be rediscovered by a modern audience. The book itself is thoroughly gripping,
not only providing facts and information, but truly setting the scene and enveloping you in the
feeling of having travelled back through time to The Golden Age of Arabia.

If you can't see, taste, smell, hear, imagine or experience something, then does it exist?
A blind person cannot experience colour.
Yet those who can, vouch for its existence.
A deaf person would never be able to comprehend music.
Yet again, many say that music is integral to their lives.
Those who experience limitations with particular senses may find it hard to grasp certain concepts
- despite their existence being proven by others. These are examples of somethings individuals
may not be able to see, taste, smell, hear, imagine or experience.
Now consider this: The Big Bang Theory.
It is not something that could have been experienced by us, however we do have scientific proof
that it may have occurred.
One might say that due to it being a theory, it may not exist - however the theory itself in an idea.
The theory does exist. Whether real or simply a theory, anything and everything can exist as an
idea.
Take the example of a black hole. One does not know for certain what occurs, seeing as no human
has experienced it, however theories exist. For example, the experiment of Schrdingers cat in a
box. He places this cat in an airtight box, and in theory knows that the cat will die. But he does not
know exactly when. Therefore, in the box, the cat could be both dead and alive, proving that the
possibility for something to exist is always there, regardless of whether you experience it or not.

If you had a billion dollars to spend on humanity, would you use it to eradicate racism or to
eradicate malaria?
If I had a billion dollars to spend on humanity, I would use it to eradicate racism instead of malaria.
A billion dollars is a significant amount of money. In some possible future scenario, I may be tasked
with handling the expenditure of this large sum; a highly unlikely prospect. Much in the same way
as this, the existence of a time machine too, would be highly unlikely. Yet, for the sake of justifying
the route taken with the funds given, let us presume both cases to be possible, and both cases to
be mutually codependent.
Racism is affected by an institutional bias where societal patterns have the net effect of imposing
oppressive or otherwise negative conditions against identifiable groups on the basis of race or
ethnicity. There is a distinction between petty racism due to individual bias where we see some
white people saying derogatory things to some black people. The institutional racism that would be
targeted is about entire cultures viewing people negatively, feeding stereotypes and having
damaging portrayals. These things filter into the way societies are constructed - back in the day
that meant colonialism, which resulted in slavery. The atrocities of colonialism would have been
unacceptable if they were done at home to citizens who were no different in appearance to the
slavers, but there would be acceptable slavery in, for instance, South Asia, because the British
used a very racist narrative about how uncivilised Asian tribes were.
Today, institutional racism results from the social caste system that was enforced, and was
sustained by, slavery and racial segregation. Although the laws that enforced this caste system are
no longer in place, its basic structure still stands to this day. Racist ideals in American society allow
for the kind of institutionalised racism we see in police forces, for example, the unfair shooting of
Mike Brown and the case of the black man who was unjustly strangled to death. In this one way,
racism continues to affect the way the Black community in America lives.
Institutional racism is detrimental to society because people are generally greatly concerned as to
how society treats them and how they are viewed. Racism acts as a barrier to people living their
lives freely in the first place. From a wider perspective, institutional racism has many other far
reaching consequences where society as a whole actively discriminates against black people; for
example, cases where politicians are less willing to support black people, especially in southern
states. Additionally, they're willing to disenfranchise them through restrictive voting laws. Blacks
suffer more workplace discrimination, and less of them are able to go to college, meaning they
have fewer opportunities.
In order to justify the reasons behind directing a billion dollars towards eradicating racism, it needs
to be proved that racism has caused more harms to society than malaria, and will continue to be a
major problem in the future. When we take a look at Africa, we see the majority of it as a struggling
economy, areas with unstable governments and low development. The direct reason for this could
be the fact that in the past, Europe diminished African sovereignty due to colonialism, which was
fueled by racist characterisations of the African people.
Due to the social barriers that these unfair racist characterisations posed, the unfair treatment of
under-developed nations by the whites took place, where the whites took all the land for
themselves, became rich, and the blacks were made slaves. It could be said that because of this
low status that they were given in societys eyes, blacks were automatically last to receive benefits
such as proper education and healthcare, and so over time, this cycle of poverty continued, making
adequate standards of living that include necessary medication and treatments unattainable. This
is how Malaria has been exacerbated by racism.

It is not the case that Malaria does not exist in the West; it is only fought better because the West
is financially able. The reason that many countries in the East find it hard to combat Malaria is
because they do not have the necessary resources or funds. This poverty is directly linked to the
legacies of colonialism and the social caste system it resulted in.
Malaria isnt the only thing that disproportionately affects poorer civilizations that have historically
been under the rule or influence of a Western government. It is evident that standards of
education, health and living are also of a lower quality for target populations. Racism can be seen
as the root cause of an entire host of other problems in society today.
Funding the eradication of Malaria would only solve one problem in the short term, whereas a long
term solution to dealing with many other issues would be to eradicate racism. We need to fix the
larger problem which leads Malaria and other diseases and complications to repeatedly
disproportionately disadvantage certain groups within society.
If I could abolish racism by taking my billion dollars and going back in time with my possible timemachine, then everyone today could possibly be on the same level playing field, and have access
to proper medication as a result of being more financially well-off. Not only would this significantly
lower the amount of deaths caused by malaria today, but it could also lead to a dramatic drop in
the death rate of other preventable diseases, due to reduction in poverty, as the billion dollars
would have prevented things such as slavery and colonialism.
Lastly, racism isnt simply consigned to the past. It is still a very major issue that still has impacts till
today, for example, black communities in America are far poorer and children from these areas are
less likely to go to college, with 38.2% of these children living in poverty, as compared to only
12.4% of white children living in poverty. By preventing racism, there is overall more benefit to the
world, as people from different backgrounds and cultures are offered the same opportunities,
making the world a far more peaceful and equal society.

When you switch your room lights off do the colours of your wall change?

The walls in my bedroom, coated in a green wash of paint, directly faces my open windows. My
room is just the way I like it: sunny, open and fresh, with the leafy green of the adjacent wall tying
everything together, creating a calming and tranquil effect.
From a scientists perspective, the green paint appears that way because the chemical
composition of the paint allows it to absorb all colours of the spectrum apart from green, which is
blocked, and hence reflected back to us - making it the colour that we see the wall as. Green.
However, when there is no light in the room, the entirety of the space looks dark and black. We do
not see the true colour of the wall as there is no light to illuminate it. The colour doesnt change; we
simply cannot see anything very well. The chemical composition of wall paint is unchanged. And it
always will be.

If you lived in an infinitely large cage, would it still be a cage?

The purpose of a cage is to hold subjects captive and to prevent them from interacting with
anything that exists outside of it. Now, if a cage is infinite, nothing can exist outside of it, as nothing
can exceed infinity. By this logic, you are not being prevented from interacting with the outside
world, as there is none; yet you are still trapped within the parameters of the universe. By
recognising the fact that it has a size (infinity), we can also logically infer that this size increases,
as infinity is boundless. This could indicate the existence of a cage that grows.
If this cage grows, yet you are still kept within its parameters, and cannot break them, then yes you
exist in a cage regardless of its size. An infinitely large cage is still, a cage that holds you within a
specific area (even if that area changes due to it constantly expanding).
Presuming you reach the end other the universe, and are now travelling at the same the universes
parameters are expanding; ultimately you will not be able to pass infinity, and this inability to pass
highlights the purpose of the universe as a cage.

Is burning a book the same as deleting a digital version of it off your Kindle or your
laptop?
The burning of books has historically been a form of active protest against something, typically to
stop the progression of certain ideas and opinions. In the past the Vatican burned Galileos
publishings and today we see Boko Haram burning school books as they protest Western
influence.
Conversely, the act of deleting something off your digital reader is far more personal; yet it is also
far more passive. It symbolises what today is the laziness and detached nature of individual action.
There is clearly a massive distinction between burning and deleting books. However, this distance
between a digital reader and expression of opinions is not all bad. The action of burning signifies a
definite finality of a situation, whereas a delete is more a person expressing their own personal
opinion in a more tolerant society, for example, if you delete a book, you are not restricting another
persons ability to read it. When you destroy copies of books, it is akin to sending the message that
nobody should access them; the act of burning is far harsher, with wider and more public
consequences.
The difference between the two acts can be illustrated by saying that burning books conveys the
idea of total oppression of ideas, in contrast to deleting books which allows for a more open forum
where everyone has the ability to voice their individual opinions without threats.
When pastor Terry Jones burned a Quran, he essentially declared to the world in a very
threatening and brash manner that he believes Islam to be wrong, igniting massive problems and
repercussions. If this never happened, if the pastor had simply deleted the Quran from his Kindle,
the message he would send would be far muted and contained, as he would express his opinion
that he prefers being Christian, but that others could go ahead and be Muslim if they wished.
The action of deleting allows greater diversity of views and personal beliefs to exist - a more open
minded approach where people are more tolerant of others respect for certain things - even if they
personally dont support it.

Is life an experiment?
I firmly believe that life is an experiment. The basis of an experiment is that you dont know the
outcome. Everything we do is originally a first, and so I believe that a veil of ignorance surrounds
every action we do for the first time.
In life, there are always some unexpected events and outcomes; however people always have a
vague idea of the result of their actions; measures against what they think is about to happen. So,
possible thoughts of a result against a hypothesis.
It can be said that living in a world with 7 billion others, ours lives have a pattern that we can follow
by copying anyone around us, and experiencing guaranteed outcomes. That we can essentially
follow a formula and life becomes something with fixed rewards. Yet, in my opinion, this cannot
stand, cannot be true in our constantly changing world. I believe that as much as one tries to shape
their life to follow a particular route, their individual circumstances would always lead to diverging
experiences from a person elsewhere, doing the same things.
As there are 7 billion people, there are many whose objectives are often conflicting, and some
people may not always get what they want, according to how resources are allocated, or even
simple chance. For example, my goal (or in this case, hypothesis) could be to go to a great
college and then go on to earn a 7 figure salary. But I dont know if this could happen for sure - I
could get run over. That somebody who runs me over could just want to get to work on time to
avoid getting fired. The unpredictability and randomness of life is what makes it an experiment.
No two people are the same, and for me, there would be no point to life if there was no novelty.
This novelty of life is what makes it untested, an experiment with uncertain outcomes.

Are you the same person you were ten years ago?
Am I the same person I was 10 years ago? Certainly not. Change is a natural progression; we
experience different aspects of life at different periods of time. Regardless of the significance of an
event, whether it may be learning how to walk as a toddler, to learning how to walk in heels as a
teenager, everything I have experienced in the past 10 years of my humble existence on planet
earth, has resulted in a lesson of sorts. Many proverbs from varying parts of the world state
experience is the best teacher. And its true. All my experiences and interactions with external
factors have all shaped who I am as a person today. I take what I have learned from an
experience, and apply it to any similar future endeavors. I use what I have learnt to change myself
for the better.
That being said, I would still like to believe that the little girl in me exists. That she hasnt become
jaded over-time. In order to have an exciting and fulfilling life, I like to view the world through the
eyes of my inner, silly 5 year old self. Everything is all of a sudden new, fresh and most of all
important. That flower on the tree, half in bloom, that little aquarium at the dentists? Or even
simply enjoying a good book; its the little things I like to think I still pay attention to, that often
fascinate children, but are overlooked by adults, who lead busy lives with work commitments and
the pressures of making it, that they sometimes dont fully appreciate the world passing by.
The past 10 years of my existence have culminated to form a girl who has had her ups and downs,
who uses the lessons learned from her experiences to guide her future decisions. I would say that
am most certainly not the same exact person; rather Im a person who hasnt lost the crazy bubbly
5 year old in her, yet also manages to evolve and grow as much as possible to the best version of
herself.

If a land has no people, can you call it a 'country'?

The necessary elements that make up a country have been firmly established; a country is
characterised by its culture, known for its food and architecture, loved and cherished by its citizens.
Now lets consider this hypothetical situation: what if a nuclear war were to take place, the bloody
invocation of World War Three? This disastrous conflict could have the potential to completely level
entire cities to the ground, eradicating populations as a result of mass casualties due to intense
heat, radiation poisoning and the general collateral damage of being in the presence of exploding
buildings and collapsing roofs.
We would have the remnants of an entire culture on our hands; the debris of their proud buildings,
travel guides of their cities still existing in the rubble. Only, no people to speak for their land.
I still firmly believe that this uninhabited land should be classified as a country, as it had once been
cultivated and built upon by a group of people that called it their home. This hard work and labour
should not be dismissed so casually; this hypothetical destroyed country should not lose its title
due to another countrys aggression.