Conversation Paper #3: Staring at Goats (and other test subjects)

“Jamal paused for a moment and then he said, “You don’t know how deep the rabbit hole goes, do you? But you know it is deep. You know it is deep”” (Ronson 169).

For your final Conversation Paper, and your Final Exam paper, I want you to have a conversation based on one of the main ‘theories’ of the book, The Men Who Stare at Goats. It’s hard to know what’s real and what isn’t in this book, though the “Acknowledgments and Bibliography” in the final pages show how hard he tried to verify his story. So I want you to do the same with this paper—do a little more research one of the ideas, stories, incidents, or people in this book. Don’t try to discuss the entire book, but take one small aspect of it: say, the idea that sound influences behavior, or that world leaders often rely on astrologers, etc.

The goal of this paper is to find something (a) you are interested in discussing, and to (b) explain why you think it’s important by using our book, and then (c) bring in other sources to help expand the conversation—to show us that other people think it’s important, too! Some topics you might consider are:

• Psychic research in the army and/or society
• Astrology and world leaders
• The future of warfare in the post-nuclear age
• How military technology influences civilian life
• How science fiction influences military life
• The psychology of conspiracy theories (why do people believe them?)
• The ethics of interrogation (what is right/wrong?)
• The ethics of human/animal research (MK-ULTRA, etc.)
• The psychology of sound

REMEMBER that you’re writing for people who have not read the book and do not know the conversation. So you have to introduce the book and the conversation to them, and explain why you think it’s important. Use The Men Who Stare at Goats as your main source: quote from it to establish how the conversation impacts our daily lives and what Ronson wanted us to know about it. Then find other sources that contribute to this conversation. Consider naysayers, people who might refute Ronson or not believe this is a serious or credible issue. YOU can be a naysayer, too, and argue against Ronson or any of the people in the book.

REQUIREMENTS

• At least 4 pages, double spaced
• Quote and respond to Ronson’s book in your discussion
• Introduce and discuss at least 2 additional sources
• Follow proper MLA citation guidelines (or other, if you prefer); just be consistent
• DUE by 5pm on our Final Exam Date December 7^th