본문 바로가기

English

[영어스터디] 부천/인천 영어회화스터디

■ 스터디날짜: 9월 18일 수요일

 

■ 스터디시간: 오후 8:00~ 10:00

 

■ 스터디장소: 경기부천시중동로254번길78 필타운 6층슈가맨워크

(신중동역 AJ파크 옆건물, 미리신청시에만 무료주차가능)

 

■ 참여인원: 8인이하

 

■ 참여조건: 자기가이야기하고자하는바를영어로표현할수있는수준의회화실력을가진분/ 미리

 

참가신청을하신분(영어를잘하실필요는없습니다. 그냥말만하시는정도면OK)

 

■ 회비: 5,000원

 

■ 진행일정

8:00~8:10

자기소개, 근황 이야기

 

8:10~8:20

토픽 1 내용 이야기

 

8:20~8:55

토픽관련한토론

준비해온질문해보기

8:55~9:05

휴식

 

9:05~9:20

토픽 2 영상보기

a

9:20~9:40

토픽관련한토론

준비해온질문해보기

9:40~10:00

주말 계획이야기하기

 




-이번주토픽(각토픽당질문하나씩준비)

1.http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20190908-a-shipwreck-worth-billions-off-the-coast-of-cartagena

2.https://www.ted.com/talks/eleanor_nelsen_would_you_sacrifice_one_person_to_save_five







A shipwreck worth billions off the coast of Cartagena

For centuries, the San José galleon lay lost on the ocean floor, but now it’s at the centre of a custody dispute, with several parties all staking claim to its riches.

It was on 8 June 1708 that Spanish galleon San José erupted into flames off the coast of Cartagena, Colombia. The ship had been at battle with the British since late afternoon, and by night, the 62-cannon galleon had disappeared into the Caribbean Sea. With it, sunk nearly 600 people and up to $20bn worth of gold, silver and jewels.

“It could all be a great legend

For centuries, the San José galleon lay lost on the ocean floor. But the mystery surrounding the ship began to unravel in 2015, when the Colombian government announced it had officially been found. Four years later, the galleon is still 600m deep in Colombian waters. Now, it’s at the centre of a custody dispute among parties all staking claim to the San José’s riches.

In 1708, Spanish galleon San José sank off the coast of Cartagena, Colombia, while carrying up to $20bn worth of gold, silver and jewels (Credit: travel4pictures/Alamy)

The Colombian government hasn’t revealed the exact location of the famed galleon, which is often called the “holy grail” of shipwrecks. But the San José is said to be located close to the Rosario Islands, a tropical archipelago and national park 40km from Cartagena. Throngs of small motorboats zoom over the waters as they transport beach-going tourists to the islands each day. While being carried across the sea, it’s difficult not to imagine the San José and its treasure, somewhere out there below.

You may also be interested in:

The slave ship hidden for 200 years

Israel’s ancient underwater treasure

An epic search for Russia’s lost gold

In fact, the real-life treasure ship has long been the subject of fascination. Nobel prize-winning author Gabriel García Márquez wrote about the galleon in Love in The Time of Cholera; the novel’s main character, Florentino Ariza, planned to dive down and retrieve the San José’s riches for his lifelong love.

“The Caribbean is very magical,” said Bibiana Rojas Mejía, a traveller I spoke to from Bogota who spent the day at the beach with her family on Isla Grande, the largest of the islands. “This is the magical realism that exists in our country. We don’t know how much [treasure] is actually in the San José galleon. It could all be a great legend.”

The San José is said to be located close to the Rosario Islands, a tropical archipelago and national park 40km from Cartagena (Credit: Victoria Stunt)

The San José galleon left Panama’s port city of Portobelo in late May 1708. It was laden with gold, silver and precious stones extracted from what was then Spanish-controlled Peru, which have been estimated to be worth between $10bn and $20bn today. The riches were destined for King Philip V of Spain, who relied on resources from his colonies to finance the War of the Spanish Succession.

The galleon’s captain, Jose Fernandez de Santillan, knew that the British, who were involved in the war, might have ships waiting to attack in Cartagena; the city was only meant to be a quick stop to repair the San José before its longer journey to Havana, Cuba, and then on to Spain. But the captain pushed forward anyway. And by the evening of 8 June, a battle for the San José’s treasure had begun. The British Navy – armed with pistols, swords and knives – tried three times to board the galleon and take it as their own, said Gonzalo Zuñiga, a curator at the Naval Museum of the Caribbean in Cartagena.

“The San José was winning the battle,” explained Zuñiga. “But... we don’t know what condition the San José was in during its last [moments].” The galleon could have lost a sail, he said, or the passengers could have revolted against the captain – most were civilians and weren’t under anybody’s orders.

However, it’s undeniable that neither side wanted the galleon and its treasures to sink. Zuñiga’s theory is that instead of surrendering the San José and returning to Spain empty-handed, its captain could have ignited the gunpowder on the ship and exploded the galleon himself.

The San José (not pictured) was attacked by the British Navy while making a stop in Cartagena for repairs (Credit: Timewatch Images/Alamy)

On 27 November 2015, the San José was “officially” discovered by a robotic submarine called the REMUS 6000, which is operated by the US-based Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The nearly 4m-long underwater autonomous vehicle can explore up to 6km below the sea’s surface, and was able to descend just 9m above the San José to snap photos of the galleon – as well as its bronze, dolphin-engraved cannons, which were what helped researchers to distinguish the San José.

“The San José galleon is an epicentre of information about colonial [history],” said the director of the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History, Ernesto Montenegro. “It’s representative of almost 300 years of colonial [history] from Europe, and particularly from Spain, about the American territory.”

On 27 November 2015, the San José was "officially" discovered by a robotic submarine called the REMUS 6000 (Credit: Courtesy of ICANH)

There are an estimated 1,000 ships sunk off the coast of Colombia, waiting to be discovered. But despite the San José galleon being found in Colombian waters, there’s no guarantee it will stay within its borders. Spain has shown interest in claiming part of the galleon, as has the Bolivian indigenous nation Qhara Qhara whose land (once part of the Viceroyalty of Peru) the San José’s riches were extracted from.

Moreover, the San José has been entangled in legal battles for nearly 40 years. American salvage company Sea Search Armada (SSA) stated they’d found the ship in the early 1980s and claimed 50% of its contents, which SSA says was an agreement with Colombia at the time – and which the Supreme Court of Colombia ruled in favour of in 2007.

Former Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos didn’t credit SSA when he announced Colombia had found the galleon in 2015. Colombian Vice President Marta Lucía Ramírez said in a statement in June that “Sea Search Armada has no right over the San José galleon or its contents” because the coordinates where they claim to have found the galleon don’t match its actual location. The case is still in a Colombian superior court.

Former Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos: “The San José galleon… is one of the greatest finds of history” (Credit: EFE News Agency/Alamy)

This year, the government has also held off on signing a contract with another private company to extract the San José galleon. As of now, Maritime Archaeology Consultants (MAC), who participated in the 2015 search, is the only contender. Partnering with a private salvage firm could once again divide the San José’s contents and reward them up to 45% of its contents – that is, those not classified under cultural heritage, items that still need to be determined by Colombia.

This would be a worst-case scenario for historian and author Francisco Muñoz, who is an expert on the San José. “Humanity has the indisputable right to get to know the [San José galleon], and get to know it completely. Colombia needs to serve as a worthy custodian.”

That would mean opening a museum in Cartagena to display the galleon’s riches in full, said Muñoz – something the government has also suggested. “Who wouldn’t visit this unique exhibit?” he said. “Visitors would be absorbed and obsessed with the stories the [San José galleon] would tell.”

In 2018, former president Santos wrote on Twitter, “The San José galleon, sunken in national waters, is one of the greatest finds of history. With the law of submerged cultural heritage, we can recover it.” He ended the tweet with the hashtag #NuestraCulturaElMejorLegado, which translates to “Our Culture, the Best Legacy”.

Because of an ongoing custody dispute, the San José remains at the bottom of the sea (Credit: Luiz Ribeiro/Alamy)

Still, say experts, it’s a project that can’t be rushed.

“[The ship] has been submerged for 300 years, and this guarantees the right to conservation,” said underwater archaeologist Juan Guillermo Martín. “If we don’t have the conditions right now in Colombia to assume the rescue... it makes no sense to do it. It’s a fundamental principle of responsibility for Colombian heritage, but also for humanity.”

Until the San José is rescued, a museum for Cartagena residents and visitors to enjoy is a long way off. And, Colombians still haven’t won the guarantee for this prized ship to stay within their borders. For now, visitors to Cartagena and the Rosario Islands still have the opportunity to look out far into the sea, and picture the galleon as it remains today: nestled on the ocean floor and still guarding its riches.

Sunken Civilisation is a BBC Travel series that explores mythical underwater worlds that seem too fantastical to exist today but are astonishingly real.



Would you sacrifice one person to save five?

 

 

 

Imagine you're watching a runaway trolley barreling down the tracks straight towards five workers who can't escape. You happen to be standing next to a switch that will divert the trolley onto a second track. Here's the problem. That track has a worker on it, too, but just one.

What do you do? Do you sacrifice one person to save five?

00:32

This is the trolley problem, a version of an ethical dilemma that philosopher Philippa Foot devised in 1967. It's popular because it forces us to think about how to choose when there are no good choices. Do we pick the action with the best outcome or stick to a moral code that prohibits causing someone's death?

00:55

In one survey, about 90% of respondents said that it's okay to flip the switch, letting one worker die to save five, and other studies, including a virtual reality simulation of the dilemma, have found similar results.

01:11

These judgments are consistent with the philosophical principle of utilitarianism which argues that the morally correct decision is the one that maximizes well-being for the greatest number of people. The five lives outweigh one, even if achieving that outcome requires condemning someone to death.

01:30

But people don't always take the utilitarian view, which we can see by changing the trolley problem a bit.

01:37

This time, you're standing on a bridge over the track as the runaway trolley approaches. Now there's no second track, but there is a very large man on the bridge next to you. If you push him over, his body will stop the trolley, saving the five workers, but he'll die.

01:56

To utilitarians, the decision is exactly the same, lose one life to save five. But in this case, only about 10% of people say that it's OK to throw the man onto the tracks. Our instincts tell us that deliberately causing someone's death is different than allowing them to die as collateral damage. It just feels wrong for reasons that are hard to explain

This intersection between ethics and psychology is what's so interesting about the trolley problem. The dilemma in its many variations reveal that what we think is right or wrong depends on factors other than a logical weighing of the pros and cons.

02:36

For example, men are more likely than women to say it's okay to push the man over the bridge. So are people who watch a comedy clip before doing the thought experiment. And in one virtual reality study, people were more willing to sacrifice men than women.

02:52

Researchers have studied the brain activity of people thinking through the classic and bridge versions. Both scenarios activate areas of the brain involved in conscious decision-making and emotional responses. But in the bridge version, the emotional response is much stronger. So is activity in an area of the brain associated with processing internal conflict. Why the difference? One explanation is that pushing someone to their death feels more personal, activating an emotional aversion to killing another person, but we feel conflicted because we know it's still the logical choice.

03:31

"Trolleyology" has been criticized by some philosophers and psychologists. They argue that it doesn't reveal anything because its premise is so unrealistic that study participants don't take it seriously.

03:45

But new technology is making this kind of ethical analysis more important than ever. For example, driver-less cars may have to handle choices like causing a small accident to prevent a larger one. Meanwhile, governments are researching autonomous military drones that could wind up making decisions of whether they'll risk civilian casualties to attack a high-value target. If we want these actions to be ethical, we have to decide in advance how to value human life and judge the greater good.

So researchers who study autonomous systems are collaborating with philosophers to address the complex problem of programming ethics into machines, which goes to show that even hypothetical dilemmas can wind up on a collision course with the real world.

 

 

 

카카오톡 오픈챗방

 

https://open.kakao.com/o/gHaRbOdb

 

🤷‍♀️부천 신중동역 영어스터디 모임

#부천 #신중동역 #영어회화 #영어문법 #영어과외 #영어스터디 #중동 #상동 #열공 #원어민회화 #동네친구 #해외여행 #슈가맨워크 #슈가맨북스

open.kakao.com

 

 

오픈 채팅방에 참여하세요.

밋업에 가입하세요.

네이버카페 (왕초보, 초급, 중급 영어 회화스터디)