The first article iread awas about presenting "naked," making your speech the honoset, simple, and fresh. He gives advice at the bottom of the post on how to give a "naked" speech. It is a long list that i included jsut to show an example of how he gives advice to his readers.
• Be present in the moment. Right here right now. Do not be occupied with thoughts of the future, of thoughts concerning what the results of your presentation might lead to. Do not ask about origins and ends leaving the moment forgotten. When you are with your audience, all that matters is that moment.
• Don't try to impress. Instead try to, share, help, inspire, teach, inform, guide, persuade, motivate... or make the world a little bit better.
• Keep the lights on. Find a compromise between a bright screen and enough room light for you to be seen. Do not hide in the dark — the audience came to see you as well as hear you.
• Forget the podium. Move away from obstacles that are between you and the audience.
• Use a small remote allowing you to have the freedom to move around the room/stage as you like.
• Don't attempt to hide. What's the point? Do not be evasive intellectually or physically.
• Do not become attached to your software — if your computer crashes, screw it...the show must go on immediately, not after you have rebooted. Stuff happens, move on. Your message is far greater than the technology helping you.
• Keep it simple. All of it. Simple goals, clear messages, and moderation in length.
• Are you just a bit cheeky? Then that should show in your presentations too. Let your personality shine through. Why hide one of your biggest differentiators?
• Be credible.
• Do not use "corporate-speak" — speak like a human being. You can not be naked if you say something like "best practices" or "empowering a new paradigm."
• Think of your audience as being active participants not passive listeners ("Passive listener" = oxymoron?).
• Be comfortable with yourself being "naked." It takes practice and it takes confidence. The confidence comes with practice. Audiences hate arrogance and cockiness, but they love confidence...if it is genuine.
• Never decorate your messages or your supporting visuals. Decoration is veneer. Think design, but never decoration. Design is soul deep, decoration is "Happy Birthday" placed atop a sponge cake.
• Think in terms of what makes a good meal and good design. Think balance, harmony, variety...and content that leaves them satisfied and delighted, yet wanting more.
He gives disclaimers to hi advice though too. The persona is that he is a logical guy giving logical information. he knows what he is talking about and therefore we shold listen! I could definitely use his advice on giving naked speeches for my pecha-kucha speech.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
blog on political blog
Read two political blogs and then blog yourself on how to blog attempts to persuade. How quickly did it take you to figure out the general orientation of the blog? Comment on the usage of logos, ethos, and pathos. What about the use of images? Comments? Links? Think about adding to their comments if you are so inclined.
The first blog i looked at was "instapundit.com." This blog had titles of the posts made on the main home page. In these titles, a few words of key important woudl be in blue and were the links to other posts or articles. By doing this, the author draws atention to his main focus and potentially his own opinion on the topic. He attempts to persuade readers by providing them with information, but information targeted toward a particular side of the opinion. I saw very quickly that this guy was not a Mike Huckabee fan sine there were many titles disputing or mocking him. There wer a few images and lots of links.
The second blog was "The corner." This article was a bit harder to figure out. Actually, I'm still not sure i really know what the over view of teh bloggers is. There were some pieces that were clearly pro a certain candidate, like Romney, and others, like ones about MIke Huckabee, are a bit more mixed and confusing. There were some that said he was a better theologist than political leader and others giving mixed message about his speeches given. I think the blog attempts to persuade by giving the people an option to get their own voice out there. There was one blog taht said this, "Romney wins in a romp. Positive and substantive.," which very clearly gets the point and opnion accross of this blogger. The overall blog is a piecing together from many different types of people. There aren't many links or pictures, mainly personal blogs.
The first blog i looked at was "instapundit.com." This blog had titles of the posts made on the main home page. In these titles, a few words of key important woudl be in blue and were the links to other posts or articles. By doing this, the author draws atention to his main focus and potentially his own opinion on the topic. He attempts to persuade readers by providing them with information, but information targeted toward a particular side of the opinion. I saw very quickly that this guy was not a Mike Huckabee fan sine there were many titles disputing or mocking him. There wer a few images and lots of links.
The second blog was "The corner." This article was a bit harder to figure out. Actually, I'm still not sure i really know what the over view of teh bloggers is. There were some pieces that were clearly pro a certain candidate, like Romney, and others, like ones about MIke Huckabee, are a bit more mixed and confusing. There were some that said he was a better theologist than political leader and others giving mixed message about his speeches given. I think the blog attempts to persuade by giving the people an option to get their own voice out there. There was one blog taht said this, "Romney wins in a romp. Positive and substantive.," which very clearly gets the point and opnion accross of this blogger. The overall blog is a piecing together from many different types of people. There aren't many links or pictures, mainly personal blogs.
op/ed story analysis
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20071206/cm_csm/ysalih;_ylt=A0WTUcdgblhHs7cAOwb9wxIF
blog it by identifying the types of arguments used and their effectiveness, and plan a short group presentation of the editorial to the rest of the class.
The story i read was about a guy from Sudan. He gives insight to his own personal life about how what is hapening in Sudan affects him here in America. The author talks about the power of association in how people would associate the knews that they heard about Sudan to him, because he was teh only Sudanese guy they knew. Becase he was born here and it was his father who immigrated here during the 1970s, he feels "ashamed" sometimes of his heritage. When radical events occur in Sudan all he wants to do is disappear because the connection peple draw from him to Sudan is all to unpleasant. The type of argument he uses is informal pathos. He comes accross as a regular guy dealing with a probem and makes one feel empathetic to his case.
blog it by identifying the types of arguments used and their effectiveness, and plan a short group presentation of the editorial to the rest of the class.
The story i read was about a guy from Sudan. He gives insight to his own personal life about how what is hapening in Sudan affects him here in America. The author talks about the power of association in how people would associate the knews that they heard about Sudan to him, because he was teh only Sudanese guy they knew. Becase he was born here and it was his father who immigrated here during the 1970s, he feels "ashamed" sometimes of his heritage. When radical events occur in Sudan all he wants to do is disappear because the connection peple draw from him to Sudan is all to unpleasant. The type of argument he uses is informal pathos. He comes accross as a regular guy dealing with a probem and makes one feel empathetic to his case.
fallacies
1. circular argument: " A viciously circular argument is one with a conclusion based ultimately upon that conclusion itself, and such arguments can never advance our knowledge."
2. slippery slope: A) non cuasa pro causa "If A happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through B, C,…, X, Y, eventually Z will happen, too. Z should not happen. Therefore, A should not happen, either."
B) vagueness "A differs from Z by a continuum of insignificant changes, and there is no non-arbitrary place at which a sharp line between the two can be drawn. Therefore, there is really no difference between A and Z."
"A differs from Z by a continuum of insignificant changes with no non-arbitrary line between the two.
Therefore, A doesn't exist."
3. either/or: simple contructive dilemna "Either p or q. If p then r. If q then r. Therefore, r."
disjunctive syllogism "Either p or q. Not-p. Therefore, q."
4. Post Hoc: non causa pro causa "event C happened immediately prior to event E. Therefore, C caused E."
"Events of type C happen immediately prior to events of type E. Therefore, events of type C cause events of type E."
5. anecdotal fallacy: personal experience/ story to prove a point
6. gamblers fallacy: "A fair gambling device has produced a "run". Therefore, on the next trial of the device, it is less likely than chance to continue the run."
ex "You have flipped a fair coin and gotten a run of seven "heads" in a row.
Therefore, the chance of "tails" on the next flip is better than half."
7. hasty gernalization: "This is the fallacy of generalizing about a population based upon a sample which is too small to be representative. If the population is heterogeneous, then the sample needs to be large enough to represent the population's variability. With a completely homogeneous population, a sample of one is sufficiently large, so it is impossible to put an absolute lower limit on sample size. Rather, sample size depends directly upon the variability of the population: the more heterogeneous a population, the larger the sample required. For instance, people tend to be quite variable in their political opinions, so that public opinion polls need fairly large samples to be accurate."
8. ad hominem: "A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent. Such red herrings may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate."
9. Straw Man: "In a Straw Man argument, the arguer argues to a conclusion that denies the "straw man" he has set up, but misses the target. So, the fallacy is not simply the argument, but the entire situation of the argument occurring in such a context."
10. Tu Quoque: "Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation."
PARAGRAH 1
I decided to go buy a brand new pair of ugg boots since I had read on the Vogue fashion website and talked to the Nordstrom shoe salesmen and they highly recommended the shoe. When I mentioned this to my friend Kelsey, she was aghast at the notion. She told me that her sister had a pair of uggs that only lasted for a month. After a month period of time the shoes leaked and started to fall apart. She thinks uggs are the worst quality shoe brand out there. She had to have toes removed because they got frostbitten when she wore the uggs in the snow and they fell apart. (anecdotal fallacy)
PARAGRAPH 2
There is no way I am going to side with you on this topic. You're saying that we should give less of the tax money to the public schools? How would we fund the schools without taxes? You don't pay for public school because it's required to attend. Without the necessary funding then the school systems would fal and students would not learn and become productive adults. How would we have a functioning society?
PARAGRAPH 3
I might go to school today feeling sick. But, by going to school feeling sick I might fail my calculus test. By failing my calcuclus test I could not get any good grades and then not get into college when I submit my semester grades. By not getting into college I will end up homeless on the street watching all of my successsful friends pass me by. Therefore, I should not go to school today because I am sick.
2. slippery slope: A) non cuasa pro causa "If A happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through B, C,…, X, Y, eventually Z will happen, too. Z should not happen. Therefore, A should not happen, either."
B) vagueness "A differs from Z by a continuum of insignificant changes, and there is no non-arbitrary place at which a sharp line between the two can be drawn. Therefore, there is really no difference between A and Z."
"A differs from Z by a continuum of insignificant changes with no non-arbitrary line between the two.
Therefore, A doesn't exist."
3. either/or: simple contructive dilemna "Either p or q. If p then r. If q then r. Therefore, r."
disjunctive syllogism "Either p or q. Not-p. Therefore, q."
4. Post Hoc: non causa pro causa "event C happened immediately prior to event E. Therefore, C caused E."
"Events of type C happen immediately prior to events of type E. Therefore, events of type C cause events of type E."
5. anecdotal fallacy: personal experience/ story to prove a point
6. gamblers fallacy: "A fair gambling device has produced a "run". Therefore, on the next trial of the device, it is less likely than chance to continue the run."
ex "You have flipped a fair coin and gotten a run of seven "heads" in a row.
Therefore, the chance of "tails" on the next flip is better than half."
7. hasty gernalization: "This is the fallacy of generalizing about a population based upon a sample which is too small to be representative. If the population is heterogeneous, then the sample needs to be large enough to represent the population's variability. With a completely homogeneous population, a sample of one is sufficiently large, so it is impossible to put an absolute lower limit on sample size. Rather, sample size depends directly upon the variability of the population: the more heterogeneous a population, the larger the sample required. For instance, people tend to be quite variable in their political opinions, so that public opinion polls need fairly large samples to be accurate."
8. ad hominem: "A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent. Such red herrings may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate."
9. Straw Man: "In a Straw Man argument, the arguer argues to a conclusion that denies the "straw man" he has set up, but misses the target. So, the fallacy is not simply the argument, but the entire situation of the argument occurring in such a context."
10. Tu Quoque: "Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation."
PARAGRAH 1
I decided to go buy a brand new pair of ugg boots since I had read on the Vogue fashion website and talked to the Nordstrom shoe salesmen and they highly recommended the shoe. When I mentioned this to my friend Kelsey, she was aghast at the notion. She told me that her sister had a pair of uggs that only lasted for a month. After a month period of time the shoes leaked and started to fall apart. She thinks uggs are the worst quality shoe brand out there. She had to have toes removed because they got frostbitten when she wore the uggs in the snow and they fell apart. (anecdotal fallacy)
PARAGRAPH 2
There is no way I am going to side with you on this topic. You're saying that we should give less of the tax money to the public schools? How would we fund the schools without taxes? You don't pay for public school because it's required to attend. Without the necessary funding then the school systems would fal and students would not learn and become productive adults. How would we have a functioning society?
PARAGRAPH 3
I might go to school today feeling sick. But, by going to school feeling sick I might fail my calculus test. By failing my calcuclus test I could not get any good grades and then not get into college when I submit my semester grades. By not getting into college I will end up homeless on the street watching all of my successsful friends pass me by. Therefore, I should not go to school today because I am sick.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Malcom X
Finally, we’ll listen to Malcolm X’s speech Ballot or the Bullet and analyze it according to logos, pathos, and ethos. For homework, write a 500 word blog post that examines at least 2-3 incidents of each.
Malcom X uses logical reasoning to convince his listeners that he is a reasonable person. "’m a Muslim minister. The same as they are Christian Ministers, I’m a Muslim minister. And I don’t believe in fighting today in any one front, but on all fronts. In fact, I’m a "Black Nationalist Freedom Fighter." Islam is my religion, but I believe my religion is my personal business. It governs my personal life, my personal morals. And my religious philosophy is personal between me and the God in whom I believe; just as the religious philosophy of these others is between them and the God in whom they believe." Malcom X is using ethos to show that he is a logical fighter just like the Christian ministers he mentioned in above paragraphs.
Malcom X also appeals to anger of other black people by using the threatening style to show the white leaders that 'their glory days are over.' "By the same token, the time when that same white man, knowing that your eyes are too far open, can send another negro into the community and get you and me to support him so he can use him to lead us astray -- those days are long gone too." He is threating the white leaders that their days of controlling the black people are over. What the white political leaders were doing angered teh black people as well, which is why he is appealing to their anger. He also appeals to anger by stating, "So we’re trapped, trapped, double-trapped, triple-trapped. Anywhere we go we find that we’re trapped. " he uses a paragraph long explaination of the suffereing and pains that the black people face in Harlem, and elsewhere!
He uses logic to also say, "'Cause if you're black you should be thinking black, and if you are black and you not thinking black at this late date, well I’m sorry for you." This shows his reasoning and logic behind his own philosophy to life and religion. He is very blatent and bold about what he says.
Malcom X uses logical reasoning to convince his listeners that he is a reasonable person. "’m a Muslim minister. The same as they are Christian Ministers, I’m a Muslim minister. And I don’t believe in fighting today in any one front, but on all fronts. In fact, I’m a "Black Nationalist Freedom Fighter." Islam is my religion, but I believe my religion is my personal business. It governs my personal life, my personal morals. And my religious philosophy is personal between me and the God in whom I believe; just as the religious philosophy of these others is between them and the God in whom they believe." Malcom X is using ethos to show that he is a logical fighter just like the Christian ministers he mentioned in above paragraphs.
Malcom X also appeals to anger of other black people by using the threatening style to show the white leaders that 'their glory days are over.' "By the same token, the time when that same white man, knowing that your eyes are too far open, can send another negro into the community and get you and me to support him so he can use him to lead us astray -- those days are long gone too." He is threating the white leaders that their days of controlling the black people are over. What the white political leaders were doing angered teh black people as well, which is why he is appealing to their anger. He also appeals to anger by stating, "So we’re trapped, trapped, double-trapped, triple-trapped. Anywhere we go we find that we’re trapped. " he uses a paragraph long explaination of the suffereing and pains that the black people face in Harlem, and elsewhere!
He uses logic to also say, "'Cause if you're black you should be thinking black, and if you are black and you not thinking black at this late date, well I’m sorry for you." This shows his reasoning and logic behind his own philosophy to life and religion. He is very blatent and bold about what he says.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
synthetic essay
how did i do on essay...what can be improved for my writing in the essay....general essay rules:incorporate the sources into writing...make it fit not just plug it in bcuz you have to
I think I did reasonable well on the essay. It is hard for me because I did not have APUSH last year so I have never done a timed synthetic essay. So I probably did not do as well as I feel on it. I think my writing needs to be improved. We wrote so much for AP english last year and I feel like my writing is slipping. I think I need to improve my analysis skills. That's somethign i worked really ahrd on last year but this year I haven't so my analysis and conclusion skills have dropped dramatically. For general essay rules I think for synthetic essays I need to work on not jsut plugging in quotes, like I may have done last year, but really incorporating the imformation so it's more fluid. I think the pieces are supposed to flow and feel like there is no break in thought event with a quote.
I think I did reasonable well on the essay. It is hard for me because I did not have APUSH last year so I have never done a timed synthetic essay. So I probably did not do as well as I feel on it. I think my writing needs to be improved. We wrote so much for AP english last year and I feel like my writing is slipping. I think I need to improve my analysis skills. That's somethign i worked really ahrd on last year but this year I haven't so my analysis and conclusion skills have dropped dramatically. For general essay rules I think for synthetic essays I need to work on not jsut plugging in quotes, like I may have done last year, but really incorporating the imformation so it's more fluid. I think the pieces are supposed to flow and feel like there is no break in thought event with a quote.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
common sense- thomas paine
a) a summary: Thomas Paine is discussing the pro's of society and the formation of soceity, and the con's of government. he is very pro-starting a society and keeping people united together for one cause, but believes that government ruling is evil. He goes on to describe a scenario where four or five men together can bild up a house, but one man alone can slave all day and accomplish nothing. People are naturally drawn together for want of safety but once people obtain safety, they no longer need governments.
paragraph one is making the statement that society = good and government = bad. introducing the idea that he prefers society over government. He says that other writers say that society and government are the same thing but they are very different in reality. Government is a necessary evil in his eyes because governmtn is there for bad side of our nature and society for the good side of it
paragraph two is about supporting his thesis made in teh first paragraph. government is there because our conscience isn't strong enough and we don't obey our conscious to the point of being just. governemtn is there for faults and lack of ability to listen to conscious. build government palace on lost innocence. badgeon ....metaphor to adam and eve having to ear clotes to us needing government.
paragraph three is an extended metaphor proiding an example to a claim before in the previous paragraph about the "design and end of government." people naturally try to connect with each other and they have lots of ideas of what they want it to look like, but one man can't do it on his own. They all have to work together. it's important for us to see that we need ea ch other and that we need each other because we can't do our own thing.
b) an analysis of the logical argument (fact, claim, warrant)
fact: To me it is unclear if he contains any facts in the piece since it is an incredibly opinionated point of view and discussion.
claim: he claims that people would be better off with no goverment and just society.
warran: he gives scenarios where people working together are more effective and beneficial than the instillment of a government.
c) rhetorical strategies: parallelism "happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices" demonstrate that there are two sides to one coin...yin/yang....
metaphor with palaces built on bowers of paradise.
logical arugment/ analogy." if the people are doing blank, then logically blank."
ARGUMENT BY ANALOGY*****
playing if-then / hypotherical
paragraph one is making the statement that society = good and government = bad. introducing the idea that he prefers society over government. He says that other writers say that society and government are the same thing but they are very different in reality. Government is a necessary evil in his eyes because governmtn is there for bad side of our nature and society for the good side of it
paragraph two is about supporting his thesis made in teh first paragraph. government is there because our conscience isn't strong enough and we don't obey our conscious to the point of being just. governemtn is there for faults and lack of ability to listen to conscious. build government palace on lost innocence. badgeon ....metaphor to adam and eve having to ear clotes to us needing government.
paragraph three is an extended metaphor proiding an example to a claim before in the previous paragraph about the "design and end of government." people naturally try to connect with each other and they have lots of ideas of what they want it to look like, but one man can't do it on his own. They all have to work together. it's important for us to see that we need ea ch other and that we need each other because we can't do our own thing.
b) an analysis of the logical argument (fact, claim, warrant)
fact: To me it is unclear if he contains any facts in the piece since it is an incredibly opinionated point of view and discussion.
claim: he claims that people would be better off with no goverment and just society.
warran: he gives scenarios where people working together are more effective and beneficial than the instillment of a government.
c) rhetorical strategies: parallelism "happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices" demonstrate that there are two sides to one coin...yin/yang....
metaphor with palaces built on bowers of paradise.
logical arugment/ analogy." if the people are doing blank, then logically blank."
ARGUMENT BY ANALOGY*****
playing if-then / hypotherical
Sunday, November 25, 2007
he $114.69 Speech Poplice
Facts: University of Montana < $100 Condidatre spendy 2) a sum allocates fees 3) in 2004 Flint ran for student senate 4) Flint spent $214.69 on posters and pizza and won 5) there were posters attacking him put up around teh school 6) he exceeded the limit fo money allowed to spend on elections = Flint ki9cked out of senate 7) Flint sues and loses in district
Claims: Flint should be allowd to spend $ on candidency w/ only a few restrictions.
Warrant: It's not fair to let interest groups spend lots and other people less.
The warrant is implied. The facts kind of match the claim. The article is comprised mainly of a lot of facts. The author deals with rebuttals by
Claims: Flint should be allowd to spend $ on candidency w/ only a few restrictions.
Warrant: It's not fair to let interest groups spend lots and other people less.
The warrant is implied. The facts kind of match the claim. The article is comprised mainly of a lot of facts. The author deals with rebuttals by
Freedom's just another word
Facts: australians are required to vote 2) if they fail to comply they're fined 3)currently less than 51% of ppl vote in the US 4) 90%+ voter turnout in Australia
claim: if americans had this system people would participate more in voting
warrant: We are a non-participating democracy and we would be more traditional democracy if more people voted.
The claim is implicit. Yes, the facts match up with the claim. The author deals with rebuttals by stating that
claim: if americans had this system people would participate more in voting
warrant: We are a non-participating democracy and we would be more traditional democracy if more people voted.
The claim is implicit. Yes, the facts match up with the claim. The author deals with rebuttals by stating that
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Presidential Speech
Never before has there been a question about the Presidential cabinet chosen. Questioning leads to confusion, confusion leads to chaos, and chaos leads to the destruction of what American’s hold dear: tranquility. I have had no part no this conspiracy that is leading people down the road to destruction. The people have asked of me, but now I am asking of the people. I ask all of the American people to hold faith in me, in their leaders, and in the democratic system we all hold so dear. There is nothing iIwant more than for the great nation of the United States of America to prosper and I am not willing to let this outlandish scandal to get in the way of that goal. I am your President and I am here to say I will do everthing in my power to make sure America stays along the straight path. Thank you
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Thoreau
I had/have an extremely challenging time trying to figure out what Thoreau is talking about in his piece, "Where i Lived, and What i Live for." I believe he's talking about living simply and living for oneself. He uses repetition of the word "simplify" and "simplicity," to get his point across in the second paragraph. Thoreau also uses long extended sentences with many comas. I think he uses this technique to show the invalue of life when we go for quantity not quality. He makes a point of saying we don't need a million objects but "only half a dozen."
i went to the woods because i wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life and see if i could not learn what i had to teach, and not, when i came to die, to discover that i had not lived. - in teh woods is "real life" and everything else is "not life." a way for him to not focus on "petty" and unessential parts to life. Woods allows you to strip off modern and unnecessary parts of life. antithesis in "...and to see...." to the end. other stuff in life outside of woods is frivolous.
from begining of time life has had meaning so wants to return to roots of humanity (spartans).
live meanly = lives cramped and useless and unhappy
i went to the woods because i wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life and see if i could not learn what i had to teach, and not, when i came to die, to discover that i had not lived. - in teh woods is "real life" and everything else is "not life." a way for him to not focus on "petty" and unessential parts to life. Woods allows you to strip off modern and unnecessary parts of life. antithesis in "...and to see...." to the end. other stuff in life outside of woods is frivolous.
from begining of time life has had meaning so wants to return to roots of humanity (spartans).
live meanly = lives cramped and useless and unhappy
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Singularity
The Kurzweil article is a bit difficult to understand if he's speaking negatively or positively about technological advances. He says that it will eradicate diseases and end world hunger and pollution which to most people are good things. But, he has this negative under-tone that makes it seem like he believes that technological advanaces are not all good. Personally I am just confused.
McKibben's article is a lot easier to understand. He says all of the great thigns that science advacnements are creating but then goes on to say that it's destroying the very thing that makes us human: unpredictability. He says that theses flaws give mearning to life. It's teh "weight" taht holds us to grounded and he made a quote that once technological advances snip away all that is holding us, we will "float away to meaninglessness." That is a bit scary to think about!
Personally I do agree. I think flaws and bad experiences make the good times more meaningful because we have somethign to compare it to! IF there's no disease to threaten life, how will we be able to appreciate living? IF we can't die, how do we appreciate life? There are a lot of questions with no answers and just more "snipping" at the lines that keep us tied down to ameaningful and happy life
McKibben's article is a lot easier to understand. He says all of the great thigns that science advacnements are creating but then goes on to say that it's destroying the very thing that makes us human: unpredictability. He says that theses flaws give mearning to life. It's teh "weight" taht holds us to grounded and he made a quote that once technological advances snip away all that is holding us, we will "float away to meaninglessness." That is a bit scary to think about!
Personally I do agree. I think flaws and bad experiences make the good times more meaningful because we have somethign to compare it to! IF there's no disease to threaten life, how will we be able to appreciate living? IF we can't die, how do we appreciate life? There are a lot of questions with no answers and just more "snipping" at the lines that keep us tied down to ameaningful and happy life
Monday, October 29, 2007
synthetic essay
The impact of the television on the people of this nation has increased through each coming year. Yet, this influence is not necesarily all for the better. While the media does its best to send informatino out to the people, on the topic of presidential elections there is controversey. It apears as though the television has unsuspectedly help make presidential debates focused more on which candidate is more impressive on screen than who is presenting the best ideas.
Presidential candidates are asked to appear on talk shows of all ranges from CNN to MTV. These public appearances through television seems as though it would be of value to the public, but in reality actually backfire on the candidates. "...because of television’s celebrity system, Presidents are losing their distinctiveness as social actors and hence are often judged by standards
formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars..." (Source B). Presidents judged and evaluated on the same level as movie and rock stars is certainly not the motive or point of their television interviews. The President of the United States of America has histrically been viewed as a person of dignity, honor, and respect. Television interviews change and demean this appearance by making teh President feel more like a peer than a leader. "...because of television’s sense of
intimacy, the American people feel they know their Presidents as persons and hence no longer feel the need for party guidance..." (Source B). Having a personable President is important but one that still stands out as a leader is more important. This is not attainable if teh Presidents are appearing on talk shows that demean their authority.
The image of the President is important but it should not be the governing factor as to which Presidential candidate deserves to be sworn in. Television has made it so that Presidents who have the most influencial appearance during a broadcasted candident debate receive the most support. '. . . “Our national politics has become a competition for images or between
images, rather than between ideals,” [one commentator] concluded. “An effective President must be every year more concerned with projecting images of himself.” (Source C)' Is not the object of becoming President to help create the best nation we can be? Having a President be elected based on appearance on television is not only wrong but terrifying. Poor Presidents could be sworn in simply because they appeared the most impressive. This is not helpful to the nation or its people. Theodor H. White "believed that Kennedy’s “victory” in the debates was largely a triumph of image over content. (Source C)" White had the correct idea that television broadcasted debates were, and are, increasingly unhelpful to the American peoples' ability to elect the best President for our nation. The television screws our views and opinions on who really is the best option.
There is, however, a positive side to all of the negativity. "One of the great contributions expected of television lay in its presumed capacity to inform and stimulate the political interests of the American electorate. (Source A)." Whether the broadcasting source decides to take full advantage of their power for the good of informing the truth to the public is entirely up the the specific news source. All of the potential is there for the television to help inform the American public on the presidential promised contributions to the country, but the news source needs help make a broadcasted presidential debate more aboutt he issues and less about image. Most of the power lies within the networks ability to lay out the raw facts and not scewed data. The cards have been laid. Who will draw the most correct, truthful, and helpful hand?
Presidential candidates are asked to appear on talk shows of all ranges from CNN to MTV. These public appearances through television seems as though it would be of value to the public, but in reality actually backfire on the candidates. "...because of television’s celebrity system, Presidents are losing their distinctiveness as social actors and hence are often judged by standards
formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars..." (Source B). Presidents judged and evaluated on the same level as movie and rock stars is certainly not the motive or point of their television interviews. The President of the United States of America has histrically been viewed as a person of dignity, honor, and respect. Television interviews change and demean this appearance by making teh President feel more like a peer than a leader. "...because of television’s sense of
intimacy, the American people feel they know their Presidents as persons and hence no longer feel the need for party guidance..." (Source B). Having a personable President is important but one that still stands out as a leader is more important. This is not attainable if teh Presidents are appearing on talk shows that demean their authority.
The image of the President is important but it should not be the governing factor as to which Presidential candidate deserves to be sworn in. Television has made it so that Presidents who have the most influencial appearance during a broadcasted candident debate receive the most support. '. . . “Our national politics has become a competition for images or between
images, rather than between ideals,” [one commentator] concluded. “An effective President must be every year more concerned with projecting images of himself.” (Source C)' Is not the object of becoming President to help create the best nation we can be? Having a President be elected based on appearance on television is not only wrong but terrifying. Poor Presidents could be sworn in simply because they appeared the most impressive. This is not helpful to the nation or its people. Theodor H. White "believed that Kennedy’s “victory” in the debates was largely a triumph of image over content. (Source C)" White had the correct idea that television broadcasted debates were, and are, increasingly unhelpful to the American peoples' ability to elect the best President for our nation. The television screws our views and opinions on who really is the best option.
There is, however, a positive side to all of the negativity. "One of the great contributions expected of television lay in its presumed capacity to inform and stimulate the political interests of the American electorate. (Source A)." Whether the broadcasting source decides to take full advantage of their power for the good of informing the truth to the public is entirely up the the specific news source. All of the potential is there for the television to help inform the American public on the presidential promised contributions to the country, but the news source needs help make a broadcasted presidential debate more aboutt he issues and less about image. Most of the power lies within the networks ability to lay out the raw facts and not scewed data. The cards have been laid. Who will draw the most correct, truthful, and helpful hand?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Women's Brains
After reading the article about women's brains I almost wanted to go perform a masectomy. It is incredible how pig headed these male "scientists" could be. The only convincing point made to me was that the male ego was (is) too large. The "evidence" is way too vague to be considered credible They come up with information and then jump to a conclusion without drawing rational connections or considering the posiblity of other probable explanations.
I think the author does an ok job of keeping his/her own biasis out of the piece, but they could definitely do a better job. The beginning was more confusing and i had troule distinguishing the author's views from the views of Broca. As the piece continued, however, the author began to distinguish their ideas from the ideas of the scientists they were quoting. "I have reexamined Broca’s data, the basis for all this derivative pronouncement, and I find his numbers sound but his interpretation ill-founded, to say the least. " Here, halfway through the piece at paragraph 15, the author says that he/she don't agree with Broca's interpretation. This is the first instance I saw of the author's opinion disagreeing with Broca's opinion(s).
My reaction to the piece ccan be summed up in the word 'disgusted.' I supposed it's not that suprising how extreme teh male scientists views were on the "inferiority" of women since they lived in a different time, but I still felt the same gut-wrenching fury at their behavior. This type of research and personal bias interpretation in science would not stand today and I'm glad. It gives me reassurance in the progression of society.
I think the author does an ok job of keeping his/her own biasis out of the piece, but they could definitely do a better job. The beginning was more confusing and i had troule distinguishing the author's views from the views of Broca. As the piece continued, however, the author began to distinguish their ideas from the ideas of the scientists they were quoting. "I have reexamined Broca’s data, the basis for all this derivative pronouncement, and I find his numbers sound but his interpretation ill-founded, to say the least. " Here, halfway through the piece at paragraph 15, the author says that he/she don't agree with Broca's interpretation. This is the first instance I saw of the author's opinion disagreeing with Broca's opinion(s).
My reaction to the piece ccan be summed up in the word 'disgusted.' I supposed it's not that suprising how extreme teh male scientists views were on the "inferiority" of women since they lived in a different time, but I still felt the same gut-wrenching fury at their behavior. This type of research and personal bias interpretation in science would not stand today and I'm glad. It gives me reassurance in the progression of society.
Innovation
All of the ideas that were discussed on Monday were excelent ideas. I didn't really have any of my own, so I will high light a few that I thought were the best. I really liked the idea of showing how technology connects different people of different cultures. I also liked the idea of going from black and white to color in the video. A small idea of my own is showing the evlutino of a product maybe, like the ipod. We could show how it went from tape to cd to mp3 to the many differnt forms of ipods. Or we could do it for the telephone or computer or many different objects. There are numerous ideas out there and I'm loking forward to seeing the final products.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Wikipedia
I love wikipedia. If I can't find a topic on wikipedia then something must be wrong because wikipedia contains everything, to me. If something sounds fishy, it's possible to cross reference the information. WIkipedia provides the references used to write their articles and this is such a good idea; it gives people more articles to read on the topic of their choice without taking the information wikpedia provides as the almighty truth.
I do agree with Lanier that we need to approach it with some skepticism, but I don't think it's a bad site. I think people using Wikipedia just need to use commmon sense.
I do agree with Lanier that we need to approach it with some skepticism, but I don't think it's a bad site. I think people using Wikipedia just need to use commmon sense.
comparison death of a moth
Anne's "Death of a Moth" has more of a detached feeling with the moth because she is describing waht she witnessed. Anne uses a lot of 'I's but doesn't really give the whole feel of becoming one with the moth and going inside the moth's mind. Woolf, however,portrays the moth as a person and not a detached object.
Anne's metaphor choice is the fact taht the moth dies, but its body/head burns for another 2 hours giving light for her to read. This is a metaphor to the fact that whn you write a poem, "your head should be on fire." Today we read the works from those whose bodies are gone but their "heads on fire." They have given us light to read.
Woolf's metaphor is more about the weak people, like the moth who died, and portraying them through the moth. The moth symbolizes the pathetic people in the world.
Syntax for Anne is more personal than the eloquent poetic form of Woolf's work. Anne does have some poetic parts but Woolf's entire piece is poetic feeling.
Anne's metaphor choice is the fact taht the moth dies, but its body/head burns for another 2 hours giving light for her to read. This is a metaphor to the fact that whn you write a poem, "your head should be on fire." Today we read the works from those whose bodies are gone but their "heads on fire." They have given us light to read.
Woolf's metaphor is more about the weak people, like the moth who died, and portraying them through the moth. The moth symbolizes the pathetic people in the world.
Syntax for Anne is more personal than the eloquent poetic form of Woolf's work. Anne does have some poetic parts but Woolf's entire piece is poetic feeling.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
technology and science
I love science. I am a total science nerd and love discovering new things about the world around us. When i grow up i am lookig to go into a sicnece field. This does not mean, however, that I feel everyone should think and act like a scientist. If we had a world full of scientists it would be pretty boring because there would be nothing new left to discover, everything would have already been done. Science helps those without scientific skill learn about the world around us. If everyone were to be involved in science there would be nothing and no one left to teach defeating teh purpose.
I don't know if there is a "best way" to look at the world. I think everyone needs to find what's right for them. Looking at the world in a scientific manner is what works for me but I know it doesn't work for my friend who is an english junkie. She does't understand things the way I do and that's fine. We are different and it makes our friendship more interesting. It's not really fair to say that the scientific method is the best way to look at the world. Just because it works for one person doesn't mean it will work for the majority.
Now technology is different. We have a very love-hate relationship. I love the conveniences technological gadgets provide, yet i hate it when they break down and don't hold up to my view of their "immortality." For example, I love having a cell phone and it's practically glued to my hand at all times. I cannot imagine what people did 20 years ago. But, when it breaks it seems as if my world is ending. How do I get a hold of people? How am I going to knwo when someone want's to talk to me? What happens is that cute boy I gave my number to tries to call? My head nearly explodes under the stress. So on that note, yes I do wish I could change my relationship status with technology. I would like he/she/it to stop leaving me and to stay with me forever. I am very needy when it comes to technology.
I don't know if there is a "best way" to look at the world. I think everyone needs to find what's right for them. Looking at the world in a scientific manner is what works for me but I know it doesn't work for my friend who is an english junkie. She does't understand things the way I do and that's fine. We are different and it makes our friendship more interesting. It's not really fair to say that the scientific method is the best way to look at the world. Just because it works for one person doesn't mean it will work for the majority.
Now technology is different. We have a very love-hate relationship. I love the conveniences technological gadgets provide, yet i hate it when they break down and don't hold up to my view of their "immortality." For example, I love having a cell phone and it's practically glued to my hand at all times. I cannot imagine what people did 20 years ago. But, when it breaks it seems as if my world is ending. How do I get a hold of people? How am I going to knwo when someone want's to talk to me? What happens is that cute boy I gave my number to tries to call? My head nearly explodes under the stress. So on that note, yes I do wish I could change my relationship status with technology. I would like he/she/it to stop leaving me and to stay with me forever. I am very needy when it comes to technology.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Death of a Moth
Use metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, irony, and syntax to comment on Woolfe’s strategies, purposes, and style.
The metaphor of the piece is the moth for the people of pure life who don't know what's coming. Moth's are blind to teh dangers that are ahead of them. It is ironic that the moth's are so beautiful and pure of life, according to the author, and then it dies. So the fact that it is pure energy/life and then dies so it was ironic. The syntax of Woolf is long and eloquent just like the moth. The syntax is graceful, but confusing in language just as a moth is.
The metaphor of the piece is the moth for the people of pure life who don't know what's coming. Moth's are blind to teh dangers that are ahead of them. It is ironic that the moth's are so beautiful and pure of life, according to the author, and then it dies. So the fact that it is pure energy/life and then dies so it was ironic. The syntax of Woolf is long and eloquent just like the moth. The syntax is graceful, but confusing in language just as a moth is.
The Plastic Pink Flamingo
I think the grader's critiques were very accurate. The essays were very dificult to read and the students gave many "glittering generalities" as Mrs. Hastig would say. They didn't give a lot of proof and explanation to teh rhetorical analysis points they were trying to make. I do, however, feel that all 3 essays were not quite ~4.31 material. The third one was actually written quite well and was consice and to the point, which made it pleasant to read. The first essay was so long that it felt like it was dragging on and was unpleasant to read. In general I would have given the essays an average of a 5 with the exception of the third essay which I believe deserved a 7-8.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
"Learning to read"
The article "Learning to read" discusses one slave's journey to becoming literate. Frederick Douglass uses eloquent words to show how he's developed from his former illiterate state to his "new found" education. He describes the process of self-education and education from young children and then his unquenchable thirst for books. A spark of knowledge ignighted his passion for reading.
"On the Pleasure Of Hating"
Hazlit's "On the Pleasure of Hating" makes a point out of saying that we hate out of boredom, a will for variety, and delight in being michievious. He uses half a paragraph for examples ofpeople taking sport in "hateful" activities to draw analogies to the point he's trying to get across (as bystanders or participants) ex. id killing fly, men assemle eargerly to watch tragedy, etc.) During the piece he uses lots of exclamation points to make it seem as though he's permaently yelling to get his point accross (he's passionate about his beliefs)
"The pleasure of hating, like a poisonous mineral, eats into the heart of religion, and turns it to rankling spleen and bigotry; it makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands: it leaves to virtue nothing but the spirit of censoriousness, and a narrow, jealous, inquisitorial watchfulness over the actions and motives of others." This quote is significant because it's references the title and seems like a second thesis. Hazlit also uses very powerful words and large big words (it makes it seem like he's "spitting fire" with a "silvr tongue").
Hazlit uses an extended metaphor, hating a spider, to symbolize the hatred for a person. He personifies the spider by giving it human qualities (a personality of being afraid) and refers to it as a person.
"The pleasure of hating, like a poisonous mineral, eats into the heart of religion, and turns it to rankling spleen and bigotry; it makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands: it leaves to virtue nothing but the spirit of censoriousness, and a narrow, jealous, inquisitorial watchfulness over the actions and motives of others." This quote is significant because it's references the title and seems like a second thesis. Hazlit also uses very powerful words and large big words (it makes it seem like he's "spitting fire" with a "silvr tongue").
Hazlit uses an extended metaphor, hating a spider, to symbolize the hatred for a person. He personifies the spider by giving it human qualities (a personality of being afraid) and refers to it as a person.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
MLK's "A Letter From Birmingham Jail"
MLK’s “A Letter From Birmingham Jail,” is long and powerful in it’s rhetorical techniques used. In the very beginning of the letter he starts off appealing to the readers’ by complimenting them. “But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.” He is complimenting the readers’ on their good judgment and character and starts the letter off on a high note. MLK then goes on to use examples from bible, other places (continents like Asia and Africa), and movements to let his readers’ know that he’s educated and rational. “…just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco-Roman world, so am I.” He is appealing to the readers since many of them belong to the Methodist and other forms of churches in the south. MLK also thoroughly explains what he’s doing and more importantly WHY he’s doing what he’s doing to let the reader’s know that he is also a logical person.
“I think I should indicate why I am here In Birmingham-Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct-action program if such were deemed necessary. But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here.”
MLK acknowledges the fact that people are questioning why he is in Birmingham and goes in depth to explain what called him to be there. This way he lets his readers know that he’s not irrational in his actions. Throughout entire piece he says, “well you may think or say or other may…” and then goes on to explain why he’s doing what he’s doing, sometimes in spite of what others think should be done. “You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling, for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action.” MLK makes a point of noting other people’s concerns and then goes on to confirm that their concerns have not been said in vain, but are actually the main driving force in the very campaign they all fight for. There are countless other rhetorical techniques MLK uses but the ones I feel that the ones I have noted are most significant in grabbing the readers and keeping them hooked into believing what he’s doing.
“I think I should indicate why I am here In Birmingham-Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct-action program if such were deemed necessary. But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here.”
MLK acknowledges the fact that people are questioning why he is in Birmingham and goes in depth to explain what called him to be there. This way he lets his readers know that he’s not irrational in his actions. Throughout entire piece he says, “well you may think or say or other may…” and then goes on to explain why he’s doing what he’s doing, sometimes in spite of what others think should be done. “You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling, for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action.” MLK makes a point of noting other people’s concerns and then goes on to confirm that their concerns have not been said in vain, but are actually the main driving force in the very campaign they all fight for. There are countless other rhetorical techniques MLK uses but the ones I feel that the ones I have noted are most significant in grabbing the readers and keeping them hooked into believing what he’s doing.
Monday, September 17, 2007
i believe essay comparison
Both essays I read from “I Believe Essays.com” had very clear personal credo’s but they were distinctly different essays. Robin Baudier’s essay covered an unusual blessing in terrible circumstances, while George Bowering discussed the joy and divine serenity in music, poetry, and becoming involved in an artist/author’s mind through their work.
The two essay’s share a common ground when they speak of a divine and higher power. Baudier’s essay discusses her belief in divine power when she talks about being blessed even in unwarranted circumstances. Bowering’s entire essay is centered around his belief in the divine and a spiritual connection between people when they experience the mind of another person. Both author’s believe in a spiritual being having control in their lives.
Each author’s purpose differs as well. Baudier shares her experience in her essay, while Bowering is about explaining, demonstrating, and encouraging the reader to share in an experience that he has had. But, both are very effective with their rhetorical strategies. Baudier’s essay, however, uses a personal rhetorical strategy to connect with readers. She gets on the same level as the reader and uses descriptions of her family and doesn’t try to sound above the reader. Bowering, however, uses very visual descriptions to get inside the reader’s head and connect with them on that personal level.
Persona:
Bowering gives his persona by saying who he is and name-dropping big name artists. He makes a statement about his belief and then backs it up with examples and real-life experiences.
Baudier gives her persona by make it known that she is well familiar with her home-town and is well educated and persevering because she worked hard for two years to finally get the job she wanted, only to quit because of hurricane Katrina.
The two essay’s share a common ground when they speak of a divine and higher power. Baudier’s essay discusses her belief in divine power when she talks about being blessed even in unwarranted circumstances. Bowering’s entire essay is centered around his belief in the divine and a spiritual connection between people when they experience the mind of another person. Both author’s believe in a spiritual being having control in their lives.
Each author’s purpose differs as well. Baudier shares her experience in her essay, while Bowering is about explaining, demonstrating, and encouraging the reader to share in an experience that he has had. But, both are very effective with their rhetorical strategies. Baudier’s essay, however, uses a personal rhetorical strategy to connect with readers. She gets on the same level as the reader and uses descriptions of her family and doesn’t try to sound above the reader. Bowering, however, uses very visual descriptions to get inside the reader’s head and connect with them on that personal level.
Persona:
Bowering gives his persona by saying who he is and name-dropping big name artists. He makes a statement about his belief and then backs it up with examples and real-life experiences.
Baudier gives her persona by make it known that she is well familiar with her home-town and is well educated and persevering because she worked hard for two years to finally get the job she wanted, only to quit because of hurricane Katrina.
aztecs vs. greeks
I believe that Charles Murray is right to a certain extent. He makes a valid point in that people of exceptionally high intelligence need to use their knowledge for the greater good. Their knowledge should not go un-used and un-appreciated, but only if they are using it to benefit the greater society. People with exceptional intelligence are blessed and should share their blessing with others. Therefore, they should be allowed to attend a different school to hone their talents, but a school that teaches and helps the students to use their talents for useful and beneficial activities.
What happens to those people who are not exceptionally gifted intellectually? They should definitely not be ignored! There needs to be a balance created between the two groups of people to great stability and harmony. A world with only intellectually gifted people would not only be boring but there would be no means for which to measure growth and learning, everyone would be the same. Each person has a gift, talent, opinion, etc. and whether they are intellectually gifted or not everyone is important to the progress of society. Everyone has something to give and should give it! It is not possible to ignore the greater percentage of society and look down upon them. Society should also strive to push for excellence in those people not exceptionally gifted. This way society can grow, develop, progress, and become balanced.
So yes, I do agree with Murray that those people who are blessed with exceptional talents should hone their skills and use them to be beneficial. But, I disagree that all attention should only be focused on those exceptionally intellectual. That would mean the rest of the population is “wasted.” Everyone should receive special attention and equal opportunities specified to their talents. This way everyone can benefit from those exceptionally gifted people ad flourish on their own.
What happens to those people who are not exceptionally gifted intellectually? They should definitely not be ignored! There needs to be a balance created between the two groups of people to great stability and harmony. A world with only intellectually gifted people would not only be boring but there would be no means for which to measure growth and learning, everyone would be the same. Each person has a gift, talent, opinion, etc. and whether they are intellectually gifted or not everyone is important to the progress of society. Everyone has something to give and should give it! It is not possible to ignore the greater percentage of society and look down upon them. Society should also strive to push for excellence in those people not exceptionally gifted. This way society can grow, develop, progress, and become balanced.
So yes, I do agree with Murray that those people who are blessed with exceptional talents should hone their skills and use them to be beneficial. But, I disagree that all attention should only be focused on those exceptionally intellectual. That would mean the rest of the population is “wasted.” Everyone should receive special attention and equal opportunities specified to their talents. This way everyone can benefit from those exceptionally gifted people ad flourish on their own.
Burke's parlor metaphor
"Where does the drama get its materials? From the “unending conversation” that is going on at the point in history when we are born. Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer him; another comes to your defense; another aligns himself against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending upon the quality of your ally’s assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress."
RESPONSE!
According to Burke, intellectual discussion is unending. It has been started before our time and will continue on after our time. He uses the metaphor of a heated discussion to bring some visual effect into mind; and we are just a momentary addition to the never-ending discussion. We come into the discussion as if entering a river along the side bank, not at the source or mouth. The main emphasize of Burke’s commentary is on the timelessness of intellectual conception. In the second sentence he already uses the phrase “unending conversation.” Right off the bat Burke is setting the notion you are not beginning or ending the discussion. A parallel metaphor is to imagine becoming a student at Oxford University. The university was there before you attended and will continue to exist after you have graduated. You, the student, are merely a contribution to the great learning that goes on.
The metaphor Burke uses values the discussion in order to attain a deeper level of learning and intellectual growth. It is not possible to have an intelligent conversation where there is no presentation of opposing ideas to make people think deeper into why they believe what they believe. Simply stating an option does not necessarily mean someone has intelligence.
Burke’s metaphor does, however, skims over the growth that does happen during an intellectual discussion. Each new point made brings out new ideas and concepts that might not have been thought of before. The more thoughtful and challenging the question or statement, the more discoveries are made. It’s a two lane street not a one way road.
RESPONSE!
According to Burke, intellectual discussion is unending. It has been started before our time and will continue on after our time. He uses the metaphor of a heated discussion to bring some visual effect into mind; and we are just a momentary addition to the never-ending discussion. We come into the discussion as if entering a river along the side bank, not at the source or mouth. The main emphasize of Burke’s commentary is on the timelessness of intellectual conception. In the second sentence he already uses the phrase “unending conversation.” Right off the bat Burke is setting the notion you are not beginning or ending the discussion. A parallel metaphor is to imagine becoming a student at Oxford University. The university was there before you attended and will continue to exist after you have graduated. You, the student, are merely a contribution to the great learning that goes on.
The metaphor Burke uses values the discussion in order to attain a deeper level of learning and intellectual growth. It is not possible to have an intelligent conversation where there is no presentation of opposing ideas to make people think deeper into why they believe what they believe. Simply stating an option does not necessarily mean someone has intelligence.
Burke’s metaphor does, however, skims over the growth that does happen during an intellectual discussion. Each new point made brings out new ideas and concepts that might not have been thought of before. The more thoughtful and challenging the question or statement, the more discoveries are made. It’s a two lane street not a one way road.
shooting an elephant
The author of “Shooting an Elephant” uses phronesis to convey is attitude about shooting the elephant. He makes it very clear that he is a European and therefore higher up than a Burmese and by extension, more logical. I had committed myself to doing it when I sent for the rifle. A sahib has got to act like a sahib; he has got to appear resolute, to know his own mind and do definite things. When is in inner turmoil trying to decide whether or not to shoot the elephant, he goes about justifying his final decision to make him seem logical and not as uncertain and “spine-less” as he really was. Going through the agony of indecisiveness, the author came to some realizations about imperialism and the British Empire in general. The author then uses virtue to explain his beliefs and insight into the inner workings of tyranny. He makes the connection explicitly between his inability to go with his gut and not shoot the elephant when he has those 2000 Burmese behind him watching and imperialism. “And it was at this moment, as I stood there with the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man's dominion in the East.” The author gets a glimpse into the “behind the scenes” of what the British rulers may have felt with regard to Burma. His attitude gets conveyed and skewed by the subconscious pressure put on by the people watching even though he consciously considers the Burmese to be lower than him. Had he been on his own, the author would not have shot the elephant. But, with so many people watching him and expecting him to shoot it, he “knew” he had to because he didn’t want to appear weak and/or get laughed at. It’s the same type of feelings that teenagers deal with in social settings. Peer pressure is extremely powerful and, unfortunately for the elephant, extremely effective.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)