Thursday Progress

Today, I had someone check to see if my paper made sense. It made sense!

Wednesday Progress

Today, I finished my essay. I had some trouble argueing why the government shouldn't fund arts, but I think I managed.I have yet to have someone else read it and check to see if it makes sense. I'll do that tonight.

Tuesday Progress

Today, I did what I didn’t do yesterday. I got my counter-evidence for my paper, wrote my opening paragraph, and explained the situation of why Mayor Ballard is terminating arts funding in Indianapolis.

Monday progress

Today, I was working on my history paper. I didn’t physically do anything to work on my paper, but I thought of what I should have done. I should have gotten my counter-evidence for my paper, and written my opening paragraph and perhaps began on explaining the situation of why Mayor Ballard is terminating arts funding in Indianapolis.

more progress

Yesterday, my mom and my friend edited my paper (to make sure I made sense!) Normally, I’m ok, but sometimes things that I write don’t make sense to other people, (something I need to work on).
What I thought was interesting, was that both my mom and my friend knew that the arts funds were getting cut, but none of them knew that it is going to be completely terminated in three years. Also, they didn’t know all that the Arts Council of Indianapolis does to promote art in the area. I think people need to be more aware of the benefits of art in the world, and all that the Arts Council of Indianapolis does. I believe if the people spoke out about the elimination of art on our city, and how we want art to be a larger part of our lives, then the government would have to listen! It seems that today, everyone just talks about football and sports, but if people were exposed to more art then they could appreciate it more! This lack of appreciation and exposure to arts is why people aren’t that concerned about it’s elimination. Without art, the world would be so dull and boring! It would be aweful!
Today, I turned in my proposal!

progress 2

Today, I did a lot more than I expected to get accomplished! I started jut thinking that I was going to get my opening paragraph written, but then I ended up just finishing the whole proposal! I really got into it, so I figured- why stop when you’re on a roll? So I kept going!
I, Personally, don’t understand why the government would want to stop funding the arts. If the arts help deter child delinquency, lessen drop out rates, and improve academic achievement, then why would that want to be stopped? This is exactly what the government is looking to improve, yet they’re trying to eliminate one of the main things that helps it. Funding the arts is also a lot less costly than funding sports teams! I imagine it would also be a lot easier too! It isn’t logical, or probable to eliminate the arts. Art brings joy and happiness to society, which is crucial currently with so much stress and violence around.
Tomorrow, I think I’m going to have someone else read it so they can edit my paper and give me their opinion. I edited it myself for grammar and spelling, but usually I’m a little biased when I have to judge my own papers!

Working on Project

Over the break, I decided that I wanted to do the individual opportunity project over arts funding in Indianapolis. I knew it was being cut, but what I didn’t know was that in three years, they’re planning to eliminate it completely! This will mean no arts in schools, and no arts funding to companies from the government.
Today, I did some more research and found some statistics to help support my argument. According to studies at UCLA, “the arts make a tremendous impact on the developmental growth of every child and has proven to improve learning and decrease drop-out rates across every socio-economic category.” The U.S. Department of Justice not only reinforces the past study, but also says that the
arts have a measurable impact on youth at risk in deterring delinquent behavior and truancy problems.” The Institute for Community Development and the Arts says that “art diverts youth from gangs, drugs, and the juvenile justice system, provides a more cost-effective approach than traditional programs such as midnight basketball or juvenile boot camps, reduces truancy, and improves academic performance, builds critical self-discipline, communication and job skills.”
In order to reduce this, the Arts Council of Indianapolis provides free concerts in neighborhood parks and community centers, arts programs in juvenile justice centers, correctional facilities, community centers, neighborhood youth clubs, womens’ and homeless shelters, health care facilities, mentorships, day camps, internships, as well as after school programs. They also provide programs for senior citizens, community and neighborhood gatherings, and many others.
The Arts are something that everyone can enjoy. The arts are also a large part of my life, considering I’m a dancer. The arts funding cut in Indianapolis is one of the worst, if not the worst, idea that I’ve heard about in a long time. After this project, I would also like to do something and take action about it.

KKK

Yes, I think his story offers a credible way of overcoming misunderstanding and hatred between races. After all, it wasn’t a fictional story. It would be easy to believe that this story could have never happened and that it’s uncredible and ficticious, but if you have even an ounce of hope in your body, you can believe that something like this really happened! This man overcame his prejudice, just by talking and communicating with others of different opinions! It’s something close to a miracle, but it’s wonderful!
Yes, I think this could work on a larger scale, but I don’t think it would affect all of the people in the meeting. I believe a handful of the population in the meeting would walk out completely changed, but not absolutely all of them. Of course, I’m not one to doubt any glimpse of hope there could be, but I believe not everyone would be affected. But who am I to predict whether or not a miracle will happen or not?

Yoshino

Yoshino says that “the mainstream is a myth” because no one is purely mainstream. Mainstream is the concept of the absolute norm, with no difference whatsoever. We’re all different in someway, therefore no one can be completely mainstream. There are many qualities that are necessary to be mainstream, and no one has all of those qualities naturally, they have to disguise themselves into that mainstream. There can never be a true natural mainstream because we’re all too diverse. Most Americans try and conform to the mainstream, but they’re covering up everything about them that isn’t mainstream- therefore they’re not truly mainstream.
His reasoning is very persuasive because we can all relate to this. Whether the reader is part of the population that tries to conform to the mainstream, or part of the population that strives to be unique- it relates to all of us whether we want it to or not.

Life in the North

Life in the north isn’t all that Linda thought it would be at all. Linda is living day by day, fearing for her life because she is still a slave. She realizes that even if she isn’t a slave, people still don’t treat her equally because she’s African American, and it’s very similar to the south where she came from. Linda finally attains her freedom from a white patron purchasing her freedom. She is so happy that she is finally free, but then she’s also sad because she wasn’t born free. She isn’t happy to live in such a place where freedom has to be bought for certain people, and where people of a different ethnicity are treated with such cruelty and indignity. She doesn’t quite know if she should be happy or sad or angry, or what to do.

Emotional Passage

“Are doctors of divinity blind, or are they hypocrites? I suppose some are the one, and some are the other; but I think if they felt the interest in the poor and the lowly, that they ought to feel, they would not be so easily blinded.”
This was a particularly emotional passage for me because of the feeling behind it. Linda is such a caring and nice girl, and she has such intellectual thoughts, that it makes me sad that she is so abused.
The author combines her feelings with her intellectualness and it simply makes the reader feel for the character. She uses her thoughts and her inner questions to make us feel pity and sorrow for her, which is a very advanced tactic for appealing to pathos. Also, she uses a disability in her thought/question, which is a clever way to appeal to emotions. We all feel more emotions for someone with a natural disability, and including it in an emotional passage makes it even more emotional.

Incidents in the life of a slave girl

When writing such violent and sad stories, it is important that they’re truth and not fiction. If the book was fiction, then most people wouldn’t believe that all of these terrible things could happen to anyone. This is a powerful novel, and in order for these novels to serve their purpose of educating people about how ruthless slavery was, people need to know that this really happened.
It is important that the editor didn’t clean up the language or content because it adds to the appeal to pathos. When they hear such harsh language spoken to someone, it appeals to their emotions. Also, this is not fiction. The author has to tell the account of what happened the way it really did- not a died down version for appropriateness. The situation wasn’t appropriate. That would diffuse the purpose. This book wasn’t written for young children, it was written for teenagers and adults to educate them on what happened in times of slavery- as awful as it might be.

CNN election coverage

I was watching the election coverage on CNN at about 9:00 and I noticed something highly upsetting. When presenting the news on the election, the reporters seemed to be noticeably biased toward how they reported the news. If they were a McCain supporter, then they would be happier when the republicans were leading, and they would be gloomier, and trying to defend their republican view when Obama was leading, and vice versa for the democrats. This was very surprising to me since I didn’t think that such a reputable station would be so biased toward such an important election. However, they did present some very interesting studies. Studies show that more people who thought race mattered, voted for Obama than McCain, and even the ones who didn’t thin race mattered, voted more for Obama. Also, those who thought age mattered, voted more for Obama by a long shot, and those who didn’t think age mattered also voted more for Obama. These were interesting statistics because age was Obama’s largest downfall, however it turned out to be an advantage. The race statistic surprised me, but it surprised me in a better way! I’m happier that there are less people racist than those who aren’t!
I was very disappointed, however, with the republican’s, “booing”, during McCain’s speech. That was probably the rudest thing I’ve ever seen in my life. How would it feel to be, “booed”, in front of almost all of America? Not that I particularly like McCain at all, but even I felt sorry for him. I also commend McCain on his concession speech. It was the best speech he has given so far. After all these months, he has finally got the hang of public speaking!
I’m overjoyed that Obama won, but I’m surprised at how rude and biased people can be toward important events. Although, I did make a mental note- when I’m reporting the presidential election on the news station (hopefully), I can’t show my biases!

Wachtel responce

I, surprisingly, have not had a confrontation about race that was set in a harmful manner; however, I have had a confrontation about a prejudice with someone whom I don’t wish to name. This person was not prejudice in a harmful or dangerous way, in other words, she didn’t pose as a harmful threat towards those whom she was prejudice towards, but she certainly had prejudice thoughts. This person was prejudice toward people of a different religion.
She was very devout to her religion, and believed that anyone who didn’t believe in her religion was going to hell. She would push her religion on people, and talk badly about those who weren’t worshiping in the same religion. I had this encountering when I was very young, and she was telling me how if I didn’t do “x”, “y”, and “z”, then I would go to hell, and so would everyone else if they didn’t. Being two years old, I didn’t try to argue much, but I do think I made a difference. I cried, and when she became upset and asked me why I was crying, I said (I don’t remember exactly what), but something close to, “That’s not very nice”, and resumed crying. Not many people can take making a two year old cry and be completely guilt-free. By saying and doing what I did, I think I made her question if not her beliefs, then at least her actions. Since then, she hasn’t said anything like that to me. I’m not sure if I really changed her beliefs at two, but I’m proud to say that I at least changed her actions toward others.
After reading Wachtel’s article, I believe I understand the experience differently. Most people don’t get through to a racist person because they are making accusations themselves against them. By appealing to someone’s emotions and making them question their morals themselves, it will be more affective.

Parillo

Parillo talks about learning that takes place in the early childhood years that is from your parents or childhood guardians. These beliefs and ideas that were thrust upon you when you were younger, and concepts that you still believe throughout your life, and into adulthood. There are steps to this prejudice, and they fully show in your older years. When I was younger, I took, and still take, very intensive ballet. I was taught that ballet is the most difficult form of dance. It is technically, and artistically harder, than jazz, tap, and hip-hop. Although my prejudice isn’t very strong, I still believe that ballet is one of the hardest, if not the hardest art form of dance. This is what my ballet teachers instilled in my brain at a young age, and is what I continue to somewhat believe.

p. 503 # 2

Cose believes that official investigation, apology, and restitution are important to the victims of great historic injustices or to their descendants because it not only helps them, but it furthers the community. It is the country’s job to acknowledge their mistakes, and pay their debt to those they owe it to. This is needed in order for the country to move on, and become better as a whole. It is stated, “By finally admitting a wrong, a nation does not destroy its integrity, but rather reinforces the sincerity of its commitment to the constitution, and hence, to the people.” Of course, making mistakes are bad, especially in cases such as slavery and violence, but if the nation admits its wrong and tries to fix it, then it is reinforcing the use of the constitution, and serving the people. It is important to society as a whole because it is necessary for the country to keep governing according to the constitution, because that’s what our country is founded on. We reinforce our values by exercising our country’s morals in the constitution, which furthers our integrity and reinforces our country’s values.

Cora Tucker vs. Willy Loman

Cora Tucker is a hard working woman, who has a realistic perception of what she has done. Willy Loman, only perceives that he is hard working, and has pho-perceptions of what he has done. It is a matter of comparing a realist to an idealist.
Cora Tucker leads rallies, is self- motivated, and believes that hard-work gets you to your goal. Willy Loman isn’t necessarily unmotivated, but he certainly isn’t self-motivated, and he believes that good looks and being well-liked will lead you to success. Willy Loman relies on Linda for motivation and encouragement, whereas Cora Tucker neither has any, nor particularly needs anyone or anything.
Any job requiring self-motivation, or actual skill and hard work would be where Willy Loman would fail. Willy Loman survives on “a smile and a shoe shine”, and not on having skill and making your self work hard. Leading rallies all by yourself, or being any sort of authority figure would not be a feasible job for Willy Loman.
Although one might think that a woman like Cora Tucker could do almost anything, (besides teach an English class), I don’t believe she would be able to succeed as a salesman. If you’re a salesman, it doesn’t necessarily matter how hard you work- it’s how good you are at selling yourself as a well-liked and good-looking salesman. Someone like Cora Tucker would most likely quickly become very frustrated and aggravated with this job, seeing as she would not be able to present herself as well to the customers because of her poor English and commanding and harsh personality.
Cora Tucker and Willy Loman are two completely opposite people, and where one would fail, the other would succeed, and vice versa.

Arthur Miller and Willy Loman's opinions about success

Willy Loman believes that if you have a good personality, you’re attractive, and you’re well-liked, then that’s all you need to be successful. Therefore, according to Willy Loman, indivudual opportunity definitely exists if you have all of these things. However, if you don’t have any of these things, then individual opportunity is not feasible. I think this is because of his salesman background. All Willy Loman knows, is sales, and how to sell. All of what he says about what it takes to be successful is true- if you’re a salesman. People will want to buy things from you if they like you, other people like you, and you are a friendly looking fellow. That is the general nature of humans. For a salesman, that is really all you need to be successful.
Arthur Miller doesn’t believe that a good personality, attractiveness, and being well-liked is all you need for success. He shows this through his character, Biff. Biff is an attractive, well-liked man with a good personality, however he was not successful. I believe that Miller was conveying the typical American ideal thought of individual opportunity in the U.S. through Willy Loman, and proving the truth of it being incorrect through his example with Biff. I also think it is key that Miller made Willy Loman an insane man. Miller thinks that it is an absolutely radical idea to believe in individual opportunity being so possible in America. I think that the reason Miller made Biff emphasize his beliefs about individual opportunity so much is because that’s what the government says, and that’s what America is founded on. It seems to me that Miller made Willy Loman the American idealist for indivudial opportunity, and Biff the proof that it isn’t true.

Death of Salesman Discussion Question

Was Willy Loman’s unaccepting and aggressive nature toward his son Biff understandable, or uncalled for?

progress on the speech

So far, I have my opening attention getter- and a more specific idea of my opening paragraph. I have the body, and the conclusion already written. Sometimes, I like to work backwards because when I know the rest of my speech, it’s easier to write an introduction for it. For my attention getter, I’m going to appeal to pathos and describe a small child in the hospital with a serious illness. Although the Riley Foundation is Indianapolis-based, I believe I’m going to also emphasize the fact that you can help the community, and the whole world- just by donating to the Riley Foundation. I’m having a little bit of trouble with my rebuttal though- how could the Riley Foundation be bad? Who would protest against helping children live and recover from illnesses? I’m not quite sure what I’m going to do about that, but I’m sure I’ll think of something.

Speeches 2

Today’s presentations were fantastic! They were a little rushed due to the time frame, but altogether it was just as good as yesterday’s! I also enjoyed the process of donating, I thought that made it a lot more realistic and exciting. I thought it was extremely difficult to choose who to give the money to! Everyone was very compelling in their speeches, and I wanted to give my twenty dollars to everyone! I like how everyone was very informative in their speech- it sounded like they really worked at the charity, and knew everything about it!

Idea for Speech

For the persuasive speech, I think I will do the Riley Children’s Foundation. The Riley Children’s Foundation saves lives, helps educate doctors in less-fortunate countries, and even has a global adoption program. I believe I can appeal to logos, pathos, and ethos in this argument.
I can appeal to logos by saying what the doctors do to help educate the less-fortunate doctors, and saying how that helps society and creates a healthier community and world.
I can appeal to ethos by describing the patients in the hospital, and how they are suffering from terrible illnesses, and then describe how they are helped by the doctors and the faculty in a bright and healthy environment.
I can appeal to ethos by describing my short experience at Riley Children’s Hospital when I was younger, and what all I saw there, and how I will never forget it.
I believe this will encourage everyone to donate to the Riley Children’s Foundation. Who doesn’t want to help small children recover from illnesses and find a happy home?

monday presentations

I thought today’s presentations were very well-researched. Everyone who presented seemed to be very well-informed about their topic. Also, everyone appealed to ethos, pathos, and logos in their speeches. This is very hard to do, but they all did it very well. I was especially impressed with Andrew’s speech. Not only was he very well-researched, but he had excellent presentation, and really commanded the lecturn. All in all, I thought today’s presentations were excellent.

self-reliance

In the essay, “Self Reliance” by Ralph Emerson, he conveys that we should rely on our intuition, and what is right for ourselves. We shouldn’t conform to others, and we should follow where God leads us. This will lead to true success.
Emerson says that we should act on what we believe and what we feel, and not take into account what others say. What we feel is what we believe, and we should express what we believe. If we express how other people believe, then we aren’t being true to ourselves- we’d just be conforming. What we feel and think derives directly from God, and if we aren’t following the path that God wants us to follow, then this will not lead to true success. This will lead to conformity.
I agree with Emerson in one sense- the sense that all of this leads to true success, but I don’t agree that it is, “just that easy.” Following your heart and soul that is lead by God is most certainly not easy. We all conform to an extent- we’re forced to. Some may accomplish “success”, but only to the today’s society’s definition of success- money and riches. True success derives from being yourself, and finding your true self through whatever, or who ever you may believe in. Only then, will you have accomplished all that you can, and found true success within yourself through the path of your chosen belief. This is not a typical form of success, but it is a self-success that someone rarely achieves.

Class of America- 2003

In the essay, “Class of America- 2003”, Gregory Mantsios makes an implicit case that essentially says that the wealthy are exploiting the poor. However, he does not simply assume this. He has evidence to back it up. The data the Mantsios provides could be interpreted in different ways, but it is all in how you look at it.
The wealthy are simply using the poor for their “dirty work”, and not helping them. Mantsios says that the wealthy upper class should be helping the poor, but they don’t because the need the poor. If society didn’t have lower class citizens, then there would be no one to work at McDonalds, or to clean their houses, or make them dinner. The wealthy simply use the poor for the work that they don’t want to do. Most of the upper class do everything they can in order to refrain from giving money to the poor, including calling themselves middle class, etc…
This is an argument that could easily be made on assumptions from just looking at society. However, Mantsios has evidence and data to support his argument. He has data with numbers that explain and support his argument in a very effective manner. For example, he says that “Sixty percent of the American population holds less than 6 percent of the nation’s wealth.” This is a proven fact, and cannot be disputed. Mantsios also provided profiles of American workers, which prove their economic status. This is data that cannot be argued with, however, it can be looked at in a different light.
Like all data, you can look at it in a positive light, or a negative light. You can view the glass half full, or half empty. Mantsios looks at the data in a more negative light; however, it is also a more realistic light. You could, in theory, look at everything the opposite way the Mantsios does and say that everything is improving and there is no class difference, but then there would be no real purpose for the essay. Mantsios looks at this data in the most realistic way based on society, and the way in which it functions.
Mantsios makes a very well researched and realistic argument about class in society. He backs up his argument with evidence and observations from society to create a very believable and accurate argument about the role of class in society today.

Alger v.s. Cruz

In Alger’s story, the idyllic theme of the American Dream being that of going from rags and riches to rich and successful directly contrasts Cruz’s apparent message of the American Dream not really being such a dream after all. Alger says that the American Dream is a wonderful thing- who could ask for anything more? Whereas Cruz says that the American Dream is filled with racism and is only governed by business people who fear being legally prosecuted as racist.
Dick (from Alger’s story) is simply happy to be achieving his dream and making money. Dick doesn’t think of the conditions in which he is hired, other then the saving of another’s life. Dick’s idea of the American Dream is that if you work hard, and take chances, then the dream will come to you. That is what America is all about for immigrants. However, in Cruz’s story, he looks at why he is hired. Cruz says that it is nice, and humans are generally inclined to think the way Dick does, but that is not the case. Businessmen hire immigrants so they won’t be violating the non-racist law. Cruz says that the dream isn’t really a dream (unless you think racism could be included in a dream). Cruz says that it doesn’t necessarily matter how hard you work, it’s if the company needs someone of a different race so as not to look racist.
However, the ideas are similar in that the American Dream can be difficult to look down upon. Cruz says that it is excruciatingly difficult to say that the American Dream is a bad thing, when he has so much money due to the American Dream. They both agree that the American Dream is good in that immigrants gain money and a better life, however Cruz simply notes the conditions that the immigrants are hired, which makes it a negative idea.

"Ragged Dick"

In order to be successful, you must work hard, take a chance, and you will eventually be rewarded. This is an implicit argument that is made in “Ragged Dick”, by Horatio Alger. Dick works as a low-wage worker, but then decides that he really wants to work in a counting-room. He saved up one hundred dollars, and decided to reward himself by taking a boat ride. On that boat ride, he saved a little boy from drowning and was offered a much higher-paying job as a clerk in a counting-room by the little boy’s father.
Dick worked very hard to save up one hundred dollars while working at his previous job at only three dollars per hour. Dick was very motivated, and he never gave up. He had applied to many other counting-rooms, but was never accepted. Dick however, didn’t give up, and it paid off. Having motivation and working hard is the only way to be successful. If you want something then you have to work for it.
Dick would have never gotten the job as an accountant if he hadn’t acted on impulse, jumped in the water, and saved the boy from drowning. Dick was a morally good person with a good heart, and he took a chance and risked his life to save another. He took a chance that possibly could have killed him, but he took it at the chance of possibly saving the life of another. Sometimes, taking chances is the only way to move on in life, because you will never know what could have happened if you don’t take a chance. Dick took a chance, and another successful opportunity opened for him.
Alger conveys this is an implicit argument by creating the story of Dick and showing how he got his opportunity to be successful. Alger writes about how Dick worked very hard to raise one hundred dollars, and how he acted on impulse to save the child, and what his reward was- success. Alger doesn’t directly come out and state that in order to be successful you must work hard and take a chance, but instead conveys this message implicitly by showing the effects of hard work and taking a chance in a story-like argumentative form.

Visual Arguments

A lot of times, visual arguments are more effective. This is because visual arguments enhance logos, pathos, and ethos of an argument by supporting or clarifying the logical core of an argument, having a more imaginative effect on the audience, and enhancing the author’s credibility or authority. Sometimes, arguments presented on a piece of paper have a stronger effect than an auditory argument. Some visual arguments include photographs, drawings, graphics, and page and text design such as a PowerPoint. Things like this can make your argument seem more official and important.
If you present your argument as a photograph, drawing, or graphic, then your argument might be perceived as dealing with the arts, and would be much more effective than an auditory argument when dealing with artists. People would also think that this is a big issue, because someone has taken a long amount of time to create something on that subject. This gives the argument more importance. If you use a page and text design, or graphs, then this will also enhance your argument when presented to the correct audience. If presented to a business audience, this could give your audience a larger sense of the issue by giving them something to physically see. Also, graphs can make arguments seem more official, and enhance authority. People will be more susceptible to something if there is visual evidence of statistics.
Also, when making a commercial or similar advertisement, people will be more inclined to buy something if they associate it with a pleasant image. They will be more likely to buy a laptop that has a commercial with smiling people working on a laptop, then an ad about a laptop with no image whatsoever. The advertisement must be appealing to the audience, and often an image can enhance in argument and make it more appealing.
Of course, you must present your visual argument correctly. There are certain fonts, backgrounds, and text to use, and not to use, but if you use the assets of a visual argument correctly, then it should be more effective than an auditory argument.

Media Ethics

Ethos and pathos are very strong rhetorical devices. Writers need to understand their responsibilities and understand the result of their writing before it is published. Most of the time, our media lives up to these standards, but occasionally, they don’t.
Pathos is a rhetorical device that appeals to emotions and imaginative sympathies. Pathos, when used correctly, certainly can have a very strong effect on an audience, however, must be used correctly. You must write according to your age group. If you are writing for small children, you shouldn’t use extreme violence or detail in pain scenes. As a writer, you have a responsibility to persuade and provide information for your audience, but do so in a humane way. Also, you shouldn’t overdo pathos to create such an unbearable argument that the reader will become depressed. You shouldn’t give the reader more information than they can healthily handle. This goes for any age group.
Ethos is extremely effective, but can easily be misused. Ethos deals with the tone and style of the piece, and how you reinforce your argument. This can’t easily be done unethically, but people still manage to. You can’t present your argument in a way that isn’t appropriate for your audience. By writing an argument, you have a responsibility to keep your reader’s emotions intact all through and after the argument. Present your argument is a way where no one takes offense to your style or what you’re saying. It will diminish your credibility, and demean your ethos.
Writers have media ethics that are guaranteed to be followed. The very least of the media ethics include not giving the name of a minor, and not destroying the reputation of anyone in the article. This is summarized as truth, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability This is most always followed, except for an occasional mishap where a reporter doesn’t focus on the facts, and focuses more on destroying the reputation on someone. The media’s job is to report facts accurately and fairly, and not with the intention of tearing someone down. Every magazine, news station, etc… has there own standards on ethics, (some higher than others), but the general standard of ethics must be, and almost always are, followed. If they are not followed, then the media reporter is arrested. All media, journalism, reporter, etc… majors are required to take an ethics class in college that teaches them the ethics and responsibility they have as a reporter, and is most always followed.

Lagley v.s. Levin

David Lagley and Mike Levin use similar types of arguments to support their causes. Although Skateboarding (David Lagley) and Torture (Mike Levin) are two very different subjects, they both had similar explanations in theory.
In “A Plea for Fair Treatment of Skateboarders, David Lagley says, “But in general skateboarders help the environment more than they hurt it.” He also says, “In the bigger picture, infrequent repair of curbs and benches is cheaper then attempts to heal the ozone. In “A Case for Torture”, Mike Levin says that overall, it would be better to kill the terrorist than the innocent people. Their claims both ask you to look at “the big picture” or the “overall outcome.” In their argument, they minimize the small damage, and only think about the positive ending. They demean the damage that happens in the process of their actions, and amplify the optimistic side of the outcome. They’re correct in that the overall outcome is desirable, but the means and damage that come along with the desired outcome, isn’t appealing. Lagley says that although skateboarding at public places hurts the concrete, mildly damages property, and can be disruptive, the environmental advantage clearly outweigh the property damage. Levin says that the benefit of saving innocent lives outweigh the much less beneficial killing of the terrorist.
Both authors are guilty of this, but Levin is a little bit more sneaky and inconspicuous. He makes the demeaning less noticeable, and Lagley’s is more prominent.

Pseudo-Argument

When I was in 8th grade, my friend and I had the opportunity to go to Malaga, Spain for two weeks and live with a host family. My whole 8th grade class was going, and she was the only one who couldn’t go. She provided several reasons why she should be able to go, but she was still not allowed to go. After two weeks, she gave up, realizing that it was clearly a pseudo-argument. Her mother wasn’t going to listen to reason, and her mind wasn’t going to be changed.
She doesn’t know how many reasons she provided, but her mother simply wouldn’t listen. Some of her reasons were: it would improve her Spanish, she’s plenty responsible, it would be a good experience, and she would get to call her mom every night. Her mother couldn’t supply any reasons for not letting her go except, “I’m your mother, and I’m not letting you go.” It was a hopeless pseudo-argument.
There are two requirements for an argument- reasonable participants who operate within the conventions of reasonable behavior, and potentially sharable assumptions that can serve as a starting place or foundation for the argument. In this particular pseudo argument, her mother wasn’t a reasonable participant who operated within the conventions of reasonable behavior. Her mother went into the argument being determined not to let her mind be changed. Her mother’s overprotective mindset wouldn’t let her be reasoned with explanations as to why my friend should go. When one person goes into an argument thinking like this, it destroys the whole argument. It is no longer an argument.

Pathos as a powerful rhetoric advice

Out of the three categories of arguments that we have learned, pathos is the most powerful rhetorical device to appeal to the audience’s imaginative sympathies. Using pathos can deeper the appreciation of the argument by engaging the audience in emotional and imaginative appeals, and make the reader feel and see what the writer does, and therefore making a pathetic appeal. Pathos is very effective when used correctly, but can be extremely ineffective when used incorrectly, which is why it is such a hard rhetorical device to use. If your argument stimulating the emotions isn’t powerful enough, then the argument won’t have any affect; however, you can’t overdo the emotional appeal and try to drown your audience in too many emotions, or the argument will become too fake.
The main reason pathos is such a powerful rhetorical device is because it appeals to imaginative sympathies. People are highly influenced by appeal to emotions. For example, if a writer is providing an argument dealing with Africa or Darfur and genocide, they might use pathos to appeal to sadder and more somber emotions, therefore making people want to help the situation. If a writer was providing an argument that parks are a good influence on young society, they might use pathos to appeal to happier emotions and making people want to build more parks. You decide which emotions you want to appeal to by asking yourself as a writer things such as: “How can I make the reader open to my message? How can I best appeal to my reader’s values and interests? How can I engage my reader emotionally and imaginatively?”
Using logic or facts are certainly affective at proving a point, but if you want to make your reader take action, pathos would be the best rhetorical device. People are more inclined to believe, or take action, to something that makes them feel something emotionally or sympathize with an argument.

responce to "A Case for Torture"

In the article, “A Case of Torture”, Michael Levin, the author, presents an argument that augments the, most commonly opposed, idea of torture. He does this by providing situations in which the method that I formerly thought of as inhumane torture would be the only humane method to use. His prime argument is that: if torturing someone who means to harm an innocent life, or multiple innocent lives, will save the innocent(s) lives, then the torturing of the harmful person is necessary.
Levin provides a situation where a terrorist is going to kill thousands of lives, so what do you do? Levin says that yes, torture is barbaric, but mass murder is far more barbaric. Levin says that although torture is most likely unconstitutional, the life of an innocent outweighs the unconstitutionality of torturing someone who is harming the innocent. Levin is not saying that torture is a good method for government, or that it should be used commonly; but he is saying that in extreme cases, torture is the only moral thing to do.
Yes, torture doesn’t always work. If a terrorist bomber sets a bomb at a theatre and the bomb will kill three hundred people in five minutes unless it is detonated, the terrorist could give false information during the torture, and the torture would be declared useless because it did not save the three hundred lives, but instead, killed three hundred and one lives, but what else could have been done? Torture doesn’t always work, but in some cases it does, so does it hurt to try?
I believe it doesn’t hurt to try, because when there’s no other option, all you can do is try, because if you don’t try, then you’ll never know if those three hundred innocent lives could have been saved.
Although Levin does use some biased and unlikely arguments in this article that deal with a survey of four, babies, and clever terrorists, the main idea in his article makes perfect sense. Torture should not be used unless absolutely necessary, but when necessary, it should be used.

Biotech foods

There is currently a political debate going on about biotech foods. The debate is largely concerning whether biotech foods should be sold, and whether they should have to identify themselves as “biotech foods.” I strongly believe that biotech foods should be further tested before being sold, and that if they are sold after testing, they should have to have a “biotech” label on them for easy identification.
I realize that biotech foods have become a large group in grocery stores, and very popular in our society today, but I don’t believe everyone buying the biotech foods knows the minimal research that has gone into biotech foods and the possible unsafety, or know that they’re buying biotech foods. I don’t believe that these are fair items to sell at least without forewarning.
Biotech foods haven’t been tested or studied enough to know the long-term effects on human consumption, or on the environment. Although they were approved by the FDA, I don’t believe they should have been because of the lack of knowledge of long term effects. Biotech food could very well cause cancer or other serious diseases or illnesses, but no one knows because it hasn’t been in grocery stores long enough for there to be a mass-outbreak of some terrible plague. Most citizens don’t know that biotech food could possibly be unsafe and harmful; they assume that it has to be fully tested before it is allowed on the market. It isn’t right to sell something in large corporate stores that isn’t scientifically tested to be completely unharmful to the human body, especially without a label!
Since biotech food is sold at grocery stores, there should be a label. Most people don’t know if they’re buying biotech food or not, or even what it is! It isn’t lawful to allow citizens to buy possibly harmful products without their knowing. Biotech food should have a large label for identification to give citizens forewarning about what they’re buying and the possible consequences. I also believe that biotech food companies need to put a large label on the food for libel reasons. If anything happens to the people who eat biotech foods, the biotech companies are no doubt going to get sued. Also, the places that sell biotech food would probably get sued also. It would be a good idea for everyone, if the biotech food companies put labels on their biotech food.
Biotech food shouldn’t be allowed to be sold without further studying and research done, and it isn’t fair to the people buying Biotech food if there isn’t a label labeling it. Further research and study needs to be done before Biotech food is released, for the safety of everyone.

genres

A genre is a “type of argument.” There are many types of genres that can be used for persuasion such as personal correspondence, letters to the editor, newspaper editorials and op-ed columns, public affairs or niche magazine articles, scholarly journals, organizational white papers, proposals, legal briefs and court decisions, public affairs advocacy advertisements, advocacy websites, blogs and informal electronic postings, visual arguments, and speeches. On page 24 of “Writing Arguments”, there is an example of a public affairs advocacy advertisement, and on page 1, there is an example of a visual argument. Both of these arguments are political, but the others have gone about presenting them in a different genre.
On page 24, they are telling us how genetically engineered foods are bad for health, and how they are dangerous for the environment and for society. Like most public affair advocacy advertisements, this advertisement has “an explicit bias”, and it ignores the complexity of the issue, and only focuses on one point of view without explaining how another point of view could be acceptable too. This advertisement is making fun of companies who make processed food. The advertiser is only stating one side of the facts, which makes her argument extremely biased. Although biased, her argument is extremely affective. Even though there is another opposing side to her argument, I’m more interested in this argument because it shows the possible dangers. This genre is very affective, as long as your argument isn’t so biased that it’s unbelievable.
On page 1, they are giving an example of a visual argument. Visual arguments tend to “make strong emotional appeals, often reducing complex issues to one powerful perspective.” This political cartoon does exactly that. I don’t, personally, find the cartoon very appealing or humorous, however I am biased due to my natural beliefs. Like visual arguments typically do, I believe they have reduced this issue a bit too much. This is a very sensitive and complex issue, and I believe they’ve simplified the argument too much to make any sort of point other than to make a little laugh at hippies.
How you present your argument (genres) can make a large impact on how the argument is perceived. What genre you use, depends on the audience, and what sort of point you are trying to get across. For example, I believe that the last visual argument was not an effective genre for that large of a political issue. I believe that argument would have better in a speech genre or in a magazine or newspaper article. Visual arguments and cartoons can be both funny and affective when used properly, but when not used properly, they have the opposite affect. However, the article on page 24 had a very affective persuasion genre that worked very well for the argument. What genre you should use, depends on the depth of your argument and what you want to convey.

implicit v.s. explicit arguments

The goal of an argument is to persuade an audience toward your point of view. There are, broadly speaking, two ways of doing this - an implicit argument, and an explicit argument. An explicit argument is a clearly stated argument that is arguing a point, with a thesis, reasons, and evidence. An implicit argument has the same intentions as an explicit argument, but is formed in ways such as poems, or pictures, and on the surface, doesn’t look like an argument. They both have the same outcome (persuading the reader toward your point of view), but the process of getting there is different.
An example of an explicit argument would be an essay. I state my point of view through a thesis statement that includes approximately three different reasons to support my argument. My next few paragraphs will have explanations, and typically facts, to support my reasons from the thesis statement. I then, end my essay, pulling everything together to make an organized ending that incorporates my thesis, my reasons, and my explanations into a paragraph. A definite way to tell an explicit argument from an implicit argument is that an explicit argument has a defined thesis, reasons, and explanations that are clearly stated early on in the piece.
An implicit argument does not have a defined thesis. You gather the thesis from the writing, which supports the unstated thesis. Implicit arguments are more ornamental and decorative with figurative language. For example, the poem on pages five and six of Writing Arguments there is a scene describing how horrifying wars are. After reading this poem, you are convinced that wars have no other purpose other than unleashing rage toward another country through spastic and untamed violence. The poem has an underlying thesis that is not mentioned, but after you read the poem, you come to toward a certain conclusion (that war is a horrible thing), which is undoubtedly the author’s thesis. Another example of an implicit argument is on page five. Although contrary to the past implicit argument, after looking at this photograph, you believe that war is noble and honorable. The poem, picture, etc… give reasons why you should believe something, without outwardly and directly telling you that you should believe it, thereby not giving away the author’s thesis - a very sly way of making an argument. Implicit arguments appeal more to your feelings through sentimental and emotion-provoking ways, such as viewing photographs, or describing ghastly vile situations.
Explicit arguments and implicit arguments are two very different ways of making an argument, but have the same intentions. Arguments have two specific pieces - the process and the outcome. The process for an explicit argument is direct and candid through a thesis statement. The process for an implicit argument isn’t bluntly stated, but instead, gives reasons through creating a mental image that direct you to believing a certain thing, without actually stating their purpose or thesis. The outcome, however, is the same. After reading the article, you come to believe a certain point of view, whether you knew that was the author’s intentions or not.

memoir

When I was thirteen years old, I had a particular ballet teacher that really made a difference in my life. It was during a summer dance camp program, and I will never forget it.
The man’s name is Scott Jovovich. He had been on Broadway, in a ballet company, and now he teaches at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia. That’s the first thing he told us when he got in the studio, and then he said, “Okay, let’s go, plies now!”
All of the combinations were excruciatingly difficult, but then he stopped us around the fifth combination. It was obvious we weren’t doing very well - we had never had such an intense ballet class before. He had a look on his face that seemed both confused, and intense. We were a little worried; we have had a lot of ballet teachers burst out into random screaming when we did something incorrectly, but he didn’t look like he was going to. Then he decided to speak, and what he said could possibly be the best advice of my life.
“Everything is ballet. We live ballet. We breathe ballet. Life is a dance. Traffic is choreography. People look at us on the street, and they can tell we’re dancers. We have a certain air about us. We walk like dancers. We talk like dancers. We act like dancers. Now why don’t you dance like dancers? Honestly, it’s not that hard. Just do it. Quit worrying about if you’re using the correct muscles and joints, and just do it. Take chances. You’re at the barre, you aren’t going to fall, and if you do, it won’t hurt that badly.”
Then, he looked at me specifically and said, “When I look at you dance, I see a dancer who has never fallen. You aren’t a dancer until you’ve attempted ten pirouettes, and fallen good and hard. You haven’t done that yet have you?”
I had no choice but to respond no, because I most definitely hadn’t. That piece of advice has had the greatest impact on me than any other piece of advice I have ever received from anyone. It made sense, and as much as I didn’t want to fall - I knew I had to. I needed to start taking chances in my dancing and stop playing it safe. So I did. Two days later, I decided to make my move. When we went out to the center, I attempted ten pirouettes, when I knew good and well that I could barely even do three. Of course, I fell, good and hard, but Mr. Jovovich was right, I fell, and I’m still living to tell the story!
Since then, I’ve fallen many more times, but that’s hardly the story. After I fell out of my pirouette, I realized that indeed, I was not on the floor with a concussion, I was still perfectly intact with the exception of a slight butt ache. I did four pirouettes, and I may be sitting on the floor with five other girls staring at me, but I did it. I took a chance, and although I fell, I didn’t fail. I accomplished something I had never done before with an amazingly low injury level. I realized that taking chances, and “just doing it,” didn’t only apply to ballet, it applied to the rest of life as well.
I had never really taken chances in life. You never know what’s out there if you don’t take a chance and look. I was taught when I was young to not do anything if you know you’ll fall. Well, that worked for awhile, but it was time to take chances now. It was time to start falling. So now, I try things that I used to think were beyond my reach. Success, failure, winning, and losing are all words with new meanings. I don’t take them so literally anymore. People who take chances are winners. And if I fall, I get right back up and try again, because we’re only human, and that’s all we can do. We have the power to do anything we want, but we’ll never know unless we just do it.
To this day, Scott has come back to our studio to choreograph one number a year, and sometimes, he still tells me, “Annalee! Dance!” But then, I just have to whip out another ten pirouettes and remind him exactly who taught me to “just do it.”

reality

Reality only exists as a series of perceived appearances. These perceived appearances could possibly be different, or the same for all of us. This is an important concept to understand when studying literature because; we must have two different perspectives in our heads when reading in order to understand the full meaning of the text. When we read a novel, we must think from all perspectives to try and perceive all perspectives of reality, and to perceive all perspectives of the book. A lot of times, literary scholars get too caught up in their own perception of reality when reading, but we can’t dilute ourselves into believing that our perception is the totality of reality. Literary reality consists of both the reader’s reality, and the author’s reality. If you live in solely your reality, then you will only be living in half of the novel’s reality. The whole meaning of the novel can change when you read it with a different perspective.
Not only is perceiving reality in different ways important in reading and analyzing novels, it is also important in everyday life. It can help you understand other’s ideas and view points. The world consists of a reality, in which we have no solid knowledge of. Reality consists of everyone’s reality, which in reality, means that reality is nothing.

Wild Tounge Responce

In Gloria Anzakdua’s, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, she talks about how your language is your identity, and how many immigrants create their own language variant to give themselves an identity.
Usually, and especially at a young age, immigrants (Mexican immigrants for example) will feel insecure about themselves because they feel that they are Mexican, but since they’re in America, they also feel American. Language can determine an identity, and if your native language isn’t your country’s native language, you may feel like you don’t have an identity. When people don’t think they have an identity, they make one. They do this, by making their own language that combines their cultures. The combination of languages made by immigrants, is how languages evolve, and how new languages are created. The new languages may start by combining their native language, and their new culture’s language. Then, they might start using their own slang words. Others will then hear this new language, start to speak it, and add on to it. So much of this is going on right now in America with Mexican immigration, that there will probably be a completely different language in ten years or so that Mexican immigrants have developed on their own. There is nothing wrong with this; they’re finding their own identity by creating their own language, and embracing their own, mixed culture.
Language does evolve, and an example of this can be found be comparing the English spoken in the United States today with the English spoken in the United Kingdom. Although immigrants from England to the United States spoke English, after settling here and living here for many years, the use of the English language evolved over time such that the way it is spoken, or the “accent,” is not the same, but also there are differences in the way we talk and the language we use, even to describe the same the thing. For example, what we call jeans would be referred to as dungarees in Great Britain.
After you have immigrated, and found your own identity with your language, that is when the language you speak changes. When you find your identity, that is when your language has finally changed. Finding your own language comes with finding your own identity. Having your own language is a way of communicating with people in the same immigration situation that you are.
On a narrower scale, there are times when this evolved language changes, I think, with developmental stages in a person’s life. The way I speak, and what I say is very different when I am talking to a baby, and eight year old, or a teenager. There is a huge difference and this appropriate. Although my family doesn’t believe in talking ridiculous non-grammatically correct “baby talk,” there is a simpleness to it and a very direct tone.
When I talk to an eight year old, my language is correct, but the words are a bit simpler than standard adult talk. When talking to peers, or the teenage group, the language is completely different, with words meaning different things. It is the most extreme difference in my use of the English language. I believe all of these variations are fine and appropriate to the situation. After all, language is solely for the purpose of communication and people are different with respect to age, culture, and education to name a few. Variations of language are an aspect of communication that makes it more effective.

Red Sky in the Morning responce

Hampl had a very profoundly moving experience. It is not often that you see a couple that really have that truly amorous love for each other. Yet, I don’t believe it was necessarily the intense love for each other that moved her, I think it was the intense love in general that moved her. Not many people have such an intense love for anyone or anything, and when you find someone who is so passionately in love with someone or something, it gives you a certain joyous feeling inside that makes you want to love someone or something like that too. Sometimes, you find the most wonderful things in the most horrible places, and an observation of love that can make a lady forget about the atrociousness of a Greyhound bus, would be the most powerful thing.
I had a similar experience like this in math camp when I was younger. It was the summer going into sixth grade, and school had just let out. As I’m not very fond of math, I was clearly very averse to spending a week of my summer studying math. The math camp was at an elementary school teacher’s house in Terre Haute. She had a fairly average house in an average neighborhood. When I walked in the door, all of the other kids looked somewhat like me - tired, apathetic, and bored. I had my mind set on this week being the worst week of the summer before I even walked in the door. When I took a seat in a chair next to some other girls, the teacher passed out snacks. First of all, I had never even had a math teacher that allowed me to eat in class. They were all very strict and rigid, but this teacher seemed enthusiastic and nice! I started to wonder if I was really in math camp, but then she got out the whiteboard with all the numbers on it, and I was reassured that this was really math camp. The teacher started out with a math game. I don’t even remember the game; I just remember the look in the teacher’s eyes, and her utter enthusiasm about math. She looked like this was the happiest moment of her life. When she started explaining the material, you could tell that this was the most interesting, fun thing that she could possibly think of doing. She was not just doing a remarkably good job in her position as “math teacher.” She was genuinely enjoying herself. There was no acting or artificial teacher – like behavior. The lady was what she was – a woman who delighted herself in doing and teaching math. When she worked the first problem, it was obvious that working math problems was what she had an intense, passionate love for. Her eyes twinkled, and she seemed to move both her hands and feet in a melodic manner as if she were dancing as she approached the equation. There were drab walls all around us with plain wooden furniture, but in the middle of that, was a lady teaching to others what she really loved. Her enthusiasm never died. With every problem, every day of the week, she had the same look in her eyes, and the same passion for math that she’d had from the first problem, and on.
At the end of the math camp, we sat in a circle, and she told us something that is still, and will forever be, fresh in my mind. She tried to tell us something she couldn’t explain. She was trying to explain to us her love of math. She struggled for about five minutes before she finally said, “Math may not be what you love, but find something you do love. There’s something out there for everyone, you just have to find it.”
This just goes to show you that true love for someone or something is profoundly moving in a way that is impossible to explain. It makes you want to have something that you love so much. No matter what happens, and no matter where you are, you still have that intense love in your heart that never goes away, and the people who are lucky enough to have found that, are the ones that are truly living life to the fullest.

yay!

Yay! I made a blog!