first draft done

I just finished my bibliography using various websites and junk to try and make it look the way it's supposed to. I'm still not sure it's 100% right, but it looks legitimate enough for me. It didn't take me very long to do, so my post won't be all that long. I did it tonight after the music concert, because tomorrow i plan to start rounding up notes and things for finals. Now while this may be last minute compared to what other people are doing i find trying to learn all of my subjects at the same time a few days in advance just jumbles information. Just make a list of things to know, write it out so you've gone over it once, and don't pull it out again until a day or two before your its the day of that final. The easiest way is to go over the closest things the most and push everything else to the side or out altogether if you've already taken it. With that in mind i finished my paper earlier.

editing

So, tonight i edited my paper and polished some last ideas. What i'm beginning to worry about is whether or not my citing various sources is clear enough. I refer to various works belonging to different people who compiled work from the same few people. I'm not sure if it comes out clear enough, or if there's more i should do to straighten this out. I think i'll wait and see what comments i get on the first draft. Other than that i think it's going well. Other than the issue with two of my electronic sources being highly similar, the rest is all going fairly straight forward. I have yet to worry about and start my bibliography, but i'm in no hurry to start that. In all honesty i'm only doing this much work on my paper in an effort to avoid thinking and focusing my energies on finals. I'm not sure how i'm going to drag out blogs for the rest of this week, but i guess my next exciting chapter will be on the thrills and chills of a bibliography.

+

I think what i've found is that the arguments defending games are always the most rational and simple. They simply cite data and people without trying to drag research in. Today i found an article that actually said something similar to what i put in my paper, about how Anderson tends to be the only name associated with some research claiming links between aggression and violence. The article i found tonight claims that the links simply don't clearly exist. They even admitted that there could just as easily be the same amount of research discrediting that of others as they have to deal with. The key points i noticed them hitting on were that although games are taking heat from Clinton, Lieberman, and researchers, the average age of a gamer right now is 30 years old. While it is true that mature 17+ games find the way into the hands of kids, the fact of the matter is the gaming audience is becoming older. They also hit on the fact that violence is a staple in the lives of many americans now. You can't blame games, and go home to find that 90% of tv content and hit shows are sexual or feature a murder as the main plot. Violent crime rates are on the decrease and surprisingly so are sex rates in teens. The article claims that this research seems to simply be crying wolf. They equated it to banning alcohol, simply because drunk drivers kill people. or. Banning guns because there are those who use them for crimes. It is a punishment of everyone just because someone misuses a right.

Paper Complete

So today i started and finished my expository paper. It went a lot more easily than i thought it would. Having already gathered sources, it went fairly smoothly. I have yet to create my works cited, but i think i'll put that off for as long as possible. I'm still not sure how to go about my actual proposal paper. I have ideas, but i think that it will be necessary to keep gathering research and information even though it wasn't used in my expository paper. I'm fairly pleased with how it went, but it'll take a lot more straightening out and work to get the actual paper done. I'll have to edit at some point this week, but it'll happen when it happens. What did surprise me in writing my paper was how quickly it seemed to come out. I didn't double space my paper until i was done and it just kept coming steadily and slowly down the page with the occasional break to double check a text. 

D-Dub and Mr.Dad

Two interesting finds this evening. The first was an adult game making company that sells downloadable content lashing out against those who attacked it. The post said that they were merely a website and a software company making games that they found amusing and appealing. What should really be the focus of attention is violent video games and what affect it has on children. They argued that not only were they safely out of children's hands not being in stores, but that they appealed to much smaller and specified crowds and wouldn't be a problem unlike disc games found in stores. I should also point out that they also bashed the ratings companies for giving them a hard time, which kind of sets them out against the whole industry since no system or mainstream company feels comfortable touching them. The second point would be that i found a sent in response from a worried mother to one MR.Dad. She worried about the affect of violence on her child and asked if it was a concern. What was interesting is that he quoted a book and various studies the author of this book made. It was called "Grand Theft Childhood." The interesting part about it was that it equated video games as being no different than any other popular new thing of anytime. Statistics equating it with violence, aggression, or anti social behavior are blown way out of proportion. Mr.Dad compared it to switching from 5 holed flutes to 6 at the time of Plato and how this was scandalous for the time and thought to destroy entire western culture. He then compared it to Rock and Roll and how this and its mandated sex, drugs, and partying were also supposed to be the downfall of entire generations. 

let's play some frogger and tetris

            What I didn’t know was that some of the pro video game arguments is that video games do just as much to improve hand eye coordination and focus as they do in stimulating any emotions at all. Emotions are argued to be temporary and circumstantial to the usage of the game at hand. The learned hand eye coordination and other characteristics stay with you beyond the game. What is arguably bad about games, and I would agree, is that in many cases it may cause very bad social affects. Kids lose the experience of social interactions and can only relate to what they’ve observed with no first hand examples from their own lives. Many parents and government agencies have tried to ban games or make them change their content, but there have been a series of successful first amendment defenses that have protected games and their rights to make content to an audience deemed competent. The main argument for the cases I saw were that the only way to handle the problem is to limit child access to violent games, and let them grow into more mature subjects. Let them grow and develop with harmless productive games with a reasonable amount of focus and attention.

Let us Play GTA IV while we Ponder

So I took a cursory glance down my options today since I’ve already got a good idea about what I want. What I found was a combination of random citeless information, most of which was either claiming neutrality and fence riding on whether or not aggression could be linked with video game violence. Among the anarchy of news reports and blogs, I did manage to find two clear articles both pro and against this argument from seemingly credible sources. One was from a PhD and the other a child psychologist. Both credibly argued their points and seem valid, but the internet does seem biased and lacking substance on the side of defending video games. It’ll be easy to find and examine arguments against video games, which will be nice when I plan on ripping them apart. What will take some time is looking up other credible sources who defend them. I was also surprised to see the volume of focus from politicians. It wasn’t simply lawyers and news casters making it an issue and riling up distressed parents. Among the things I found were a blog about gamer relief that Hillary Clinton would be in Obama’s cabinet, so she would no longer be a threat to the industry. There was also one fearing OBama’s approach to the issue as president. I found this amusing since the video game industry seems like the least of his worries at the moment, and I think we’ll all be safe at the moment. 

drugs anyone?

The proposal to switch the opium trade from drug trafficking to medical purposes is possible, but not practical. The article even admits this towards the end, but I don’t believe it’s as light a problem as they treat it. The article states that politics is the main focus of the issue and by aiding the country, we could win over the government. What I don’t think is taken into account is weakness of government, its ties to drug lords, and farmers ties to the drug lords. In some cases I doubt they’re all running around and taking drugs by force, business partnerships probably plays a major roll in the whole business. This isn’t as simple as switching the supplies from one buyer to another without upsetting an entire system. Statistically the numbers argue the point affectively and it sounds great, but realistically there are a lot of what ifs that could throw off the whole idea. What could and probably should  be stated is the fact that it’s worth a shot. Saving the extra 178 million for a year and purchasing a hefty supply of opium wouldn’t exactly kill anyone. It’d make friendly ties and mix things up just to see what happens. It doesn’t have to be a permanent thing.

Ellis

            I think Ellis’s solution is the most practical and realistic solution there is. Only by meeting people eye to eye and finding similarities and characteristics that humanize them in your view will you be able to over come stereotypes and prejudgments. The main issue with something like this, is allowing your preconceived notions to get in the way and not let you meet these people first hand. On a large scale I believe you’d encounter more and more problems. In my opinion it’s easier to get a town of 15,000 blacks and 17,000 whites to mix as opposed to clusters of 75,000 blacks and 90,0000 whites. The larger the groups the less safe and easy it is to step out of your habits and break the stereotype. It loses the personal touch and ties to people and becomes to complicated to try and completely alter a system and neighborhoods that have developed over 100’s of years. Even in the case of Ellis you can only learn by acting yourself. His klansmen would not follow his words down such a radically different path even though he slowly transitioned there. It is a journey that everyone has to make on their own.

mainstream

Yoshino means that the idea of being “mainstream” or completely a part of the norm is impossible. It is not possible to be a part of every single little technicality and detail to be in every majority group. As he says it would be abnormal to fit into all of these normal groups and in this sense it is necessary to move on and forget about the notion all together. His reasoning is somewhat brief, but I believe its simplicity is half the argument in itself. By having such a diverse variety of identities and groups you can associate with in one way or another you’re not tied to that one group, and there isn’t just one group to cover yourself up to look like. There is a large fraction of grey area that exists and is growing bigger as populations change and become even more mixed. It should become easier to blend in as part of a mixture than as trying to be the exact same sample no matter where you draw the person. Mainstream is simple whatever possibility is found in the majority among a list of options within a certain environment. 

the end"

Linda’s freedom is not what she had hoped for. By fleeing to the North, she only realized how widespread injustice had become through government/institutional support. Not only did legislation cause her to fear for her life, but through education and conversation she began to resent the whole idea of not being in control of her liberties and of the attitudes of some blacks accepting their place and of whites driven mind set to control them. She finally attains her freedom by having one of her many loyal and kind white patrons (or matron is probably more appropriate) paying for her freedom when the Flints (now the Drugdes or something like that) turned up in a time of economic need. Her response to this is mixed because she’s glad to finally have that weight and fear lifted from her shoulders and yet she resents needing to have her freedom purchased. She hated  the fact that she was born into an institution that limited her rights below those of another demographic even though in many cases blacks were productive and intelligent members of society in the North. She began to realize and understand the futility and stupidity of the institution by the end of the book and hated being a part of it.

chap 19

            I think the most emotional passage we read is probably in the last sections of chapter 19. The entire story and information thus far has been about the injustice and sad perseverance of slaves trying to survive in a culture stacked up against them. By the end of tonight’s reading you have the first actual victory of a slave against the system in which they were never supposed to get ahead. Linda was able to out last Dr. Flint and get enough aid within the system to free her family and metaphorically slap the Flint’s in the face. Although Linda is still locked up in a friend’s house in order to hide, the pride and joy she experiences upon finding out they’ve been freed is almost as intense as if she’d finally reached freedom herself. At first she’s extremely nervous and scared to believe that they made it and bites her own lip to the point of bleeding, but the way it builds up to finally outfox Flint ends on a note that is subtly different than the rest of the book. 19 finishes with insults and threats, but they seem more pathetic and empty without the same menace now that some hope of a future has been achieved. 

Slave Girl

This book is important to the honesty and passage of truths from a time that we may not otherwise understand or appreciate. Around the time of slavery, and now for that matter, it could easily be taken as a Northern view on bashing and damning slavery and its practices sharing all of the injustices and cruelties. What it does apart from evoking passionate feelings and going against moral codes is provide an account and narration of human nature/justification, and why we should remember and understand such episodes and cruelties. The editor wants it to be known that nothing was changed from author to page. This is a first hand account of a former slave and wasn’t conjured up or drastically altered. The idea that a former slave could write so eloquently and preach of the injustices that she underwent is a testimony to the equality and intelligence of slaves and they’re being humans too. This book does a lot to portray slaves as ordinary people like whites who are only distinct by the color of their skin and try to get along in the unjust society they’re thrust in. There is very little and next to nothing of unique slave culture or traditions mentioned. You are left with a people just like us.

magic map... SHOW ME MINORITIES!!!

I watched CNN’s pre-poll closing count down. What I find interesting is their approach to this. They pulled up a map of the country and showed how it voted in the last election, but then they started pulling up battle ground states. This all seems good and logical as they move forward showing typical voting history of counties within these states. What was interesting was they then addressed factors that may change the voting within theses states and pulled up a blank map. Within this map they began to highlight important demographic changes. First they showed a dark map then with a flick of the touch screen the “latino lens” was flicked on and all of our nations Hispanics appeared not all too differently than a topographical map. This magical lens was then used to portray the poor white back country counties where they typically voted republican, but various issues like loss of healthcare or jobs may alter their opinions. As I sit watching this map it just strikes me as amusing how they can show where all the poor whites, blacks, Hispanics or any other demographic is located. 

racism = bad

Growing up I’ve attended schools with either diverse groups or a high emphasis on cultural and ethnic understanding. What I’ve also witnessed growing within these open-minded groups, is a paralleled annoyance and cavalier attitude towards race. To me there is no difference between the educated and uneducated prejudices and attitudes. A large public school black kid will crack racist jokes at a white kid as nothing more than entertaining himself or others around him, while that same white kid may make racist jokes about blacks behind closed doors the minute his school presents something on tolerance. I wouldn’t consider either of these instances as racist, but I would agree that they are both ignorantly indifferent and fed up with an attitude that tells them they cannot be racist and it’s bad. Both of these kids harbor prejudices developed from the systems they grew up in, but these were learned by their places in life. The scenario I’m most familiar with, being a white kid, is the latter. It is frustrating to think about because in many cases it doesn’t necessarily bother me. Unless it’s completely unnecessary and racist, I’ve sat in on my fair share of jokes and comments that were just meant as side comments and in my opinion you can try and understand them as much as you want, but to some extent they will always exist.

prejudice

The socialization process is the process in which individuals acquire values, beliefs, attitudes, etc… of their culture or subculture. I believe it happens on a much smaller scale than culture as a whole, but within family units or close social ties to communities you’re at home with these things may perpetuate. Furthering your education, expanding your social circles, and other practices can break or make these trends. If you expand your education and learn new information and aspects you may develop your own personal values, as you may with individuals by interacting with new and different groups. In the same way, you may have these negative attitudes reinforced and made concrete if you’re surrounded and preached the same beliefs and cannot expand or move forward. There are things of this nature which I am positive have existed and permeated within me. The personal values of my parents exist in me to this day and are difficult to break away from since I was in fact brought up with those in mind. To this day I still get all of my work done on or ahead of time. The more prejudiced notions are picked up through social interactions where it may be “safe,” and unfortunately as much as I’d like to say they dissipated over time when the kids group up, these kids are just bigger and typically just as stupid on some things as they were when they were small and repeat the same offensive ignorant behavior. Now the only difference is that it bothers me.  

forgiveness

            It’s’ important to provide restitutions as a repayment to an injustice that was not the fault of those who suffered. It’s the same principal as if something were to happen to us personally now, and then not only would we suffer and lose, but it would be pushed under the carpet. It’s important to acknowledge the troubles and problems of the past and not just acknowledge the joys and triumphs that we respect and enjoy. Although it’s logical not to want to pay reparations for something you weren’t a part of, by coming into American culture you’re agreeing to abide by and live with our principles. (I.e. liberty, justice, etc…) If we want to meet the equality and justice that we preach so fiercely it’s important to make sacrifices and stand up to our own standards. It’s impossible to make immigrants agree with our values if we ourselves can’t make ourselves agree on the same principles. Our society must be made to look back and examine the past before we are able to make decisions on what is acceptable and what must be forgiven and apologized. I think the difficulty is drawing a line between what is worthy of apology and what is futile to the point of any reparations going to waste and being unable to exact change. 

selfless vs selfish

            Cora Tucker is a women who strives to level the playing field for all around her. She lives for the success and rise of equality for minorities and the underprivileged of her community. In this regard, she is much like Willie Loman. Loman lived for his sons and sought to see their successes and fame rise out of the lessons and personality he had instilled in them. The difference in these ideas of living to help other people is their attitude. While Loman was shunned and allowed himself to slip into nothingness and fade, Tucker never lost hope. She persevered and dealt with multiple levels of confrontation on many different fronts. Loman’s family life fell a part in a way while his job no longer provided a mean to live in his attempt to get them to achieve perfection. What he lost, Tucker gave up for the benefit of others. He tried to make his kids champions and she merely wanted to give everyone as equal and fair a chance at life as possible. This selfless sacrifice and determination allowed her to weather the obstacles that arose, even her own family turning its back on her, while Loman couldn’t take it.

seeking individual opportunity may cause car accidents leading to death

Willie Loman thinks individual opportunity is there to be had by the gifted. He particularly believes this of himself and his family. He has established such a strong sense of pride and self accomplishment that he believes himself well established and deservedly above others around him. You can look at Biff as his shining example. Biff was the arrogant football star who could steal what he wanted because he was well liked, and he could turn his back on academics and ‘know’ that he’d still get in college, while others, Bernard, worked hard, but wouldn’t amount to much based off of who they were. Through Bernard, Arthur Miller must think that it is possible through perseverance and humbleness. Bernard was walked on by others and used in their attempts to climb beyond him, but in the end through his own work ethic and sweat he was able to reach beyond those that attempted to go above him. He ended up working cases in the Supreme Court while Biff became a clepto and his life fell apart. I think his whole argument throughout the play was showing the right attitude and way to go about achieving new heights and wealth and what paths will condemn you.

My own discussion with Patty

            What part did Willie Loman’s pride and self confidence play in setting himself up to completely have his values and accomplishments swept out from under him?  I think Willie lived in a world completely shut of the perception of others. He was unable to escape his own views even when everything in his life fell apart. In a way this is untrue since he was finally able to escape his own false reality in an eventually successful suicide attempt. He wasn’t able to cope and function in a world that forced him to open his eyes and see that his sons were failures and his dreams had been shattered. Loman had once existed with the thought that he had and could have everything he could ever want. The single turning point in this philosophy, although arguably unrelated to uncontrollable events, was Biff’s discovery of his cheating. From that moment on his family life seemed to come undone starting with Biff’s flight to the West and followed by his career’s downfall into nothingness. In a way Willie had inflated himself full of hot air thinking his life perfect, but by the time this revealed itself to be untrue he clung to the remnants of that air inside of him. Only when he found himself no longer able to cling to the past did he attempt to take his own life. 

who gets my moneeey

I think overall today was a lot more of the same stuff from yesterday. My only problems with people were either their lack of paying attention to the class and reading from a paper making it boring or their over the top attempts to grab attention. I think these two were the most common point to lose me because I can easily get over and forget a stumble or pause around certain words, but when you neglect your audience by staring off into space or at a paper I lose interest. The worst for me was having to listen to people try to pool in crazy hypothetical situations, theatrically drawn out stories, or just flat out lame attention grabbers. I think there’s a difference between making attempts to interest your listener and overwhelming them with unnecessary thoughts or notions that remove you from your point. Apart from this as far as choosing people went, I just decided to go with whatever seemed the best balance of important organization and interesting presentation. I was surprised to see Maggie’s cup not get as many “bucks” because I thought out of all the talk of stories and being related to your organization, she had the best point for point presentation and tie to something very serious and dear to her family. 

who gets my money

            I think the most interesting/difficult aspect of evaluating and thinking about the various presentations is holding two different notions in your head at the same time. I think it’s important to hold your values into consideration with the actual organizations, but at the same time we need to at least take into account the manner in which it is being presented to you. Sometimes you don’t necessarily want to agree with someone’s organization, but the presentation was better than most so you can’t just eliminate it. It works both ways in the sense that you may think an organization has a good point, but be completely dulled by a speech. I think overall though the most difficult thing is trying to split your vote into different categories and then again do it for multiple people. You have to judge everyone against one another as well. That’s three different criteria to judge from, making this a little bit more than I anticipated. Everyone has done reasonably well though, my only problem has been with people over dramatizing their arguments and losing themselves in trying to use every single one of Mrs. Webster’s attention grabbers simultaneously. 

Goodwill take 2

            Today I attempted to apply the Toulmin system to my organization: Goodwill. As far as it goes, I think everything went relatively straight forward, but the only thing I wasn’t expecting to have to do was looking about statistics and information based on counter arguments. As far as it goes, you can go to your organization’s actual site and find all of the pro arguments and actions of what it does. What I found you had to do for a good argument was find the average amount of donations actually applied to the cause (which I couldn’t.) What I was able to find however was the annual amount of income dispensed on apparel and clothing per year in an urban environment. For me this was very beneficial to help argue why cheap clothing at Goodwill is beneficial and it also shows that over time you should accumulatively have much more than you actually need. This helps me present the argument that Goodwill is unique in a sense that money and volunteer work isn’t the only way to provide opportunities and help for others. By small donations of clothing and things you probably consider out of date rags, you have the chance to benefit others. 

Goodwill <-- It's in the name

At first, I couldn’t think of a single organization off the top of my head, and google wasn’t as helpful as you may think. What hit me surprisingly was something I drive by fairly often and see at multiple locations across Indiana. Goodwill is an organization that does many things in local communities and provides an easy center to pick up used items and money to benefit others. This works for me, because I have a Goodwill literally a mile away and I used to go in their with my mom and to this day I still drop things off their from old clothes to old furniture. After looking up their website I also found out what else Goodwill does apart from provide cheap clothes and money to benefit the poor and homeless. Their mission statement is literally to help the impoverished and welfare users of local communities find jobs and improve their lifestyles and social standings through the benefits and progress of work. Last year local Goodwills provided 1.1 million people with job opportunities or aided them in some way. To me this is something you can easily over look and don’t expect to see from a chain of stores spread across the US. When I think “helps the unfortunate” I don’t think, “Oh yeah that huge store next to Sears across from Target.”

hm...

It is not that easy; Emerson speaks like a labyrinth. What I would have to say he thinks generates success would be the virtues and self reliant personality required to be independent of outside influence and guidance. It is important not to be swayed and molded by your society and attempt to model yourself after others. You are not them, and you should look to live your life accordingly. In the event you fail to meet the same outcome or standards set before you, your life crumbles and you must start over from scratch only now you are disheartened and broken. I would agree with Emerson that it requires a great deal of independence and fortitude to pursue whatever roads are opened up to you. You mustn’t be instilled with the notion of becoming something great like those before you, for you will not feel great accomplishment should you reach success, but if you leave leniency in your path you may yet find satisfaction. I think it’s not necessarily bad to model yourself after the successes of others, you just must know their path might not be right for you and don’t burn all of your bridges. You may find that other doors are opened along the way that you may want to follow and see where they take you.

ouch

            It does not make the case that the wealthy are exploiting the poor. To me that would be more of Cruz’s essay. This is more the facts that people will try to get ahead in a system where things are either weighted against them or they don’t have to try very hard and have success handed to them. The wealthy don’t take advantage of others per say, they merely accept that they’ve been given privileges and fortune in their attempts to build their own proud mini empire. Everyone is cast into an unbalanced society with limits capped on them based off of where they begin. It’s essentially starting a board game with the end goal being millions of dollars and having tons of spots that set players back. This seems and would be fair if only 1/100 players weren’t allowed to start in a position that bypasses many of the most difficult issues. The rest are left in the middle of poverty and have nothing to build off of or improve upon. Generally speaking they must learn to live with what they’ve got because unless they can swim really well and see a billionaire drowning, they’ve got a rough road ahead of them.

American System

Cruz’s story is about the corruption of the American system and how your climb is based solely on the acceptance of those in the highest seats of power, not pure perseverance and skill. Cruz found that he was allowed to climb based on his “likeness” to his superiors and was being used as somewhat of an ethnic poster child. This is sort of similar to Dick having to work hard and be educated to a certain extent in order to succeed. Beyond this similarity there isn’t much that ties the two together. Dick was willing to aid those that he left behind in his climb to the top, a sort of homage to where he’d come from and who had helped him get there. Cruz on the other hand wasn’t necessarily unwilling to help others, but he encountered a completely different attitude altogether. He found most minorities and different social niches willing to sell each other out for their own personal gain. Instead of banding together to benefit all, they were more willing to watch others that they used to be like fall back down the ladder as long as the man on top would give them some goodies. 

Ragged Dick is my Hero

The story makes an implicit argument about the character and mindset it takes to climb to the top. Success requires perseverance, moral strength, and a knowledge of where you hope to see yourself. What took Dick time was to learn to read, write, and speak in a manner where he could enter new and elevated social circles to better his lifestyle. This was probably the most emphasized point by the end of the story as he was proud of his penmanship and fought back old “slang” tendencies. He had submitted application after application only to improve and be denied. By the time he was finally offered up a position, he had reached a height that he did not know possible for himself and began to see new light shed on his life. All any of the things above really needed to happen was one unexpected moment. In that moment, Dick excelled and stood out from all others modestly explaining away his plunge after a small child with no certain way out for either of them. This singular moment of extraordinary made him visible to those who would then in fact pay closer attention to him then others. His self sacrifice set him apart on a chain of events that granted him that last “application” in person. 

i like the pitures

We are becoming a visual society, but I think the benefits of this are much more abundant than the downfalls. Typically speaking, the people I know who care enough about a subject to become immersed in both sides of the argument will go out of their way to read book and broaden their own perspective. What you will not find, is someone going to Fox news and then comparing it with CNN. Those kinds of visual sources make appeals on emotion with bare bones information that barely scratches the surface. That is why you’re able to watch the news, hear about starving children and soldiers dying, and then go back to your family dinner and not be affected by it. The pathos is touched on, but you become desensitized to it. I’m not saying that you would’ve done something had you not been use to these kinds of ads, but we get used to seeing these kinds of things. They draw our attention for a moment, we identify their purpose, and then move on with our lives. A visual argument may at first be more persuasive, but like a bad caffeine rush that fades away and doesn’t last. You do not get a deep enough pool to claim a justified opinion on a matter and if you actually take the time to think and look into it your claims disappear with the only proof being a slanted picture. 

big entities = big lies !!!

The author of any piece is morally obligated to balance logos, ethos, and pathos. This on its own is very difficult since in many cases it’s easy to slant an argument depending on your facts and desired emotions. This corrupts your ethics as the author for attempting to sound reasonable in a way that manipulates the legitimacy of your piece. I think ethos should take a primary role over pathos. Drawing on emotions is a dangerously affective way to present an argument or story, and it leaves the reader to reach their own conclusions that they were shepherded to. This kind of manipulation is a powerful asset to maintaining attention and a sense of responsibility to those listening to you. The government and media for example may not necessarily be presenting both sides of an argument, but trying to present a feasible explanation for their actions by always portraying the world as victims, heroes, and villains. By manipulating these emotions and developing a blind belief that the media is the final word on the outside world, you are led to false conclusions. By accepting things as the ultimate truth and watching the news, you’d think that everyday in all of our cities murderers, rapists, and thieves run rampant when that is actually what is just portrayed the most. They portray ethics and pathos in whatever way they feel will benefit their purpose.

Help the Victim

Langley uses evidence from a neutral perspective. Everything said and explained in the story relates to him as a victim of society. He pleads his being misunderstood and abused by a society that is being unreasonable and ignorant of its actions and what could actually be considered beneficial and healthy as opposed to rebellious angry skaters spraying up tags at every stop sign and going wherever they want whenever and running from police. The article on torture was based from the perspective of the exact opposite. You could base it that you were a victim of terrorism and had to torture, but I’d say that the other article is written from the perspective of a torturer. The skate article was from the recipient. The perspectives slant the evidence in completely different ways. I’d say the victim is more believable and can affect more people. Evidence works best when presented to essentially a jury that will judge it passionately towards the injustice you face. Just in the way that the article was written you know that whoever this skater was, they were an intelligent youth who was well spoken and had examined all the facets to the argument. The persona on its own is evidence enough.

Learn to Argue

In the 8^th grade for history class, we had to present a formal debate to our class and teachers. The set up was U.S. history, and it was broken into three groups. There were the radicals, “whigs,” and neutrals who went with the different sides of the American Revolution and whether or not it would be a just cause to break away. Upon picking groups no one wanted to choose the  whigs, and so some of the most quiet and brightest minds of our grade decided to take on the challenge as a joke or for personal test. There was one problem with this, that left everyone else to debate against us and the neutrals to judge it and pick a winner. With all of our heavy thinkers pooled into one basket, we were left with what seemed a clear victory, but turned into a nightmare. People from the radical party took up radical behavior screaming incoherent and blatantly moronic contradictions to fair points. Any attempt to refute their arguments was screamed out and shunned like some ignorant blindness that plagues many of our political leaders and youth today. What was a very overwhelming and superior debate on the side of the whigs turned out to be a landslide victory to the radicals both through the obnoxiousness of the debaters and those going into it with their minds already made up as doubters. 

pathos best one sided

Pathos uses the imagination and emotions of readers to draw conclusions. It is easy for someone to present a laundry list of information and information, especially if you believe their information or are free to interpret the facts as you see fit. Pathos provides the guided conclusions that feed off of the emotions and tendencies of human nature. This provides facts and assumptions that we may already draw on based off of our own experiences. It allows us to empathetically reach the author’s conclusions. It provides a much more concise argument and in the same sense, more affective. The article on torture is a good example. As opposed to confronting mothers with random information and ideas on situations that may not affect them, you cut to their better judgment should it affect them directly. By threatening their infants you draw upon the desired affect you want, expediting the entire argument and having them reach the conclusion you want. It provides the most affective way to present a one sided argument. In some cases you may have difficulties providing the appropriate emotional tug should the audience turn out to be a bunch deaf ears. 

To Torture or Not to Torture

I believe torture is a practical necessity that must be addressed and dealt with accordingly. In a world where there are radicals that seek to drive fear and chaos into the hearts of millions by attacking the public at any place and any time. In principal, it is fighting fire with fire. It is unrealistic and fake to pretend that anything else could be used to fight a mentalities where many may just assume die than tell you anything. The only danger with these kinds of powers are those who use them. You can’t have some fool in charge who just grabs anyone who has met a terrorist or criminal and torture them to tell you what you want. Someone with their head on their shoulders who can remain emotionally detached is required. It must always remain strictly objective and used as an utter last resort. I believe everyone lies. After that everyone has a breaking point where they’ll tell the truth. Beyond that point of honesty there is such a thing as being in so much pain that you’ll say and believe you’re the king of England just to get out of it. Torture isn’t tricky and may not always be the answer, but it’s a solution to a problem where many have already forfeit their rights and personal health by getting into a line of work where they harm others for a living.

food labels

            I am naturally inclined to pick the ‘print the biotech ingredients on the label side.’ I feel that it is our right to know what goes into these foods even at our own cost. I’ve never looked at a food label and understood half of the crap on it, so why would more unknowns confuse me anymore than what’s already there? It’s better to go into your purchases at least having the option of finding out what’s in your foods. If some study surfaces later about how ingredient x is bad and we never knew it went into our foods there could be significant problems. If it was printed there all along and no one knew of its effects, it wouldn’t be such a big deal. I think in the long run printing the labels is a better decision and I honestly doubt the idea that a majority of Americans read food labels when shopping. The only counter arguments I’d side with are the idea of costs going up if the food isn’t even noticeably different than its counter part. In that case for widespread distribution in a world where people starve daily, I’d be ok with a little bio-engineered food sticker being smacked onto things as opposed to a full blown secondary list of ingredients in order to keep costs down.

i don't know

            The first image is a political cartoon shaded to portray the stupidity of being against genetically engineered foods. It portrays a hippy character who’s against genetically engineered foods depriving a starving African boy. This image takes a swing at the idea of food being food and that in the event of countries with mass starvation and crop problems there really can’t be all that much wrong with it. The second image plays against your pride. This picture tells you what you need to know and argues that you don’t need to know anything else. You won’t understand it so it’s over your had. This not only gets the ‘reader’ fired up about being told what they can and can’t know, but it brings into play the idea of not knowing what is going into your food. It’s one thing to not understand the labels and what they contain. It’s a completely different story to possess a food you know was genetically engineered and you haven’t the slightest idea what is in it. One picture puns and mocks the idea of a certain type of food not being good enough for the malnourished. The other plays into the patriotic ideals of our right and freedom to know.

explicit arguments are for the cool kids

            Explicit arguments present a two sided claim and supports it with various proof and reasons. An implicit argument is an argument, but it drives you to a certain conclusion through a not necessarily straightforward mean. The poem presented in the book is an implicit argument against the valor and heroism of war. Unlike an explicit statement, it is a piece of poetry that provides the imagery of the gruesome reality of war. You are allowed to draw your own conclusions as the poem guides you along in a desired direction. The picture does a similar thing in the sense that it can’t formally present a two sided argument. You could however say that both the gruesome nature of one of the veterans having one hand and the honor and pride in the picture cover both aspects of the pictures. Although the picture does present a potential two sides, it does not cover the traditional down the line thesis, support, conclusion. An explicit argument of these things would formally present both sides of whatever was being disputed or examined. There would be thoughtful representations and support for whatever conclusion you would mean for the reader to draw, be it a one sided argument or neutral.

Patty the Pirate has trouble remembering things, seasick i fear

The sun was high and the grass was low. Paige was being a bitch. Again. Only this time it was different. This time I was with MY friends and it wasn’t just my cousins and her friends. She was embarrassing me and I couldn’t handle much more of it. The problem with the open field by my grandparents house was the tendency for small spikey weeds to surface in odd spots where they’d slipped up amongst the grass. It had been a great day for wiffle ball until my sister had decided to join in. At first the teasing was the same stupid stuff, small remarks that I had retorts for. Eventually however, it grew into insults on my pride and my friends were beginning to laugh with her jokes just as much as mine. This I couldn’t stand for. She told me the second base was one of those little spikey plants and I wasn’t dumb enough to listen, but the moment she called me a baby things got crazy. After I had to listen to one of my friends laughing with her for the last time, I left my base and went someone tried to hit me with the ball I chucked it into the woods. Upon arriving to the “faux” second base I jumped, barefooted, onto the weed. After immediately following over screaming clutching my feet, to my sister’s amusement, my parents took me inside and I sat with my feet in a bucket of hot water glaring at my sister from the porch for the rest of the afternoon.

Another Packet that Makes You Think, Arrrg

Since I just read Memory and Imagination, I’ll reflect on that. The most interesting aspect of this whole piece is the idea of “lies” in a memoir and letting the true story in what you have to say finding themselves. Whether or not you realized it at the time, or even as you’re writing it, there is an underlying theme or idea in your memory. This uncharted region of your experience can be tapped into through the lies and details that begin to present themselves in your thoughts and reflections. Hampl found the focus of her father through the tendency of her old friend to continually turn up in a memory where she wasn’t even present. These small inconsistencies and blends of time and place begin to form and shape what was really important to you then and now. Although unlike her metaphor of writing being like an old friend, I think of it as an unexplored space. You must first chart out what you’ve got and take note of what you want and don’t want. At this point you may begin to weed and cut it back into the shape and finally form you desire. It just takes that original foresight through all of the tangle and mess you began with to see the end result you could have. You just have to unearth it.

Diversity of Language Matey

            Language evolves as cultures merge. As societies advance and the notion of embracing one another as one majority and not a multitude of minorities grows, we lose our traditional values and language. Language is constantly adapting with generations and niches in society to provide a special quality to groups within a majority. Unless an absolute blending of cultures and peoples is attained, there will always be cultural and generational division. In the event that one attempts to eliminate these barriers, flags would fly up and all progress would be halted. We live in a society where individuality and identity are valued. We embrace being part of a group no matter how broken down or large it may be. On any level you identify yourself with others and their likeness to you. You want your values to be reflected by those around you and unless the world melded into one cohesive blob of hippies with no distinguishing features, you’d lose everything that sets you apart. In this sense language has to evolve to mirror the sense of individualism and pride found in different sects of our culture. Without a developing language and uniqueness to these groups, they’d fall apart and dissipate. We’d be back to the grey indistinguishable mass covering the world.

Attempt at a Moving Experience

While I find it difficult to recall any singular memory or experience that moves me the way Hampl was moved by the lady on her bus, it is the main idea that stands with me the most. It’s the notion that out of all of the revealing moments that strike you in the open, beneath them is a more delicate and touching experience. The one thing that comes to mind in this may not even be the same genre of story, but it stays with me nonetheless. My freshman year I went to Paris with the January term: French Culture. For a basic two weeks we learned everything there was to be taught and that no matter where you went in Europe, you were always at risk of having things stolen. The pessimistic idea of cruel world wasn’t pushed, but you were made to realize that in a bustling crowded cite these instances of harsh reality may thrive. On an afternoon where we were allowed some free time to go shopping in groups, Kylie Kaspar took pity on me and let me tag alont being one of the few boys on the trip. On a busy street corner we stopped to buy some candy from a vendor and somehow her camera ended up stolen. What I remember the most about the entire trip was not some singularly fantastic view, but the face of the little old man who sold the candy as he helped us look for it. Although that whole nostalgic memory could be shot to hell if I found out he was the one to steal the camera in the first place. 

What's up

Hi Lamags, this is my first post. i didn't suck at making a blog.