Stephen Cruz

The American Dream is based off of people not losing and is determined by what people’s notion of the dream is. Their notion is based off power and fear, “not by education, opportunity, and hard work” (p. 356). I have always thought of the American Dream to be succeeded in life and being happy; I’ve never thought about looking at it as not losing. With Cruz’s experiences, it’s a very authentic way to look at it.

What I am confused is about the companies he was involved with and why they promoted him to look good. If they were so unfair and racist, and I don’t doubt this, why did advertise him? Why did he succeed, although that’s arguable since he gave up, if he was the minority? Why did the companies choose him to represent the minority and not hire anyone else? And I guess that’s something we won’t ever really find out that answer. Cruz says that because he was Mexican, that he was a good compromise. I found it so unfair and racist that his boos fired his secretary, who happened to be black, while Cruz was on vacation. “We have been discriminated against a lot, but I never associated it with society.” (p. 354). Cruz thought it would be based on an individual. That’s understandable, considering he was the only one in his minority that was hired.

Cruz made some great points about the American Dream. The higher up you are in business, the more you are going to have to sacrifice. The system isn’t fair by any means; it’s very rare that is a person is going to be able to start from the bottom and make it to the top. This article showed a different side to the American Dream that I never considered before, but its more authentic than anything I’ve ever heard. You can’t just succeed in life, you have to hold onto what you have and not let go.

Engaging the Text

No, Gregory Mantsois’s essay does not make a case that the wealthy are exploiting the poor. What would have made a better case would be the differences between the middle and lower classes; the economic distinction between classes. He does have any support in his argument of the poor are being exploited. And although there isn’t much being done about money issues and the wealthy aren’t doing much too help, the wealthy aren’t taking advantage of the poor. What he does do is show how the wealthy have more advantages. But I do not this qualifies as an argument.

I do think it’s interesting that he is making this case about the wealthy, which are the majority of his audience, and he makes several attacks to try and get us on his side. By having the data that Mantsois provides just makes the reading seem very heavy and dry. It doesn’t add to his credentials or any logical appeal.

“A Letter To Jim”

I found “A Letter to Jim” to be very blunt and almost humorous. Rebekah Taylor and Jim haven’t talked for a while and she spits out this argument for him to write back to. But I will say, this is a great argument on why Jim should become a vegetarian. I like how Taylor appeals to ethos by building a bridge for Jim. The argument presented is that Jim should be a vegetarian and she lists out why. (See below for Toulmin System set up) Taylor explains her beliefs to Jim instead of completely forcing them Although I don’t like how she presented her point at first, by the end of letter, I feel like I should be a vegetarian too.

Claim: Jim should be a vegetarian
Reason(s): because of animal cruelty
Grounds: examples of animal cruelty
Warrant: animal cruelty is wrong
Backing: religious views, personal narrative
Conditions of rebuttal: meat is an important part of a diet
Qualifier: Jim should buy from organic farms

Visual Arguments

When I think of visual arguments, NPR radio and NBC news pops into my head. When I was watching the news last night, it kept on flashing visual elements. It was very repetitive and annoying. But these television stations get more money because they are able to add in those elements. The radio on the other hand obviously cannot. Eh, just something that I thought about...

By adding visual elements in your argument, it’s going to be easier to get your point across. It goes along with the saying, “actions speak louder than words”. Using a picture, video, or drawling can supplement your words, and is going to have weight to it. I think that visual arguments are persuasive. It’s like with the lady that came to talk about Africa this morning. It would not of have an emotional affect on the audience had we not seen the child that was raped when she was two. Visual arguments help persuade your audience.

Ethical responsibilities

So it’s pretty cool that AP English is tying in with the Mass Media class. Just the other day in Mrs. Young’s class we looked at a copy of the “Code Of Ethics” and how journalists are suppose to follow it when writing a story. The Code of Ethics simply put means to be honest and find out everything you can before publishing a story. You should seek out the truth, be respectful, and avoid inconsistency with a minimal amount of personal judgment and bias arguments. Now if this ever really happens is questionable. Reporting the whole truth without distortion is a big problem. Either due to bias, making the story more interesting, politics, or any other reason almost all stories are fabricated in some way

I think that an author has ethical responsibilities in using ‘ethos’ and ‘pathos’, but again wither or not they follow this is questionable. As we said in class, to appeal to ‘ethos’ is to have credibility and evidence. But if you look at any story these days, the author will use two sources as evidence from people with very simplistic standpoints. We are getting a false feeling of being informed about what is presented to us, that when we hear things on the news, whether it be relevant or not, we feel informed afterwards. The author tries to get the good side and the bad to appear as though he has credibility. We also said in class that to appeal to ‘pathos’ is to have that emotional appeal. How a story is presented is going to work our emotions. I said this in a response to Allie that, “Whether you are watching on a station such as Fox, which caters to conservative views, or NBC how the stories are presented are going to make you feel different. (Hence the pathos)” I think this is held true with any station.

Pseudo-Arguments...

Hmm so the assignment is to explain a ‘pseudo-argument’ that we have come across in the real world. A ‘pseudo-argument’ is an argument based on an opinion that isn’t really arguable. It would be like saying, chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla. There is not one right answer.

One thing that I came across somewhat recently what talking with my brother about what was better: Coke or Pepsi? And I actually think that Diet Pepsi is better, but it’s really hard to argue that since it’s based entirely on your opinions. Nothing really came out of the talk other than me and my brother drinking our sodas.

Another thing that happened was during Mass Media today. We were discussing ethics in journalism. There was this killer, BTK, and how he sent articles about himself to a newspaper. The newspaper printed them and it caused a lot of people to be scared about this killer that was wondering around. So the question arose whether the newspaper should of sent his writing to the police, print it and then send it to the police, or just print it. The only way to argue this was based on your ethical beliefs. It was hard to talk about it.

Just as a side note – Wikipedia this BTK guy. It’s really creepy.

The Core of an Argument

Pathos is used in the rhetorical triangle because it is associated with emotional appeal. By having pathos, you are able to capture the audience’s “imaginative sympathies”. (p.75) It is what the reader feels and sees. “Thus, when we turn the abstractions of logical discourse into a palpable and immediate story, we are making a pathetic appeal.” (p. 75) That’s a big sentence. To break it down, what I think Ramage, Bean, and Johnson (the author’s of Writing Arguments) are saying is that when we use logos, we’re using reasoning in an argument and when we use ethos, we are focusing on the credibility and the evidence we’re given. Using pathos hits home with a reader because of the emotional appeal. That is why it is such a “powerful rhetorical device”. (LaMags)

Oh the wonderful AP English Exam...

I think my biggest concern with the AP English Lang. Exam is not scoring well or going "deep" enough. Although time is always an issue considering my terrible case of procrastination, I don't think that is where I'll be freaking out about. It helps a lot that I have extended time on tests and I was just approved for 50% extra time on the AP Exam.
Hah and thank goodness for that... Being rushed won't be an issue.

We talk about all sorts of things in class and it takes me a while to actually understand what author meant on a different level than how I would usually think; being able to analyze things quickly should be an interesting task. I will say though, come May I don't doubt that we'll all be ready for the exam. It's still early on in the year, and by the time the exam rolls around we will be more prepared. (Don't you love the pressure LaMags of having to make sure we're in good shape for this thing?!)

You know it's funny though, I just started taking this SAT prep course over at Park Tudor yesterday and I'm positive some of the tips this wacky, over the top teacher we have are going to put into use than just the SAT. The AP Exam in mostly a scantron format and I’m thrilled knowing I won’t be wasting my time bubbling in circles. This teacher gave us the most useful pencils that are shaped like a thin, long rectangle. It saves time when bubbling in the scantron because well, you don't have bubble in anymore. You just run the pencil across it and it fills in the circle... How come this wasn't given to use before?! Oh the time we would have saved... Oh and if anyone is interested in a fun fact, this pencil saves you approximately 14 minutes and 10 seconds on the SAT. Isn't that nice?

Okay back to talking about the AP Exam...

So like I said, analyzing things with essays will be the most difficult. Multiple choice will be awesome because you have the answer staring at you in the face. If they are an easy question, they will have an easy answer. If they are a hard question, they will have a hard answer. (Right Katie and Maggie!!)


Oddly enough, this was fun to post about.

Who's excited about a full week of school this week?! I know I am...

"Case for Torture"

The “Case for Torture” article case makes some rather interesting points. Michael Levin writes a sharp argument with the biased facts based on what he thinks is right. Levin creates several hypothetical scenarios that leave you with an obligated-to-do-the-right-thing feeling. One of the scenarios he created was if you were a mother and your baby had been kidnapped by a someone, wouldn’t you do everything in your power to make you one, get your baby back unharmed and two, make sure whoever took your child gets punished to the furthest extent. Levin, as Jordan said, shoots out his opinions so quickly that you don’t have a moment to grasp what he is saying and to even consider your own point of view.

My personal opinion on torture is that I think it should be allowed in certain situations. I feel bad saying that though because torturing someone seems so cruel, even if it’s used to get an answer or save lives. Levin almost makes me feel better about that by agreeing with him. In the article he argued that, wouldn’t it be better to torture a few people that were going to set off a bomb, then let hundreds of innocent people die for something they didn’t do. That sounds fine to me. It’s the thought of what type of tactics are we using to torture this people? I remember a while back my dad told me that to get information from people that would play Rammstein music on full blast. It hurt their ears so much that they would break. Now, I don’t know if that is true but that sounds better to me than electrocuting someone or hurting them. That to me seems very un-American. But who is really to say if torturing someone is right or wrong. I think, and people might argue this, that it really comes down to your beliefs. It’s really hard to chose a side on what is right or wrong.

Comparing Cartoon to Ad/Genres in Arguments

In our Writing Arguments book, there is a cartoon on page 1 and an ad on page 24 that express the same feeling about “GE” foods and how bad they are. Although they were presented in two different ways, they are both still criticizing genetically engineered food.

The cartoon uses visual pictures to get a response from the audience. It’s a political cartoon that makes an implicit argument. It presents a problem that creates an animosity toward the large man with the corn. The picture is of this larger man carrying a guitar is shown with an ear of corn that has been genetically altered and is holding it in front of starved little boy. The man tells the boy that he doesn’t want that piece of corn because of what has been done to it. From what it looks like, he is pointing out that taking away genetically engineered food is the same thing as keeping food away from the poor. (At least that is what I’m getting from it.)

The ad on page 24 is of the writing on a can and is about labeling foods correctly. The ad tries to appeal to the reader’s reasoning and the reader’s thoughts on organic food. According to our book and the different types of genres, this is a pubic affairs advertisement. It explains how genetically engineered foods should have labels warning customers of what’s in them.

I personally don’t think it’s as strong as the cartoon because of how it creates a more realistic and accurate point. The cartoon makes the reader stop and think, while the ad has more explicit argument. The cartoon has a visual appeal and provides more room for interpretation. It tries to get you to agree with the author and to be persuaded by presenting facts.

Genre is a major aspect of an argument. The style that you present your opinions can ride on whether people will support your side or not. With the ad, its genre helps its argument because it’s in a specialized magazine called the Vegetarian Times. The audience who reads this ad will more than likely agree with it because it’s put in a magazine that is based on their feelings already. On the other hand, the cartoon is from a news service. As I said earlier, this is a public affairs advertisement. This news service is for people to talk about and get different standpoints on current events. Whether the readers agree with this cartoon or not, it adds to their thoughts on politics.

Explicit v. Implicit

Arguments can be either explicit or implicit. The main difference between them is the difference between telling and showing. Explicit arguments are good for a debate, while implicit arguments put an idea into your head and indirect. Both are very effective ways of getting your point across if used correctly. Certain situations call for one type, while another will call for a different type of argument.

Explicit arguments are arguments that state the claim, use reasoning skills, and evidence to back it up. It’s a process and procedure. They are very direct and concrete. Looking at them, you know right away what the argument is about and what viewpoint is; the argument is usually written out. An example of this type of argument is when people argue out their views and it is usually like a debate.

Implicit arguments are very indirect. It’s not concrete and doesn’t look like an argument because it’s implied. . This type of argument is used in poems, stories or photos to get the point across. Like explicit arguments, they still state the claim, and support the idea. They are also similar to explicit arguments because they try to persuade others to take a certain point of view. Short stories, pictures, personal essays, narratives, and poems, are good examples of this type of argument. They don’t come right out and tell what you should think, but there are hidden and underlying messages to them. Two examples of implicit arguments are the Veterans Day Photograph and the “Dulce et Decorum Est” poem. You as the reader have to figure out what the author is trying to convey. Like the Veteran’s Day photograph and the poem in the book, they both convey a message about serving your country and about how it takes a certain kind of person to stand up and take on such things.