Rhetorical Triangle- Color Plate G

Exigence-The need to demonstrate that the VUE was environmentally friendly so that more people would be interesting in it.
Purpose- To show that the Saturn VUE wouldn't hurt nature.
Audience- Those who are concerned about how environmentally friendly a VUE is.
Logic- Cars that do not harm the environment are better and may sell better.
Credibility- No real demonstration of credibility.
Emotion- Appeal to love of environment.
Organization- VUE slightly off center with many animals and trees surrounding it, has a key of all the animals in the left hand sides.
Imagery- Uses many different animals, from small creatures to large ones to help give the message that the VUE will not hurt the environment.

Visual Arguments

Our society is quickly becoming a visual society, which means we are subjected to more and more compelling stories, day after day. Before, people would read newspapers which would provide a story, which also generally contained the bias of the writer. Many people, however, were used to this kind of bias and it was much easier to ignore within the confines of a written piece. Nowadays, we are subjected to image after image, whether it be of terrible deeds done by groups such as the LRA, or a political comic poking fun at the amount of pork in the last Stimulus Bill. These kinds of images are much harder to reject because images can easily appeal to our emotional side and, though they are generally not explicit arguments, they lead us to think of the argument from the point of the view the images creator wants us to think of. Though they are only images, and can easily be ignored, visual arguments can be much more persuasive than written ones.

Pathos AP Lit Blog

When constructing an argument, many disputants attempt to appeal to their audience’s sense of pathos, that is, the audience’s emotions. This can often be very effective, and can lead to an emotional connection that is hard to break. This only works, however, if the audience is sympathetic to that side of the argument, otherwise, they may have a negative reaction. The only responsibility lies with the fact that appeals to pathos should not confuse an issue; it should help to make the issue clearer. The media and the government, both of which generally utilize the appeals correctly, often utilize appeals to pathos. If talking about abortion, pro-choice people will tell stories of mother’s health being at risk, or if they talk about taxes, people will talk about how strenuous they can be on the poorer people in our society. The problem lies with the fact that so many media agencies appeal to our sense of pathos that it can confuse people, with all the different stories and distortions of truth they are told. Though appeals to pathos can often be effective, it should always help to clarify and issue, and if too many sides attempt these appeals then the audience can eventually grow confused.

Analyzing Skateboard Argument Evidence

In “Half-Criminals” or Urban Athletes? A Plea for Fair Treatment of Skateboarders, David Langley uses a great deal of evidence to try and convince the reader that skateboarders are not menaces to society and should be treated better by officials. The most compelling piece of evidence is the fact that he himself is a skateboarder who has, along with his friends, frequently suffered many injustices just because he skates. These include having a friend receive a $50 ticket for skateboarding in an area that even said it was ok to skateboard in during Holidays. He also uses very effective analogies when he says skateboarding is as natural as surfing, in that people are adapting to their environment. He appeals to people’s senses of emotion by continually giving examples of skaters being harassed and even says that cities have tried to accommodate skaters, but are not succeeding. To further emphasize his point, he offers what he considers reasonable and safe solutions to the problem, which shows the reader that he really wants to find a solution. His argument accurately fills out every portion of the STAR method of looking at evidence. The evidence is accurate (mainly because it is based off his opinion or memory), it is relevant to his argument, he provides more than enough evidence (though some statistics may have been helpful) and, according to him, the evidence he presents is representative of what happens to a majority of skaters.

Toulmin's System

Real world arguments actually seldom prove anything to be 100% true, because what you are arguing about could be subjective based on the disputant or things could fall into different groupings, as the example provided on page 87 of the book does. Though, real world arguments seldom actually prove anything, they do serve as a good advocate for one cause or another. Normally, you can only hope to strengthen your side of the argument or weaken your opponent’s side and garner supporters for you cause, but not actually prove either side to be right or wrong. This in and of itself is enough of a reason to learn Toulmin’s “courtroom model” of arguing (“Writing Arguments”). Toulmin’s system assumes that a neutral third party will render all verdicts in regards to the argument and that all assumptions are contestable by an opposing side, which forces the disputants to tailor their arguments to their audience, thus garnering more support. Though it is very difficult to ever prove something in a debate, using a system like Toulmin’s allows you to make a better case for your belief and possibly garner more supporters.

Pseudo-argument

A pseudo-argument is an argument, which is based on the opinions of the people involved and often means that the people are fanatically devoted to their side of the argument and unwilling to change their views based on the strengths or weaknesses of their opponents argument. This is why it is a pseudo- argument, because there is no collective inquiry or potential for intellectual growth through the debate. This seems to be what many of my arguments are whether they are with friends or with parents. The most common kind of pseudo-argument I have is with my parents and involves my curfew (both during weekdays and weekends). My parents always thought there should be a set time to be home and that I should always call to tell them where I am, whereas I believed that, as long as I had my phone with me I should be allowed to do what I want. They thought that getting home at a specific time would help develop a habit which would lead to getting homework done faster and better, and they would always know exactly where I was. I believed that it didn’t matter where I was, as long as they were able to contact me (via the cell phone) and that the time I got home didn’t matter, as long as I finished my homework. This kind of homework almost always ended with my parents winning because they could easily threaten to take away my car privileges altogether, but this kind of argument still exemplifies what a pseudo-argument is.

Biotech Food

From it’s emergence, biotech foods have been debated constantly with proponents saying that the biotech product is no different than the natural, and the opponents saying that we don’t know the dangers of these biotech products.
So far, the companies and the FDA have both determined the biotech foods on the market to be harmless to people and to have several advantages. This clearly shows the advantages that the biotech food would bring to the table (no pun intended), yet the opponents continue to say that there should be labeling for what are biotech foods and what aren’t. Not only would these labels scare the public, for the public often thinks of such labels as warnings, but it would be very costly to the company and this cost would then be passed onto the consumer with increased prices. Though labeling all biotech foods would be a bad and costly idea, it would still be advantageous to have certain foods labeled, but only if they had different nutritional facts than the natural product. This does not mean that it has to be labeled for being the smallest amount off, but rather, if it is a significant amount off, or an amount that could affect someone’s health, then the product should be labeled. If it would have no real effect then the biotech food should not have to be labeled.

Genre of an Argument

The genre of certain arguments can greatly influence the message that the argument portrays. From the image on page 24 the reader gets the general idea that genetically modified foods are very possibly bad for you and can have harmful effects, which serves as a good warning to most readers. The cartoon, however, has a much more penetrating message because it shows what genetically modified food could do for us (help solve world hunger) and contrasts this even more with the idea of the starving little child who would give anything for food but is having the food withheld by a self righteous “reason resistant” person. This kind of contrasting makes the comic much more effective than the image on page 24 because people are constantly bombarded with advertisements like the one on 24 that tell them why something could be wrong or bad for them but that is all it does, is tell them in a boring way that many people become immune to. The comic, on the other hand, attracts the attention of the general viewer because many people enjoy comics and the image of the starving child draws their attention and makes them feel more sympathy, while the mockery of the “reason resistant” person helps to fuel the dislike the reader feels for that same group. These two images clearly show how the genre of an argument can determine how effective the argument is.

Implicit vs. Explicit Argument

As defined by the book, “Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings,” an explicit argument “states directly a controversial claim and supports it with reasons and evidence,” while an implicit argument “doesn’t look like an argument. It may be a poem or short story, a photograph or cartoon, a personal essay or an autobiographical narrative. But like an explicit argument, it persuades its audience towards a certain point of view.” These definitions help the reader to understand the context of the Veterans day picture and the poem Dulce et Decorum Est by Wilfred Owen, neither of which are explicit arguments. Though they both seem to be relatively innocuous entries into the textbook, they really say a great deal. With regards to implicit arguments, both have a great deal to say. The poem, for example, is a stinging and bitter rant against war and the horrors men face while fighting a war. The point is further driven home when it is revealed that the author, Wilfred Owen, himself died in the midst of World War I. The picture, on the other hand, offers a far different picture. It shows a young strong looking marine embracing and older veteran of another war, showing the comradeship of the two different generations of soldiers. Though the artificial hand of the younger soldier does come as a shock, it serves to remind the viewer that war itself is a very shocking thing and never to be taken lightly. Though neither item actually state an explicit argument, the amount they have to say is no less than if they were explicit.

Memory

A week after this school year started I was at DePauw helping my brother move into his new dorm with some friends of ours. This mainly consisted of the parents moving things in and setting up beds and dressers while we screwed around doing nothing, sometimes going out onto the campus. In the beginning, when I walked around by myself a little, so many people started asking if I had found my dorm yet I got tired of giving the long winded response which consisted “I’m not going to DePauw, I’m still in high school, but my brother is going here,” and instead took to just saying “yes.” Eventually, while unpacking some of Phil’s things, we found a nerf side by side break action shotgun he had shown us that he had gotten from Walgreens for five dollars. This served to bring us back down to the maturity of eight year olds as we ran through the dorm grabbing the gun from each other and shooting each other, to the ire of our parents, who eventually told us to put it down. This led to us walking around the dorm pointing out all the dirty spots and speculating to why they were there or who would have to clean them (such as the “AIDs spot”- a black splotch in the bath tub that Phil was assigned to clean). Eventually our parents kicked us out and sent us over to the Union to pick up books and computer information for Ian and our friends, which managed to entertain us for awhile as we poked fun at the selection of books they had or various other entertaining things. Though it was a simple day, it was one of the most fun i’d had in awhile.

Random Blog

After each reading within this class, we always have a class discussion, just to make sure everyone understood the reading as they were supposed to. This is a very helpful idea because, without it, I wouldn’t have understood nearly as much about these readings as I do. For instance, I would not have been able to draw the connection between “The Great Gatsby” and “The Great Death,” because, although I could have recognized the meaning of Gat, I would not have been able to see that was the aim of F. Scott Fitzgerald. Another benefit is some of the ideas we are told, such as the idea that the chair is only the chair, in so much as we ascribe the word chair to mean the four legged object which we usually sit on.
These in class discussions prove very helpful to the classes understanding of the literature that we read, which is why I enjoy this class, and the books we read, a lot more than the books I read in seventh grade.