Greetings!
It is summer, but we do have work to do. I want to encourage you to engage in your summer assignments, so from this point on, I will be posting weekly blogs to which you should respond. In Jay Heinrich's Thank You for Arguing, he opens with a tribute to John Adams and quotes him as proclaiming, " “catch from the relics of ancient oratory those
unresisted powers, which mould the mind of man to the will of the speaker,
and yield the guidance of the nation to the dominion of the voice.”". Heinrichs goes on to explain that rhetoric " teaches
us to argue without anger. And it offers a chance to tap into a source of
social power I never knew existed."
What is something you personally care about? What do you think Heinrichs means by social power? And do you personally know how to argue without anger? Make an argument about something you care about personally. All of you should post this week about these questions I am proposing. You must also respond to the post of a classmate. You can agree or disagree or qualify their argument, but you must respond without sarcasm or anger. If done properly, your post should be at least 300 words, just to give you a ballpark in regards to what I am expecting to see. Your response to your classmate should be a minimum of 50 words.
PS. You need not argue about a hot button topic. It really should be something you care about. I, myself, might consider arguing that every student planning on attending college should take AP Language, or that classical education is the absolute best model for the education of American youth, or that under not circumstances should people have sex outside of marriage, or that going to the beach is the absolute best vacation. You must decide for yourself, but do not pretend something is important to you if it is not. Also, do not make arguments that are against church teachings. We aren't going to be doing that.
ReplyDelete“Whoever is righteous has regard has regard for the life of his beast, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel,” remarks the written text of Proverbs 12:10 as it lies within the pages of the New Testament. One could better grasp this ancient statement by taking a peek at it through a different lens. This verse is simply referring to the belief that a righteous man holds a steadfast respect for the life of his animal, but even the compassion displayed by those who are wicked is considered cruel. These words are to bring shame to those who carry about the acts of abuse, and/or neglect, upon animals. Being a good person means not only being kind to yourself and your neighbors, but it also translates to showing compassion and empathy to the animals that, like us people, populate the globe.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I care about the rights of those who cannot or are too frightened speak up for themselves—be it the inconspicuous life of the unborn or the dignity of someone who is too frightened or shy to defend themselves against another whom has become the target of harassment. However, the cause I have gravitated towards most have been the rights of the creatures we happen to share Earth with. I have walked l the majority of my life’s journey being captivated by the beauty of creation. Animals are the reason I learned how to draw and express myself through creativity! I am no longer ignorant to the realities of rights that have been cheated.
The release from ignorance stems from the various articles that I wrote for the class of AP Biology and the keynote that I was able to work on and complete for Sociology during my time as an eleventh grader. Both of these assignments shed light on the grisly learning technique known as vivisection. This term literally means “live dissection” and is derived from the Latin roots vivi, defined as “life,” and sect, meaning “to cut up”. This is an invasive procedure that will ultimately end in the termination of a—typically— healthy— animal, such as a dog or a cat. It is essentially a waste of life all for the sake of science and, to me, that simply is not a strong enough argument for the senseless destruction of life. Professors in veterinarian medicine practice the procedure in order to teach their protégés different surgical techniques, but of course, these are inexperienced students, so they are bound to make a mistake. Due to this, it is considered inhumane to keep the animal alive following the procedure, so the animal is euthanized immediately afterwards. As I become older and more experienced, I have come to realize that the rights of these innocent beings are something to defend and just as the pro-life and pro-choice communities rally to stand up for their beliefs, so too must I for the sake of the lives of all the animals whose lives have been or are in the mists of being stolen by man.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete(Continued)
DeletePreviously mentioned have been the reasons as to why I care so much about the proper treatment of animals, from the slimiest amphibian to the shaggiest mammal. These points are important to me, and I stand by them. This is why I tend to find it difficult to Arthur without getting a tad bit heated. What I mean by that is that I am someone who will speak with passion about something that I discover to be dear to my heart, like animal rights for instance. My voice becomes high-pitched and my heart races whenever I make an attempt to defend my own points, so I understand why some people would be unable to understand the urgency laced across my words. This inhibits me from establishing a proper spoken argument.
Jay Heinrich touched upon the pot in which the concept of “social power” rests. This was elaborated on the pages of his book titled Thank You got Arguing. This is a novel in which I believe he Thanks his readers for engaging in an argument so that he himself has the opportunity to better his own initiatives through combating with another person with words. “Social power” to me is like the pedestal that a selective quantity of people are placed on according to their ranks on the social latter. It is a hierarchy.
With myself identifying as Catholic, it is comforting to know that through verses like Proverbs 12:10, I can feel validated by the statements of the godly writers whom were present to string the passages together. Mr. Heinrich’s mentioning of social power could be a reference to the power that many people receive in society because of their class. I have made it quite transparent with the reason as to why I feel inclined to defeat my belief that an animal’s well-being and dignity is ours, as the human species, to protect and maintain. Due to this brightly ignited belief of mine, I find that I do in fact find myself suppressing anger down whenever I speak out in defense of the dignity that animals hold. I do discover that I can be engulfed in such a strong passion that coldness and anger could be the way that others interpret my responses. It seems to me that “the most noble attribute of a person is the love given to all living creatures” (Charles Darwin).
I absolutely agree with all of this. Animals are beautiful displays of God’s creation and it has been our job to care for them and protect them since Creation. We need to speak up for those who cannot do it for themselves. That is how God wanted it to be and that is something we need to respect.
Delete
DeleteThis blog post explains the moral issues of vivisection very well. As Heinrichs made clear in chapter 3, arguments based on moral issues predominantly fall into the value element and the present tense. This blog post follows these prerequisites well. I also believe that this argument would be demonstrative because it separates the supporters of vivisection from those who would be likely to support animal rights. However, this argument is missing the element of choice, which is very valuable in the challenge of swaying readers. Nevertheless, the present tense use is likely to spark thought in the minds of the audience, who may have been unaware of the issue. Emotion was used very well, and the blog was well written overall.
Martha Plimpton once said “ The word equality shows up too much in our founding documents for anyone to pretend it’s not the American way”. This quote can be related to many American issues that greatly affect our county right now such as racial injustices, religious issues, and other important topics. However when I read this quote my mind immediately drifts to the economic issues in education that are hurting our countries future leaders today.
ReplyDeleteThe average cost of a public four year college degree in America today can range anywhere from a total of 36,000 to 90,000 dollars. This amount of debt with interest that effects almost all college students in this era who take out student loans is unsustainable. 70% of college students will take out these students loans, which truly shows that the middle class suffers from the present economic education system. Their is no equality in a system that either makes a student go into immense debt at the young age of 21, or not be able to get a degree at all, while only the top percentage of Americans can afford to pay for these outrageous prices. Many will argue that it is the students fault for investing in a public college degree, but it hardly can be blamed on them when almost all jobs that aren’t trades require a degree.
I became very passionate about America’s need to lower the prices of a college degree or fix the college debt levels last year because of a sophomore seminar class that was offered to me.
(Continued) It made me completely aware of the impending issue that I would soon have college debt in the upcoming three years because of my plan to attend a four year college. At the end of this year when I was offered to take take the AP Lang course for relatively no money, I became even more frustrated. How is it that I could take a college like course right now for almost no money, but go into debt from this type of course as soon as I attend an actual college? As I keep on looking more and more into the economic crisis that comes with college it’s hard not to become angry. I constantly am plagued with new questions of the nature about how could America, who talks about equality so much, not have an easily accessible way to get education for everyone in a world where it’s basically necessary if you want a good paying job. I become especially angry when adults and sometimes other kids my age want to argue that their isn’t a crisis in the present education system.
ReplyDeleteArguing for one of my most passionate topics makes me realize how easily heated I could become in an actual argument on defending my stance on why the debt levels of education need to be handled. In the book “Thank You for Arguing” by Jay Heinrich, he brings up the concept of social power. While what he means could possibly be interpreted in different ways, I believe he meant that some people have easier positions in they way they argue because of they social statuses they were granted with. For example, someone who is graced with the luxury of being able to afford a college degree may have an easier way to defend their argument as of to why they believe Americans don’t have a college debt crisis. From reading his concepts of social power, I understand that I need to use my positions and experiences about how colleges debt can ruin someone’s lives to defend my argument.
I totally agree with the cost of college being ridiculously high. A lot of us want to go to college to get our degree and pursue a career, we shouldn’t be scared off by the huge price. We live in a world where anyone can achieve anything if they get the education they need, this shouldn’t be limited to what you can pay for schooling. Education should be accessible to people who truly want to use it to further themselves.
DeleteI’ve found that your argument gets the point across very well that college is exceedingly pricey. Your topic lies mostly in the future tense (choice) category, yet present tense plays a part as well. These high costs can not necessarily be blamed on any one certain thing. There is not a singular answer for this issue, which I think you write about very well. An idea that is present throughout your argument is that we, average American citizens, cannot do anything to minimize the cost of secondary education. This argument comes down to values as well, are you willing to pay these large costs? I definitely understand why certain higher education programs and even universities in general cost so much. However, looking from the perspective of how it can financially ruin you in the future is something to consider.
DeleteThere is a passage in Jeremiah 2:7 that reads, "I brought you into a fertile land to eat its fruit and rich produce. But you came and defiled my land and made my inheritance detestable.” These words make me feel an array of emotions. Firstly, joy, because our Creator has truly blessed us with this beautiful world. On the other hand, it makes me so sad that we are failing miserably at our given task of protecting his creation. The state of our environment is something that I am very passionate about. Spreading this passion is very important to me because a huge difference could be made in the world if everyone did just a few key things to help.
ReplyDeletePollution is the first and most prevalent issue that comes to mind. The obscene amount of plastic products, greenhouse gasses, chemicals, and other various pollutants that we are carelessly dumping outside is causing major problems. Sure, some people do not care in the slightest about wildlife, the health of our oceans, etc… . They feel completely removed from the situation. However, it is so much more than that. Habitats like the ocean and rainforest are foundations of entire ecosystems. Overfishing and discarded plastic getting carried into the oceans are making them a place where we cannot acquire the resources we have depended on since the beginning of time. Pollution is destroying the forest filled with materials absolutely necessary for us. We have become careless, and Gods beautiful creation is being demolished.
Changes need to be made in the way we live here on Earth for our sake and the sake of every future generation. As a result, these issues are something I try to help other people see and respond to. Personally, I think I am quite good at making my case without becoming angry. I don't really see the point. If something needs to be shared with someone, it might as well be done kindly in a way that makes sense. If they disagree, it is not worth an angry argument, but if we share the information we can at least know that they walk away with something to think about, no matter how they reacted to it.
Finally, I think by “social power” in Jay Heinrich's "Thank You for Arguing", he means a kind of basic ranking among humans, just not in the way we usually see it. It’s a social system of superiority based on intellect and ability to be calm and effective in everything one does, not just power based on money or status. All these things have really made me think, and without a doubt have set me even more on fire about my passion for the environment.
I agree that we are failing at taking care of God’s creation. I like the way you described it because it makes people think of the environment as something more than just political. An individual’s impact on the environment may not be huge, but if everyone does their part, an improvement can be made.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis is a very well written argument; however, I think it could be even better if the proper tense was utilized. When I first read this post, I could tell it was meant to be a persuasive argument, yet I didn’t feel as though I was being asked to make a choice. The majority of the post was demonstrative, and it simply told me about her values without asking me to make choices about my own. This was because most of the argument was written in the present tense. Instead, the past tense would be much more effective in accomplishing the goal she had in mind.
DeleteColossians 3:23 reads, “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as you are working for the Lord.” From this passage alone, it is easy to understand that God wants us to work hard and give glory to His name. It is important for everyone to work hard at what they do, but I believe that this is especially important for teenagers. Having a job in high school teaches invaluable skills that prepare young adults for surviving in college and going on to thrive in adulthood.
ReplyDeleteFrom personal experience, I have found that it is very common for young people to be frustrated with their lack of money. However, some young people choose to change that and get a job, while others are able to work but choose not to. In other circumstances, some parents are able to provide completely for their children, including expenses like cell phone bills and gas money. While it is great that some parents are able to do this, I know personally that taking care of some of my own expenses has taught me great responsibility. When I first began working, I felt that I had all of the money in the world. I quickly learned that this was not true. I began learning money-saving skills that I am still developing and will take with me when I go onto college and adulthood.
Having a job in high school also quickly develops one’s work ethic. I work at a very fast-paced restaurant. It was a difficult job to learn. Without the work ethic I have developed, I would never be able to keep up. I feel that this work ethic has carried over into my academic and personal life. It has given me a clear understanding of how important it is to work your hardest on every task you are given. Additionally, a job teaches social skills, time management, and how to handle difficult situations. These are all fundamental qualities that should be developed while in high school. Without these, people would struggle in college or their other future plans.
I personally struggle to argue without anger. I can calmly make points in a discussion, but I get heated very easily. However, I know that it is very difficult to take someone who is angry in a serious manner, which is what helps me to regain my calm state. Getting angry will not help someone understand or consider my opposing point of view.
I believe that the concept of social power Jay Heinrich touches upon in “Thank You for Arguing” is our sense of respect as human beings. Those who are the most respected are the ones we listen to most, such as the president or the pope. Our ability to argue and overall carry ourselves calmly is what should bring us respect from others. Because of this, it is essential to be able to show respect in order to receive it. This supports my belief that high schoolers should have jobs because overall, I feel that my job has taught me to respect everyone that I interact with. While I was able to respect people before I began working, I received an entirely new perspective after getting a job. That perspective has made me passionate about working and about others doing the same.
I completely agree with your idea of needing a work ethic to be able to keep up at a job. Without my work ethic I definitely wouldn’t be able to show up to work everyday. I also think your idea of what social power is interesting. I didn’t think about it as having respect for others. I also liked how you incorporated God’s want for us to work hard to bring glory to his name.
DeleteI think that getting a job can really help kids learn skills that can't be taught at school. A good work ethic can help people be the best at whatever they are working on. Your view on social power is really interesting. It is a good point that the more respected people know how to handle themselves properly.
DeleteI agree with all of this and I really liked the way you focused on the skills having a job can give you. Some kids are spoiled and have no need for jobs, so it’s good that you pointed out why having one is so important. I also liked the way you defined “social power.” I've read through most of these blogs, yet your definition really caught my attention most of all.
DeleteVivian, this blog post is beautifully written. It has a wonderful balance being it was very informative yet it felt personal. It was just the right touch to keep me interested in reading! Your blog post was also easy to relate to, as many of us have jobs as teenagers. It forced me to recall of all the things having a responsibility teaches us.
Delete"Thank You for Arguing," by Jay Heinrich discusses tenses in chapter three. Surprisingly enough, there are really only three tenses that a good argument can abide by. Those tenses are as follows: blame, value, and choice. Vivian, in relation to your blog, I would say it's written in the value tense. I say this because you expanded on the importance of teens being employed, as it builds character in a sense.
Concerning the past, present and future rules that follow tenses, I believe your blog follows value's present tense rule quite well. However, some portions of your post "flipped" from present to past tense when describing your experiences. This did not cause any confusion, or take away from the overall gist of your blog.
Although your post is almost entirely written in present tense, (as it coincides with the value tense rule) I would say it reads as a deliberative tone. A deliberative tone pairs with the future tense, according to Heinrich. He defines deliberative tone as, "argument that promises a payoff." Your argument gave the impression that if a teen works, they will gain real-life experience.
Despite the constructive criticism, your blog post was, again, just lovely. I could really tell it was a topic you are passionate about. Personally, when I can truly tell by just reading how driven someone is by a subject I am far more intrigued. Bravo to you! I'm looking very forward to seeing what else you have in store on your blog for the rest of the school year.
Congressman Morris “Mo” Brooks stated at a Washington Update luncheon that “good, healthy people should not be subsidizing the care of others.” I agree. This statement was a part of Brooks’ discussion of healthcare in Alabama, the state in which he serves as a U.S. Representative in the Republican party. On the opposite side, the Democratic idea is that most or all healthcare expenses should be government funded. Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the leader of the ‘Medicare for All’ caucus, is rewriting the House bill to appear more like the Senate bill, written by Sen. Bernie Sanders. Their idea, theoretically, sounds good. Providing free healthcare for all Americans at the expense of the federal government, but this idea is highly problematic and begs the question, where is the money going to come from to fund such a massive undertaking?
ReplyDeleteMedicare for All claims that total government control over American healthcare secures higher quality care at lower costs, but this is just not the truth. It’s actually contradictory, they say they will give Americans a new healthcare system for less, but turn around and expect them to pay nearly double in taxes for it. Over the course of just 10 years, Medicare for All would cost the federal government about 32.6 trillion dollars. That cost then falls directly into the hands of working class taxpayers. If this change were to happen, people of affluence should expect their tax bill to raise 70% as well. U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson stated in an interview that "you could double every American’s tax bill and it still wouldn’t pay for it.”
Another fact that I think is disregarded in Democratic discussions is that both bills would outlaw the use of private and employer-sponsored health plans, which cover about 181 million Americans. This means Medicare for All would eliminate American’s ability to use private health insurance. By essentially eradicating the medical insurance industry with this act, over one million jobs would be terminated as a result. "M4A (Medicare for All) will be neither more efficient nor cheaper than the current system, and it could adversely affect health," says the report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers. The White House also calculated that if Medicare for All was financed through higher taxes, it would end up reducing household income by 19%. Besides several health plan providers being run out of business, Americans would not be provided the same coverage through this new plan. The effect of federal spending through this new plan—according to the White House—would cause shortages of care, longer wait times, and reduced innovation in the healthcare system by 2022.
I have an interest in both the medical field and politics and this is issue checks both of those boxes. I believe the thought that completely changing the medical insurance system and overriding insurance companies that already exist is a social injustice. It’s easy for most politicians to advocate for a change like this with the platform they have, but that’s because they are not affected by it. Working class American taxpayers would take the brunt of the impact. There are countless leftist news providers that report on Medicare for All as an easy way to cover anyone and everyone. They publish articles claiming it will solve all the issues caused by single-payer taxing, yet they fail to realize that Medicare for All is riddled with flaws that are severely detrimental.
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteI believe Heinrichs’ idea of social power works into this very well. Leaders in both the Republican and Democratic parties gain social power from people who share likeminded ideas. For the Democratic party, Bernie Sanders and Pramila Jayapal’s words are perceived as valuable to people who support them and their ideas, giving them social power within their political platform. I interpreted Heinrichs’ reference to social power more as the effect that your message can have depending on how you present it, which can affect one’s social power. Heinrichs’ mentioning of finding a new source of social power is a result of writing without the intention of angrily expressing your views. In his book, Thank You for Arguing, Heinrichs sees this through discovering rhetoric, thanks to John Quincy Adams’ rhetorical lectures he taught at Harvard. The way Heinrichs describes having a visceral reaction to Adams’ work, he was moved by what he read. I see it more as a philosophical view, keeping your composure while arguing and writing in a mature fashion that will allow your message to be conveyed and remain timeless. Heinrichs describes Adams’ words as ‘antique’ but that they still uphold a certain power. The eloquence of Adams’ words have a clear impact on Heinrichs. I, myself, believe i can argue without anger or sarcasm if i have the factual evidence to back up what i am seeking to prove. However, it may be difficult to not become angered when you are being served an injustice, in this case. I think presenting facts in a respectful manner whether it is to inform someone or disprove something, has a great deal of power. If the evidence to prove something is not present, then it is not worth it to feud over.
In this blog, you did a really great job of arguing the facts of a sensitive topic in today’s political world. It has become clear to me how you got your points across in such a straight forward way after reading Jay Heinrich’s “Thank You For Arguing”. Your blog focused mainly on a choice persuasion topic. It begged the question on what type of healthcare is best for our countries needs and how each kind would effect our government. I believe the way you used the choice topic worked really well because it followed the rules of being in the future tense. I think the argument being mostly in future tense really worked because it is often times the easiest to argue for according to Aristotle. This argument also was deliberative because it ended with the sense that one certain time of healthcare would benefit our countries future needs. Once again I would just like to mention that I really enjoyed this argument because it allowed me, who definitely believes in medicare for all, view some of the downsides that would come with it!
DeleteLast summer I became the owner of a golden retriever. She came into my life during an especially hard time when my dad became sick. What started out as a distraction from a sad event, turned into one of the most important things in my life. Taking care of the dog’s life helped me learn what it is like to really have responsibilities. I did not want my family members to help train the dog or pick up the slack on the chores that I normally did around the house. I wanted to learn the correct way to teach my dog that she needed to go to the bathroom outside and how I could help her live a good life.
ReplyDeleteI was always trying to prove to my parents why I would benefit from a dog but all they focused on were the negative aspects. Many times I would start to discuss it and get angry because I knew it was not going to work out in my favor. At first when this would happen, I would get upset and start whining and yelling that it was not fair. After a few months of this, I realized that if I wanted to take care of an animal, which would require being responsible, I needed to start changing my attitude. So instead of arguing back to my parents when they disagreed, I would respectfully listen and not interrupt them. When I actually listened to them I realized that the reasons they were telling me were right and that it was not a good time to get a new dog. I stop asking for a long time until I got older and was more prepared to handle the responsibility.
Some new events in my life changed my parents plans for the future. The events caused my dad to put my wants before his and allow me to get a dog. Even though he did not want one he thought that it would help me to remain happy through the more difficult times ahead.
When Jay Heinrich used the term social power in his book he meant that people who have more power and resources can influence others’ decisions easily. Someone who has power over someone else could be a parent and their children. The child’s respect for their parents could be what causes them to stop and think about the reasons for the parents choices.
This is Sophia Fragale. I don't know why it isn't showing my name.
DeleteSoph! This really resonated with me. I also had the hardest time convincing my parents to let me get a dog. When we did, I, like you, had to step up and take major responsibility in his growing up. I thoroughly enjoyed your story of how Winnie helped you through difficult times. There is nothing like a dog! On top of all that, your comment on Heinrich's idea of social power was super insightful. Loved this!
DeleteSophie, this is a really well-rounded argument about the meaning of having a dog, and the impacts it can have on one's life. I believe this argument is made out to be one of choice, simply, to purchase a dog, or not purchase one. Yet, it still holds values in perspective. However, this argument seems to fall under the wrong tense in my opinion. I believe rather than arguing in the past tense, try creating more of a deliberative approach to entice me to follow your side of the argument. It will open the door wider to your side of the argument.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the age of social media, do we truly know the difference between real life and the social construction of reality? With countless online applications at our generation's disposal, it can be very difficult to see the line at which these two worlds meet. Funny enough, while I was scrolling through social media I came across this anonymous quote, "Don't lose what's real, chasing what appears to be." I believe as time goes on the more troubling it becomes for adolescence to grasp what is real and what is not. Society pushes standards that can be damaging not only to ones self image but also to people's attitudes towards one another.
ReplyDeleteAs a teen immersed in the age of technology I would say I have firsthand experience in trying to maneuver through social media's biggest downfalls. Don't get me wrong, I, like many kids my age, can't resist a good swipe (or ten) through Instagam. However, with easy access to photoshop-esque apps it is very simple to alter your own body in photos. For example, media influencers or "instagram models" can easily change the curvature of their natural bodies to match a certain societal standard. This poses a threat to how one can look at themselves. Studies conducted at UCLA have shown that social media is the biggest enemy in the rise of body dysmorphia. In fact, numbers have risen to upwards of 2.4% of the population being diagnosed with this disease. This percentage may not sound like very much but it is only on the rise.
To add to the faults in which social media encapsulates, there is a growing popularity in "cancel culture." This is the act of purposely destroying someone's reputation by embarrassment or harassment to, in turn, "cancel" their career or online appearance. The biggest concern is that bullying others on the web has become a form of enjoyment for many. Gary Zukav states, "Scarcity of self-value cannot be remedied by money, recognition, affection, attention or influence." I feel that this quote embodies our generation's issues with differentiating between actuality and social media. Society has skewed reality for many by forming near impossible standards for looks as well as encouraging the ruination of others. I am extremely passionate about this topic, as the discussion of mental health is very important to me.
This leads me to the next topic of whether or not I feel as if I'm able to argue without anger. To answer, I'd say yes. While I do tend to get quite passionate, it is all from a place of care as opposed to vexation. Although, my tone of voice can sometimes be aggressive so I do have to get in the right mindset to make a strong argument without sounding angered.
Lastly, in Jay Heinrich's "Thank You for Arguing," I believe the term "social power" is referring to the separate classes of human beings. However, similar to many of our conclusions, I feel sure Heinrich is alluding to a more cerebral power. On the surface "social power" could mean anything that could help assert dominance; such as money, hierarchy, number of followers, etc. Nevertheless, Heinrich's comment on rhetoric is based off of the intellectual power that anyone can achieve. Learning the art of arguing is something virtually anyone can accomplish no matter their social status. In my opinion, this is a really beautiful thing that ties almost directly into my topic of argument. Loving yourself should be based on your core beliefs and your mind instead of beauty or financial greatness. When we engage in behaviors that encourage deep thinking it can inspire self growth, which can become our own definition of "social power."
I totally agree. Social media is a major source of trouble for the new generation. Not to sound like an oldie, but it really is a huge cause if depression, anxiety, you name it. I remember reading a book by Mark Manson in which he mentioned that a hundred years ago, if Farmer Joe felt sad he'd acknowledge it and go back to shoveling manure. But today, you feel sad, and you go on Instagram and see how "happy" everyone else is and it creates this positive feedback loop starting with , "why am I sad, everyone else is happy" and then feeling sad about being sad, repeat. We all need a reminder that it's okay to not be okay, to not be perfect, to not be 100 percent all the time. Love this take.
DeleteI agree with your assessment on social media. I believe that much of technology has created a new sense of what reality is for young kids who are engulfing themselves into the virtual world. I liked how you put into detail how people are physically manipulating their own body structure to suite the pleasure of a virtual world, which should not have any effect on how someone should view themselves. It is a concern that I, too, believe should be heavily monitored and dealt with. It is hard to believe that technology is not affecting younger people critically.
DeleteThe topic of social media effect on the psychology of those who use it is a blame issue. We know the problems that have become evident in society. Vanity and bullying in particularly, but here we see them clearly linked to a common blame-able factor. Liv, you do a great job of presenting the issues that come with social media in society, but Heinrichs, or more specifically Aristotle, does make it clear, the future tense is the most effective, and blaming is the least. You are pointing blame effectively, threatening punishment, but the reader isn't compelled to do anything. I even agreed with you, but I still took multiple breaks while writing this to look at my phone. More specifically Instagram. Great points though!
Delete“Chaos cannot bring about order.” While a quote this short and simple will easily be agreed upon by almost everyone without a second thought, problems can arise at its application. Growing up in a Catholic school system, we tend to be shielded from the alternative ideas of the world; however, as time progresses, I have seen many classmates and friends fall prey to these falsehoods. This morning at mass, Father Canice used this quote in his homily during a brief discussion of the existence of God, and though the tangent only lasted a minute or so, it continued to linger in my mind because of how strongly I believe in the subject.
ReplyDeleteThe opposing explanation is often structured on the argument that the idea of a God is simply illogical or “too far out.” However, this simple quote shows us that a lack of God is, in fact, illogical. Our beautiful world is so incredibly complex down to the smallest details, so how is it logical to say that all of this just “happened.” Another statement Father made exemplifies my argument perfectly, “You can throw a deck of cards into the air a billion times and it will never land into a perfect house of cards.” Well, the universe only had one singular try at becoming the way it is, so how is it possible or logical that everything became this perfect just by chance.
Another common argument is that science and religion cannot coincide, but this could not be further from the truth. Many say that science’s theory that evolution occurred over millions of years contradicts Catholicism’s idea that God created the world in seven days. However, we cannot simply isolate the creation story and use it on its own. We must read the entire Bible in order to truly understand it. 2 Peter 3:8 says “One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” This means that God’s concept of a day is very different from ours. This is much more logical being that the sun was only created on the fourth day, so 24 hour days could not have possibly been used to measure time when God put the universe in motion. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that the Earth was around for billions of years before life ever touched its surface. Another thing we must recognize is that evolution was simply God working through a natural process. We often like to imagine massive hands of God sculpting the universe, but this personification is not necessarily true. We see God working around us in our lives everyday, yet we don't physically see him. Why should creation be any different?
Arguing took up a large portion of Accelerated English my sophomore year, and if there was one important lesson I learned, it's that reason and logic will work more effectively than “shoving your ideas down someone’s throat” every time. Not that becoming angry during arguments has ever been a problem for me, but that class really showed me why it's so important to keep your cool.
Finally, in Jay Heinrich's "Thank You for Arguing," I believe that by “social power,” he is referring to one's ability to argue effectively. Money and high social status will mean nothing in the end of you can't explain and persuade others with your ideas. In fact, those with money and high social status are where they are because of this social power. For example, the one thing that any elected official has in common is the ability to explain their ideas and convince the public that they are the best person for the job.
Joe, you shared some awesome thoughts in this post. It definitely gave me some points to think about. I agree with the idea that God made us, our world, and the whole universe. I also share the belief that he is very real. You presented a great argument, and I would like to analyze it a bit further.
DeleteIn Jay Heinrichs, “Thank You for Arguing” some basic tools to identify a specific type of three basic types of argument, or to choose which would be most effective in any given situation, are presented. By applying these to Joe’s writing on the existence of God, it becomes easier to see the goal Joe had in mind and how effective he was in reaching it.
The case made was one regarding values. Is God real? or rather, Is he simply too illogical or far fetched to be anything more than a bedtime story? Joe made a case not pertaining to who was responsible or if an action was to occur or not, but rather relating to only belief or non belief in the value at hand. Using predominantly the present tense, a convincing demonstrative argument was shared. These three characteristics — value, present tense, and demonstrative are all linked together. There are two other options that other students may point out in response to other blog posts. However, for this comment, there will be a focus on the one just mentioned, and how well Joe stuck to it.
Overall I think he did very well. He presented most of his argument in the present tense, aside from a few examples, which only added to his proposition. He continued to back his standpoint with several good points, which made it very convincing. Any argument could become stronger, but I think Joe did a wonderful job.
Standout highschool soccer athlete Dan Mcquaide once said, "Soccer is the language between countries." He is saying soccer is the best sport to play or watch. It has brought the human race together for hundreds of years, in fact, since the mid nineteenth century. Many Americans believe that 'football' is the superior sport. (American football played with hands, not fútbol as soccer is known across the world, excluding the United States)This is false for many reasons. Firstly, football is not exactly a team sport. Yes the players know the plays they run, and the quarterback runs the field, but there is no synergy. When it comes down to it, it's all based on the players' abilities to tackle one another, or to run, throw, or catch the ball. Meanwhile, soccer is all about team play and synergy. Playing FIFA and Madden from a young age teaches one that you can put the best forward with the best wings, but still lose 5-0, because there is no connection between the players. On the other hand, you can construct the most random assortment of wide receivers, linemen, and running backs, and do just fine, because the game is based on tackles, passes, catches, and runs. More than half the game is an individually based workload, meaning that it's up to each individual to carry out one secluded action, rather than to work as a team, as soccer requires. Secondly, soccer requires much more finesse, coordination, and thought than football. For example, when a coach or quarterback calls a play, the players will do their part of it, and nothing else. Of course there's a little room for improvisation, but nothing compared to that of soccer. And once the play's over, the game stops, they start over and call another play. Meanwhile, soccer is almost all improvisation, each player thinking for him or herself, predicting and reacting accordingly. The plays almost never stop. The ball rolls out, simply throw it back in. There is no time to stop and ask the coach what play is next, each player simply does what they think is best, and if the synergy is there, everyone will work together to achieve their common goal… a goal.
ReplyDeleteI often have trouble with containing my anger in arguments, it's just the way I am. But reading a lot of psychology based material has helped me understand why I am the way I am, and what I can do to change it. So I have made, and continue to make progress in remaining calm during debates, especially concerning topics I am passionate about. And this has lead to certain insight about Heinrichs quote.
When anger appears in an argument, the topic of debate is automatically disregarded and it comes down to slashing one another. Remaining calm and deliberate is the most effective way to get a point across. That's why social power, in this context, should be considered the validity that comes with calmness in an argument. If people started looking for middle ground, and stopped looking to be right, debates would be so much more fruitful.
I like to sleep, a lot. Typically, when someone is known to sleep so often, it comes off as lazy, disorderly, or antisocial. This isn’t always the case. High school kids are supposed to get around eight hours of sleep a night. I don’t think I know anyone who gets an average of eight hours of sleep a night. Getting this much sleep all at once is difficult for someone like me, who has two jobs, a busy school schedule, and is participating in two sports. Whenever I get about an hour in between activities, I use that opportunity to take a nap. As I said, this seems lazy, disorderly, and antisocial. It’s quite the opposite. In a recent study done by Sleep Advisor, it was shown that “power” naps boost learning and memory, motivation, and aids decision making. Little sleep also contributes to low mental health levels, so if sleep levels go up a moderate amount, so does mental health. Not only does sleep aid in mental aspects, but it could also bring us closer to God. God appears to prophets, sinners, and saints in dreams a significant number of times in the Bible. He appeared to St. Joseph, the Prophet Daniel, and the Pharaoh of Egypt, just to name a few. By closing our minds off to earthly things, we are inviting the spiritual world to enter our minds. People may argue and say that sleeping during the day causes one to miss out on life, but sleep is healthier and makes a positive difference in life rather than mindlessly scrolling through social media or watching Netflix for hours. Many people browse the internet or use cell phones as a way to wind down and rest, but this is being the opposite of beneficial.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, Mary, I would like to congratulate you on a well-written post. Just by simply glossing over, prior to a more in-depth peek, I can deduce how straightforward and honest your opinion is. This argument is so well constructed that I believe I can accurately pinpoint which of the three basic rhetorical issues—blame, values, or choice— to which your lines follow. I think that your argument on the benefits of napping stems from a place where values grow the most fervently. Judging by the demonstrative facts that you lay out on the table, it has become rather transparent that you are presently arguing for the support of said opinion, and, after all, values are issues that frequently come construed in a present-set light.
DeleteWith all of this being said, I do believe you are utilizing the present-tense rule correctly, and it appears to work quite nicely due to the interwoven web you stitched together between personal experience and borderline facts. The persuasive tone seems to stay quite relevant as you put forth information, such as Sleep Advisor’s statement on power naps and Genesis 37: 1-44 (a chapter and collection of verses that pertain focus on Joseph and the Dreamer, which was one of your examples of God utilizing dreams to communicate with His prophets). Your argument tumbled over as being a kind of “demonstrative” rhetoric. At the point of your very last sentence, it seems as though you used this language to divide audience types whom take their cell phones out as a manner of easing themselves following the events of a day. This is evident in the final statement of “but this is being the opposite of beneficial”. However, despite that piece of rhetoric, I believe your demonstrative rhetoric had an end goal of bringing those targeted in your audience in a tighter bond. You did succeed in that, as you certainly changed my values and present-thinking on the overall benefits of the art of a quick sleep.
"Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.'" says the Bible quote Jeremiah 1:4-5. I value the life of a human being, born or unborn, as a gift from the Lord, to serve Him, and to be instruments of His mighty work. I believe all life, from conception to natural death, has been planned by our loving creator, Jesus Christ. The topic of abortion brings forth feelings of compassion for the innocent lives taken each and every day, sorrow for those who cannot reach better means, and the feeling of change this nation needs to bring about. Life is a beautiful gift given to us, and it is our duty as born humans to allow all of the unborn to experience its magnificence.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I believe I am a rather "easy-going" arguer, and stay relatively calm during a mature-mannered argument. In this case on the topic of abortion, I find it not only crucial, but imperative that I listen and hear the points of another that has opposite beliefs in the subject at hand. It is essentially impossible to win over another's belief through anger. One's reason to believe abortion is acceptable usually comes by the result of personal experience with the subject, which shows how important delicacy is in an argument on the topic of abortion. In addition, it is quite unnecessary to show anger in an argument, as this leads to negative outcomes, and shows immaturity in the ability to argue.
In my opinion, Jay Heinrich's phrase "social power" speaks a lot towards the influence people have on a higher popular status, rather than people of a low, and unknown state. As an example, I myself would have an unbelievably difficult time attempting to persuade a large number of people with my idea, but on the other hand, someone well known throughout this world, as our president of the United States of America, Donald Trump, would have an edge in influencing that same crowd of people, due to his large presence in this world. However, in a large sense, these people should have the ability to show thorough logic in their defense toward their argument or idea. In reading this text, I have come to realize the beauty in the complexity of an argument.
I think that your post about abortion is very good. In the present tense you have given many ways to carry out an effective argument about something very important in society today. Everyone has problems in their life that others do not know about and people should really think about how that can affect view points on issues in life.
Delete