Sorry for the delay! When I discovered that students had not had iPads since the last day of school, I decided to provide a little catch up time. I know you can all access this blog in a myriad of other ways, but it is often a good idea to just give people time to catch their breath. So, moving on.
Each of you made an argument in our first post. They include the following topics:
vivisection
educational costs
pollution
employment of youth
"medicare for all"
dog ownership
social media
the existence of God
fútbol vs. football
napping
Right to Life
In chapter 3 of Thank you for Arguing, Chapter 3 titled "Control the Tense" breaks rhetoric down into three basic issues, blame, values and choice. Go back to last weeks post and choose a topic other than your own. Comment on the post you choose and tell us whether that topic is an issue of blame, values or choice. Then, read your classmates argument and see if it follows the present-tense, past-tense, future-tense rule described on page 30. Also, is the argument demonstrative, forensic or deliberative? First come first serve. No repeats. Once a topic is taken, it no longer available.
Once a classmate has analyzed your argument, take a look at it. Consider how well you controlled the issue.
" Do you want to fix blame? Define woh meets or abuses your common values" or get your audience to make a choice? The most productive arguments use choice as their central issue. Don't let a debate serve heedlessly into values or guild. Keep it focused on choices that solve a problem to your audience's and your advantage. Control the clock. Keep your argument in the right tense. In a debate over choices, make sure it turns to the future. "(37).
For this weeks post, edit and rewrite your original argument so that it is stronger.
“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 will often arise at its application. When kids like us grow up in a Catholic school system, they will often be shielded from the alternative and evil ideas of the world; however, as time progresses, some will 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.
ReplyDeleteI tend to hear a multitude of opposing arguments, and most of the ones I hear will be often structured on the argument that the idea of a God is simply illogical or “too far out.” However, this simple quote will reveal to us that perhaps the very opposite is true. Reading the quote will show that the lack of a God is, in fact, illogical. Our beautiful world is so incredibly complex down to the smallest details, so do you think that it is logical to say that all of this could ever just “happen?” Another statement father made which we must consider exemplifies my argument perfectly, “You could 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 would it ever be possible or logical that everything could become this complex just by chance?
Another common point many will use is that science and religion cannot coincide, but this theory would not be true at all. Some would try to argue that science’s theory that evolution occurred over millions of years would harshly contradict Catholicism’s idea that God created the world in seven days. However, we must not simply isolate the creation story and use it on its own. In order for you to truly understand the context of this story, you would need to examine the entire Bible. Read 2 Peter 3:8, and you will learn that, “One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” After reading this verse, wouldn’t you agree that God’s concept of time and days must be different from ours? In fact, if you were to read farther into the creation story, you would learn that the sun was only created on the fourth day. Therefore, it would only make sense that God must not use 24 hour days to measure time. Moreover, it would make perfect sense that the Earth could have been around for billions of years before life ever touched its surface. Another thing we must recognize is that evolution is simply God working through a natural process. Many times, you and I will imagine the massive hands of God sculpting the universe, but this personification comes entirely from our own minds. Every day, we see God working around us in our lives, yet we don’t physically see him in these instances. Why would creation be any different?
In 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 kids, much like you and I, to grasp what is real and what is not. As I’m sure many of us could agree, society’s standards are constantly changing and becoming increasingly demanding. Needless to say, this can be damaging not only to one’s 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. One of those “downfalls” being easy access to photoshop-esque apps. These online applications make it 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. Perhaps, there are some teens who feel they are not affected by what they are consuming via electronic device. Unfortunately, this could not be further from the truth. Studies conducted at UCLA have shown that social media has a much bigger impact on us than we may think, as it goes hand in hand with the rise of body dysmorphia. In fact, numbers have risen to upwards of 2.4% of the population being diagnosed with this disease.
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteTo add to the chaos 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 troubles with differentiating between actuality and social media. Overtime, daily life has been skewed for many. As teens are bombarded with countless, near impossible standards for looks, the ruination of others is on the rise. Our entire generation’s mental health is at stake which is incredibly concerning. When we all work together, big changes can be made to help all of us in the long term sense. 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. To continue, 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 message 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."
There 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.” Reading these words made 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 have failed miserably at our given task of protecting his creation. The state of our environment is something that I am passionate about. Spreading this passion is very important to me because how we choose to go forward regarding the issue will impact every single one of us. It’s easy to say, “I am just one person among billions, I won’t change a thing.” but that attitude is why we’re here in the first place. Each person can help the movement my making a habit of small decisions with a large goal in mind.
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 have dumped outside has caused major backlash. Sure, some people will continue to do so without a thought about wildlife, the health of our oceans, etc… . They have always felt completely removed from the situation. However, the environmental issues at hand will become harder to ignore, and will have direct effects on every one extremely soon. Habitats like the ocean and rainforest will lose their ability to be proper foundations of entire ecosystems. Overfishing and discarded plastic will continue to move into the oceans and will make them a place where we cannot acquire the resources we have depended on since the beginning of time. Pollution will destroy the forest filled with materials absolutely necessary for us. Our actions will continue to ravage the earth we love, but only if we will let them.
Changes will need to be made in the way we live here on Earth for our sake and the sake of every future generation. We will have to become the difference that we are all waiting to see. It will by no means be easy, but we need to start now. Many people will wait to see the blunt of the devastating changes mentioned to start doing something about it, so why not just start now?
Clearly these issues are something I try to help other people see and respond to, because they really matter to me. Personally, I think I am quite good at making my case without becoming angry. I don't really see the point. If something should be shared with someone, it might as well be done kindly, and in a way that makes sense. If they disagree, it is not worth an angry argument. If we are able to civilly share the information, we can at least know that they walk away with something to think about, no matter how they reacted to it. Sounds like a win to me.
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.
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 almost all of 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. I think almost all Americans can come to an agreement that 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. When faced with this issue, many Americans should consider “ Either we fix the current debt crisis, or let debt harm our future leaders”. I believe this type of thought can truly show the values that people hold.
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. While it is understandable that our country can not fix the current debt situations at this very second, I believe we Americans must urge our leaders to come to common ground and find a solution that we can enact in the future to help our students.
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. 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. I think that at this point we all need to accept that we have an education crisis and either need to lower college prices or have a way to lower the debt levels.
DeleteArguing 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 rhetoric comes with social power because it helps you talk what you want into existence. This social power could help me when I become angry in an argument because it would give me the ability to talk control of the situation and change the argument toward the points I want. There are many techniques I could use that would help me have a type of social power, but the one that I thought helps in an argument the most is using desire. When rhetoric helps me control the mood, mind, and willingness of a reader using their desires, such as someone desiring a debt free future for our teenage Americans, I believe it allows me to control the argument without anger.
Standout high school 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. One may argue that players know the plays they run, and the quarterback runs the field, therefore there is synergy and teamwork there. There is. There is synergy in the same way Kim Jong Un has synergy with his Cabinet members. Kim calls the shots, and if anyone disagrees or contradicts him, they're as good as dead, as a player on the field is as good as dead if he doesn't follow the quarterback or coach's call. 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. All the players must work together on a soccer field. 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. Of course football requires much more physical strength, and body mass, but again, individuality is ever present here. Gaining body mass is primarily for the individual to do. But for one soccer player to know that his pal's head is going to be in the exact spot, at the exact angle needed to make a goal, that takes connection. A connection that football just doesn't have. 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.
ReplyDeleteCongressman 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. Sure it sounds selfish of us to say we should not be liable for strangers, but that is reality. At the end of the day, people who work and provide for their own families, should not have to deal with another’s needs. 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. I think it is a little ridiculous for jobless Americans to expect their healthcare and other expenses to be taken care of by someone else. It’s easy to judge something like this and say it will work, but we have to understand the damaging effect 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. That is a lot of people with insurance coverage that could be severely jeopardized. 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. Simply put, this enormous plan just isn’t feasible.
I have an interest in both the medical field and politics and this 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.
Colossians 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. I am learning money-saving skills that I 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.
Once someone understands these benefits, they are faced with two options: take the plunge and seek employment or try to develop these characteristics on their own. Which one is going to be more beneficial? While there is no cookie cutter plan for every human being’s life, I feel that getting a job is the best option.
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.
“Whoever is righteous 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 the eyes of 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. Those open-ended words are to spark conversation into a turn-around for those who may view their “beast” in a less than compassionate light. They should provide a prodding as to why being a person rooted in morals translates to being kind to all those whom they find sharing the same earthly dwelling as themselves.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I care about the rights of those who cannot or are too frightened to 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. My motivation comes from the love I gathered from the various animals that have touched my heart. Animals have given me a creative outlet and have taught me how to better myself.
I was fortunate enough to become released from the facade of “everything is fine”. This stems from the various articles that I wrote for a class called AP Biology and a 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. Thoughts often stirred in my head that centered on ways to combat this unneeded procedure. It actually came in the form of a topic for one of my AP Biology articles: Synthetic Canine Cadavers. These breakthrough-hounds in medicine completely destroy the need for live animals to be used in “practice surgery,” as they are nearly perfectly identical to real dogs, equipped with artificial blood and heartbeat. They are stripped down to their muscular skeleton for better viewing on behalf of their doctors. This amazing find wholly eliminates to senseless waste of life that is vivisection.
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteFor reasons such as this procedure, I find myself placing a great deal of blame upon my own species for such vile acts. As I become older and more educated, 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.
Previously 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—although some may find it difficult to understand. This is why I tend to have a pressure to argue 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. However, I am aware that others are much better at expressing themselves through their words than I am, so I am happy to learn from them in that manner.
Jay Heinrich touched upon the point 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 shows gratitude to 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. Heinrich is using three incredibly influential men—Aristotle the philosopher, Homer Simpson the comedian, and Abraham Lincoln the game-changer—to contort his own ideas and examples for his audience to understand. “Social power,” in my opinion, is comparable to 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 safeguard 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. This is a tendency that much be suppressed on my part. 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).
Last 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.
ReplyDeleteTo help myself win the argument for a dog, I needed to explain to my parents meaningful facts that proved I was capable of taking care of a dog. To properly defend my points I would bring up the topics every couple of weeks. The discussions needed to be mature and not end in an argument. If my parents were going to believe me I needed to act more responsible and have a better attitude when discussions did not go my way. 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.
"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 will always 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 will bring 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 will need to bring about if we want to preserve our right to life. Life will always be a beautiful gift given to us, and it is our duty as born humans to allow all of the unborn to experience its magnificence for eternity.
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.