Visual Arguement

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1xXNoB3t8vM

Response to Poniewozik (154)

In the article "Ugly, the American" James Poniewozik claims that diversity is what makes America such a wonderful country. Poniewozik uses many examples from today's pop culture to support his claim. He states that reality television, extremely popular in America, is purely import. On the note of reality television being so popular, Poniewozik states that this is because it embodies the American spirit.

Poniewozik has several warrants that can be drawn from the article. The author feels that America is a diverse nation, and that this is positive. He also believes that other people feel the same way about people, that the love of diversity is a common virtue. I do not think that Poniewozik does a good job of arguing his position. His approach involves too much sentimental appeal. Rather than use hard facts to persuade, Poniewozik relies too hard on appealing to America's sense of patriotism

Response to Williams(58)

In his article "Realistic Idealists" Alex Williams claims that our generation is much more philanthropic than previous generations. He starts the presentation of this idea with an example of a family. The mother of the family comes from a long line of philanthrapists and is perfectly used to the idea. However, her oldest daughter was raised when social service was no more than a requirement at private schools. The mother states that now, things have completely turned around. Her younger daughter has already completed her own service project and participated in many others. Williams then presents September 11 as the cause for this spurt in social activism. He feels that experiencing such a great tragedy has caused our generation to feel a sense of philanthropic duty.

The author of the article has many different warrants. He feels that social service is important in today's culture. He also thinks that today's youth are participating in social service activities out of good will. Williams does an excelent job of making a case for his claim. His use of examples and stories from our generation really help to convey his message.

Rhetorical Analysis

"The Rap Against Rockism" by Kelefa Sanneh

Central Claim: "The problem with rockism is that it seems increasingly far removed from the way most people actually listen to music." (pg. 355)

My Central Claim: "The author presents his argument with strong examples and opinions, but fails to make a solid and convincing argument." (pg. 1)

My Revised Claim: "Senneh's use of strong opinions, and lack of solid facts, decreases the effectiveness of his article."

My Conclusion: "...Senneh does not follow through on his strong examples and opinions with sufficient supporting detail." (pg. 3)

Prep for Rhetoricla Analysis

John Mohrmann
English 101:056
September 18, 2007
Rhetorical Analysis Reflection

The first article I chose to read was “Gen Y’s Ego Trip Takes a Bad Turn”, by Larry Gordon and Louis Sahagun. The article covers the problems associated with the emphasis on self esteem over the past few decades. The authors provide evidence to back the argument that Generation Y’s self absorbed attitude will be detrimental to their success in life.
The second article I chose to consider was “The Rap against Rockism” by Kelefa Sanneh. In the article, Sanneh criticizes Rockists’ for having a prejudiced view of music today. He complains that they are too conservative and want all music to fit into the rock category.
I chose to write my rhetorical analysis on “The Rap against Rockism”. I chose this article because I think it will be an interesting learning experience to analyze an article I completely disagree with.
Outline:
P1: Introduction
P2: What type of text is the article?
P3: Who is the author writing to? A: Rockists B: Popists
P4: What qualifies the author to make this argument, and is it working?
P5: How do the author’s and reader’s constraints affect the effectiveness of the article
P6: Why does the author see Rockism as an important social issue? Is it?
P7: Conclusion

SWA #5

John Mohrmann
English 101:056
September 13, 2007
SWA

The article “Virginia Tech and Our Impoverished Language for Evil”, by Gregg Easterbrook, was written for The New Republic. The main idea of the article is about the problems with using politically correct terms to describe the massacre at Virginia Tech. The author stresses that the descriptive phrases used by the media were too light. The article is a good form for stating an opinion logically, and in a succinct fashion.
Easterbrook’s audience is mainly the subscribers of the newspaper the article appeared in. More specifically, the author is writing to those who might not have considered the view that the events a Virginia Tech were taken too lightly. I feel, as I’m sure that Easterbrook felt, that this article does a very good job a making a convincing argument. Most people that read this article would, at least, seriously consider this viewpoint; if not be in completely convinced. I myself cannot identify with that crowd. I share much common ground with the author on this situation. I already feel that the media beats around the bush a little too much.
The author of the article is Gregg Easterbrook. He is contributing editor at The New Republic. The fact that he works as an editor for a newspaper shows that he is a fairly adapt writer. The author is also a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution. The point shows that he is a well educated individual. Easterbrook present a well organized argument. He maintains his passion about the subject yet it does not interfere with his conveyance of ideas. Easterbrook’s main motivation in writing this article is the belief that there needs to be a bold reform in today’s media.
The main constraint involved with this article is political correctness. The author feels that today’s media is too politically correct in the terminology they use. He thinks that the media need to be more direct and call it like it is. Easterbrook points out that the Virginia Tech murders were just that, murder. The media, in its reporting, simply referred to it as a “tragedy” and the killer as merely the “shooter”. Easterbrook feels the media should have used the term murder and killer more frequently, solely because that’s exactly what happened. On the opposite end, some readers might feel that the media was justified in using the terms.
The argument presented was caused by the murders at Virginia Tech. The author’s main argument against soft media terms is that it does not completely identify the issue. Easterbrook uses a wonderful George Orwell quote to distinguish the problem. “Unless we call a thing what it is, we can neither think about it clearly nor oppose it.” This is a recurring problem in today’s media. How are we supposed to fight a problem if the country cannot fully identify and understand it? This is exactly the reason Easterbrook wrote this article: to get the people thinking about how to accurately define a problem.

SWA #4

John Mohrmann
English 101:056
September 11, 2007
SWA #4

“Ideas” and my friend’s MySpace are both internet blog sites. Blogs are able to easily reach large amounts of people. Blogs provide an easy, free, way to convey your personal ideas and feelings. The “Ideas” blog is a page about different ideas or concepts a professor is pondering. He gives a short summary of an idea, and leaves it open for discussion to other bloggers. My friend’s MySpace, on the other hand, is more of just an online journal. He shares different thoughts, but mostly just rights about his life in general.
In “Ideas”, the target audience is anyone who is interested in the topics and has a valid contribution to make. The very nature of the blog is for people to present their own ideas about a situation. On each issue presented, several people have relevant solutions or additions to the issue. Most of the people who respond to the blog are exactly the type of people the author was aiming for. The author is a professor, and most of the responders are well educated individuals. I believe this is his preferred target audience. This also means that they have a common interest and ground, but do not necessarily agree. These circumstances provide for wonderful discussion. On the other hand, my friend’s MySpace is merely a place for him to discuss his personal views. This is the main difference between the two blogs.
The author of the “Ideas” blog is a professor at a law school in California. He teaches economy courses. I believe his motivation for writing is for stimulating educational intercourse. The author of my friend’s MySpace is obviously my friend. He goes to Winthrop, at home, in Rock Hill. He is the same age as I am, eighteen, and has many of my same interests. His main motivation for writing, as he has related to me, is merely another creative outlet to express his ideas.
The author of “Ideas” is constrained by the belief that all of his readers are well educated individuals, as he is. He also is constrained by the belief that his readers are as passionate about the subject matter as he is. On the contrary, my friend is constrained only by the fact that he thinks he is always right. He is usually not open to criticism.
The cause for most of the arguments in the “Ideas” blog is propositions that have been brought up by the author. He presents an idea, and then he opens it to discussion for solutions. Most arguments that arise in my friend’s blogs come from readers disagreeing with his particular views.

SWA #3

John Mohrmann
English 101-056
September 4, 2007
SWA #3

Out of the options given, I definitely picture myself as a professor leading a class discussion. This may be in part because I plan on teaching. But for the most part it’s because I would just feel most comfortable in this position. As far as my personal arguing style, I lean towards a consensual style. Although I like to be direct and open, I prefer cooperation. A discussion is much more effective when the parties involved are willing to be honest, and at the same time, civilized. I am generally nonaggressive, I disdain fighting, and I always attempt to see an issue from multiple angles. I think close mindedness is the reason most discussions turn into fights. The people involved are not willing to step back and consider other options than the ones they have prevented. This approach prevents any agreement or compromise. Taking these factors into consideration, I would say that I am more of a consensual arguer.

SWA #2

John Mohrmann
English 101,056
August 30, 2007
Short Writing Assignment #2
In “Is Persuasion Dead?” Matt Miller questions whether America as a whole is still open to suggestions. Miller first presents the question of the possibility of convincing someone of something they do not already believe to be true. The author makes a wonderful point of the fact that ninety percent of political “debates” today turn into dead-locked arguments. This does not do any good because, this only appeals to their supporters. Miller puts forth that, in politics, persuasion is dead. Miller sees politics as having become all about money, fame, etc. In conclusion, Miller gives a good rousing go-get-them charge.
The body of Miller’s article starts in with a lot of questions about persuasion in America, and some personal reflections. Miller then moves on to showing that the signals for persuasion are not looking good. He feels that most people are stuck down in their personal, political ruts. The author paints a mental picture of politics being little groups of troublesome gnomes. I feel that Miller is coming from to extreme of a Democrat view of the political world. For instance, he says nothing about politicians today who are doing good. Take, for example, John McCain. He may not be liberal enough for Mr. Miller, but this does not make him evil.
Miller does make a good point in stating that politicians have realized that don’t need to change minds to get votes. This can be clearly seen in a political campaign today. Any ad you watch is not concerned with actually imparting information, but bolstering the politician’s platform. I feel the author made a very good point on the topic. Miller makes another good point about human error in persuasion. He shows, using Ken Pollack’s book, how someone very convincing can also be very wrong. This is another severe problem in America. There are too many people who allow themselves to be spoon fed information. The author’s ideology is to think things through, even if they fail in the end. I believe this is an extremely sound practice for today’s world. Miller’s article, though at times whiney, makes several sound points about the state of good persuasion in America. To fully solve this issue, Americans most learn how to logically form their opinions and argue the articulately.

SWA #1

Mohrmann, John
English 101 056
August 28, 2007
Carolina Reader: Chapter 1, Question 3

In his article, Skube expresses a severe concern about college freshmen’s vocabularies. He feels
that high schools are not giving reading and writing skills adequate emphasis. He is readily disappointed
whenever he encounters a student who does not know the meaning of a certain word. Skube believes
these words should be in common usage for college freshman. He credits this problem to teenagers not
reading enough literature. He clearly demonstrates this problem with an example from his class. He
inquired to his students as to whom their favorite author was. Everyone was silent in response. One
person offered Dan Brown as a response. The only problem is that this was the only answer anyone
could come up with. This was a strong representation as too the level of his students reading. In my
experience, Skube’s feelings are fairly accurate. I have been in plenty of English classes where everyone
around me failed vocabulary quizzes. This was probably because most of them abhorred reading books
of any sort. I usually found this to be quite entertaining.
Hagstette’s concept of “aggressive reading” would be extremely beneficial to the students
mentioned in Skube’s article. Reading in general would most likely be progressive for these students.
Thoroughly involving yourself in a literary work really helps the content sink through all of the other
stored information in your brain. This way, vocabulary and other knowledge gained from the reading will
actually be retained for use. If the average student could realize the joy and privilege of reading, and
focus on it so, both writers complaints would be solved.