More Stuff On Organ Trade

In Iran, selling Organs for profit is legal. What is most interesting is that Iran has no wait list for kidney transplants. Two organizations regulate the trade. The average kidney sale is about $5000-$6000, which is less than most prices I have seen listed on various sites as the average price for the black market. Until 1994, India had legalized the organ trade. According to Wikipedia, though, one of the contributing factors to it being banned was that people were getting transplants without knowing it. I assume this means that while operating, doctors would take out a kidney and sell it for profit. Another contributing factor to the banning of the organ trade was that people were not being paid the prices settled for beforehand. I don't think that this would be much of a problem if America were to legalize the organ trade, but in countries that do not regulate economic exchanges as well, it clearly could be a problem.

Researching Organ Trade

There are not two arguments on the organ trade. There are quite a few on both sides of the issue. Obviously, it is an ethical issue for many. Why should people sell an organ when they could donate it and save the person's life? On the other hand, there is quite a bit of money that can be made from selling organs - in my research I've seen prices in the hundred thousands, others find these numbers appalling. Some think that legalizing the organ trade will lead to safer transplants. The organ trade is especially prevalent in 3rd world countries. After the tsunami, many Indians put there organs on the black market after they were left desperate by the natural disaster. In a way, these people are being forced to donate organs.

Doing More Work On Proposing

I finished my inquiry contract proposal. I have decided to research and write about the organ trade, its black market, and the issues regarding legality. Like in the issues over whether or not to legalize drugs, it is extremely interesting to look at the situation with the organ sales and try to predict what would happen if it became legal. Do you sacrifice one person's ethical viewpoint for another person's life? I've done a little bit of research so far on the situation. Third world countries, it seems, are the biggest suppliers of organs. It makes sense when one considers that the "giver" can make as much as a 100,000 dollars on an organ sale. When one takes the foreign exchange rate into account, this is the kind of money that could give a poor person in a third world country financial security for life. In Iran, selling organs is legal. It is interesting to note that there is no wait list for kidney transplants in Iran. In the USA, the kidney transplant wait list is 105,205 people long. One can clearly see that legalizing the organ trade could save and enhance a lot of lives. I am excited to continue researching on this interesting topic!

Doing Work On Proposing

I have made great progress today. I have narrowed my inquiry contract topic down to two topics: "The morality of beauty pageants" or "The legalization of organ trade". I read a conversation on a website recently about whether beauty pageants are inherently positive or negative. A couple of the participants in various pageants gave relatively scripted answers about pageants being about confidence, being healthy, meeting new people, helping charities, and true beauty. I found it interesting that they claimed it's not about how one's looks but the confidence one shows. I find it genuinely interesting that participants and their defenders think that beauty pageants are not about the best looking person. I have a hard time believing that they really believe this. The other idea was given to me by my dad. It is no secret that there is fairly large black market for organs. Like the drug legalization issue, the major controversy is whether to legalize it so that the black market diminishes or to keep it illegal for "ethical" reasons.

Laramie Project

Blog – Respond to the movie. Comment on the idea of ‘live and let live’.

The Laramie Project is clearly designed to get a strong emotional response. From the violent descriptions of the murder, to the innocent portrayal of Mathew Shepard, to the heart-wrenching speech by Matthew's father - the movie's sole purpose is to create an emotional response to the cruelty of hate. Even in today's world - where news reports all seem to be about murder, robbery, and somebody pulling the race card - the movie is capable of making even the strongest cry. The movie is extremely well made - not focusing on the facts as much as the emotional response of the people of Laramie, Wyoming. The movie's only flaw is one that is incapable of being fixed. It is slightly annoying to watch actors portray the real people of Laramie. The actors seem to try to hard to be their character - sometimes making it look more like a Hollywood film than a portrayal of normal people who undoubtedly would not have used such advanced vocabulary and the same style of social interactions with "strangers", especially after such an intimate tragedy. It is understandable though, and quite obvious, that it would have been darn near impossible to get enough people to talk about the tragedy on film. The people of Laramie appear to be uninterested in the attention and the media - wanting to be left alone to "live". Indeed, a common term used in the movie is, "live and let live". The people in Laramie wish to move forward - to let the memory of Mathew Shepard live, the killers of Matt Shepard live, and they want to live. They wish to live because it's the way they can heal, the way the town can continue living. Just by "letting live".

™£∞¢§©§•ªº•§∞∞¶•£¶¡¢

Exigence: Stories about victims of covering as well as his own stories

Purpose: To explore society's influence on how people must adapt

Audience: Americans who are interested in making the country more equal

Logic: Mainstream does not exist, people are individuals so it's inaccurate to portray them as a kind.

Credibility: He is a minority and gay.

Emotion: Own experiences, stories.

Imagery: Some people overlap the circle of mainstream but none are completely in

Yoshino Is An Awesome Name

Blog – Engaging the Text #4 on p. 608

When Yoshino says that "the mainstream is a myth" he means that the term "mainstream" describes nobody. He proves this based on his own experience: that when he speaks in public, there will always be a white man who will raise his hand and say that they, too, have to cover. He gives examples of what a white male may have to cover: "depression, obesity, alcoholism, shyness, a working-class background, or a nameless anomie". To this, Yoshino says, he agrees. He has observed that people hold many identities, and nobody's identities all fall within the box of "mainstream". He concludes that, "It is not normal to be completely normal". I agree with Yoshino that mainstream does not really apply to anybody. Certainly you can call an object mainstream - "Twilight" and "Party In The USA" are two examples. But defining people as mainstream is erroneous and impossible.

Blog – Engaging the Text #5 on p. 529

I think that assessing C.P. Lewis's method of overcoming racism resorts to a fundamental argument: Is man inherently evil or good? If man is inherently good, then Lewis's method of overcoming racism is a definite solution. It would also mean that people are racist because of misunderstandings, not because they truly hate other people. I prefer to take this viewpoint because (A) it is much more romantic and (B) I believe that anybody's mind can be changed on racism. C.P. Ellis is the prime example - the preeminent story of a man who realized he joined the KKK because he was down on his luck and wanted to blame somebody else. He realized that he was not racist because he genuinely hated other people, he was racist because of misunderstanding and misfortune. I think that this is the way most people with recurring racist thoughts think. They will deny it, but they are not racist because they genuinely hate other people. They are racist because they were raised to hate other people, because they were overburdened and misplaced their blame, or because they came across an unfortunate encounter with a person of another race. Racism can be overturned, but as with the case of C.P. Lewis, the realization must come from within.

Mixed Emotions & Linda

Blog – How does Linda finally attain her freedom? Why does she have mixed emotions about this at the end of the book?

Linda finally attains her freedom when Mrs. Bruce purchases it. She has mixed emotions because she doesn't want to be bought again - as if she were an object changing hands again. She would obviously prefer to be free because she was human, not because somebody bought it for her. However, Linda isn't going to deny the opportunity to be free. Even though she's happy to be free, she's sad that it ultimately came because somebody purchased her and then purchased it for her.

Jacobs Honesty

Blog – Pick a passage in which Jacobs is using her own honesty to establish her credibility. Explain how and why she is doing it.

On page 114 (paragraph 2), Jacobs wrote, "I was too proud to ask Mr. Sands to do anything for my own benefit; but I could bring myself to be a supplicant for my children." In this excerpt Jacobs honestly admits that she would not try to ask Mr. Sands to help her children for her because even though it may have been the best option, she was too proud. In this, she proves her credibility by showing the mental process of a slave - she must hold on to anything she still has - her pride. Later on, however, she wrote, "but what will not a mother do for her children?" In one paragraph she showed the struggles of being a slave mother - how to protect her kids by outsmarting her owners. Throughout the whole book Jacobs uses her own honesty to establish her credibility.

Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl

Blog – Why is it important that this book is truth, not fiction? Why is it important that the editor didn’t clean it up, either in terms of language or content?

It is important that this book is truth because if it was fiction then it would not have had the same impact on society. A real account of the life of a slave girl helped abolitionists prove their points by revealing the horrors of life in slavery. It also helped portray slave owners as inhumane, immoral people. It is important that the editor didn't clean up the book because then it would have been easy for slave owners to discredit the book as a more fictitious piece. But because it was uncensored - the readers were able to experience first hand the horrors of slavery. In addition, the editor allowed the public to see how slavery had prevented Jacobs from receiving a real education, and despite this, she was able to learn how to read and write so well - further proving the equality of slaves and the people owning them.

11

I'm sure I've been in situations where a confrontation in race has occurred, but any recollection of these moments eludes me. So I'll talk about what some would consider reverse racism. When I lived overseas, we spent a lot of time in rural areas. Places where people may have never seen any white people. Often times I would walk around feeling like I had a third arm. It was more apparent in the kids, but people would literally stop what they were doing and watch us walking around. I guess if I were older, I would not have cared that people were staring - what do you expect? But as a kid, one who had lived in America for a couple of years where staring is considered very rude - it became a "what am I doing wrong" thing. I guess it made me feel self-conscious, but I also understood that they weren't staring at me, they were staring at a white person. I understood that this was a very natural reaction, so I didn't consider it racist, and I still don't. Maybe some people will. Was the interaction positive? Definitely. It was, like all aspects of living overseas, an incredible experience. People staring at me wasn't enjoyable but I realize that it have me at least some understanding of what being the minority or the "weird one" is like. Because most of the time in America I hide behind my white, middle-class identity. After reading Wachtel's analysis I don't really feel any different about the experience. I think I understood what was going on pretty well. It wasn't really any lack of communication, just the novelty of white people. But I certainly think that if a real racist situation were to come up, I would certainly feel different about it because of reading Wachtel's analysis.

Parrillo

Blog – What is the “socialization process” according to Parrillo? Do you agree that prejudices – or really any beliefs – are instilled in this way

According to Parillo, the "socialization process" describes the predisposition to prejudices that affect the development of kids. I agree that prejudices are instilled this way. But, as Parrillo wrote, this is not the only way that beliefs are formed. The "socialization process" is definitely a major factor in the development of prejudices. This is evident in discrimination that occurred across generations. For example. slavery in America lasted over 200 years. Clearly the easiest way for people to justify this cruelty was through beliefs instilled by the generation before them. If they believed that blacks were less important than them, or if they believed that they were giving blacks a better life by "exposing them to Jesus", then it was obviously easier for the slave owners to justify the fact that they owned other people. On the other hand, there are examples of times when the "socialization process" has not been effective. Take, for example, the civil rights movement. Even after the abolition of slavery America had been an extremely racist country. The Jim Crow Laws weren't even repealed until 1965. But around that time, something changed. Something enabled the civil rights movement to occur and change the way blacks were treated in society. Something overrode the predisposition to prejudice that so many white Americans had. While it is clear that the "socialization process" can determine one's beliefs, it is clearly not the only cause of those beliefs.

Thomas Jefferson

I have been fortunate enough to attend schools that never tried to tell the classic American history fabrications. So it does not surprise me to read that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves or that he was in favor of freeing slaves and kicking them out of the country. It doesn't surprise me that he also had some rather progressive and humanitarian ideas for somebody of his time. In many ways, Jefferson is the embodiment of a hypocrite. But in many ways Jefferson is the embodiment of the future. While reading "Notes on the State of Virginia" one gets the feeling that Jefferson is a racist, inhumane man who exists in a fantasy world where whites are the superior race. At other times, though, Jefferson appears to be so close to the truth. It is easy to see that Jefferson calls black people odorous, less beautiful, less loving, and inferior in thinking. But there are times when Jefferson seems so close: when he suggests that blacks may be capable of being free members of society if there weren't so many prejudices against them. Or like when he admits that there are examples of success by black people in society. Or when he admits that blacks may look inferior because of years of oppression in America that included lack of education and opportunity and being forced into slavery. In his time period, Jefferson must be considered a progressive thinker - a man who talked about freeing slaves before they were free and a man who saw some potential in black people. But at the same time, it's important not to forget that Jefferson was still very racist, that he was cowardly of doing the right thing, and that he was not the man that many people say that he was.

Speeches

The speeches were great. I'll try to write something about every single one:

Steve - Steve had great stage presence, he was the only one who did not appear restricted by the podium. He moved around, he used changes in tone to his benefit, and it was especially impressive how he connected the charity to the texts we had read.

Breanna - Breanna earned the most "money" for obvious reasons - she had a very emotional speech that was presented in a very effective way. There's not a lot more that can be said than "wow".

Katie - It was clear that Katie was very dedicated to Schools on Wheels. You could tell that the charity was important to her. I was surprised and impressed with her speech.

Jessica - Jessica did a great job of using her statistics to present a compelling speech. She had great stage presence and it was clear that the charity meant a lot to her.

Chris - It was clear that Chris was very nervous, as he admitted in his blog, but I thought he still did an excellent job talking about Greener's Food Bank. It's a great charity and his speech reminded me that so many people in the world aren't as fortunate as us.

Ashley - It showed in Ashley's speech how much she cared about the charity. Her speech was effective because she combined ethos and pathos. I was impressed with her public speaking ability.

Kwame - Kwame obviously has some public speaking experience from his time in stewardship - and it clearly showed. Kwame was very confident in talking about Second Helpings.

Alyx - Alyx did a great job presenting her speech on the Special Olympics. I found her story about the boy from her brother's basketball game very touching. It was difficult for a lot of us to wrap up our speeches, but Alyx did a great job of leaving the speech on a big note.

Brian - Brian's speech was impressive because it was clear that he could have kept talking about United Way forever. He was very well prepared and it showed in his speech.

Jordan - Jordan's experiences with School 67 showed through in her speech, it was clear that the school was very important to her. It was particularly interesting how she brought up the point that if the school wasn't so underfunded they could hire more teachers which would lead to better results - on tests and in the community.

Katie - I thought Katie started out her speech very well by sharing a story from her personal experience in Big Brothers and Sisters. Like Breanna's speech, Katie's speech was effective because it shared a personal connection along with all the other important information about the charity.

Kailey - Kailey's speech was energetic and motivational - she did a good job of presenting the Julian Center in such a way that it showed the tragedy of the people who go there and then the great ways in which they succeed.

Molly - Molly impressed me with her public speaking abilities. She was very captive and kept a great stage presence throughout her speech on Habitat for Humanity. She did a great job of presenting how Habitat for Humanity helps people around the world and people locally.

Marcus - Marcus's speech was great considering what he had to work with - I know it's hard to find statistics on the Red Cross. But he did a great job of presenting what the Red Cross does - especially in their blood donation program. He also added some effective humor to his speech, but not so much that it overshadowed what he had to say.

I was impressed with everybody's speeches and thought everybody did a great job!

Willy

Blog – What does Willy Loman think about the idea of ‘individual opportunity’? What does playwright Arthur Miller think? What evidence exposes each opinion?

Willy Loman thinks individual opportunity exists - but he does not personally know it very well. Willy has seen individual opportunity with his brother Ben and his next door neighbors, and even in his son Happy. Perhaps Willy thinks individual opportunity exists for everybody but him - he certainly doesn't take any initiative into making sure he is present when opportunity exists - it is all he can do to muster up the courage to tell his boss that he doesn't want to travel anymore - and he ends up getting fired instead. For Willy there is a combination of bad-timing, bad-luck, and unwillingness to take the initiative that prevents him from finding his individual opportunity. So he tries to kill himself. But once his suicide attempt fails he realizes through his manic depression that maybe he hasn't ever found his individual opportunity, but his sons can if they were given a message. So he kills himself the second time around, so his sons can receive the life insurance money and so that they can finally be free enough to chase their dreams.
Arthur Miller thinks that individual opportunity exists for some people. But Miller seems to be saying that not everybody finds it - which is not an overwhelming observation. It appears that Miller thinks some people find individual opportunity, and the ones who don't provide it. Perhaps the people who don't find opportunity fulfill their lack of success by being successful in helping others find it. Willy is just one example, and a rather extreme example too, but I think that Arthur Miller is saying we all become successful by finding opportunity or by providing it for other people.

Willy VS. Cora!

Blog – Compare Willy Loman to Cora Tucker

Willy Loman and Cora Tucker are opposites, antipodes, antitheses, and polar. The most obvious difference between the two are there contrasting definitions of success. Cora Tucker's idea of success is helping black people secure positions in government as well as voicing the opinions of minorities to the government. She doesn't live in a big house, she doesn't have many material items, but she has seen so much change in her life that she feels successful for how far blacks have come in society. But she's still not content because she keeps fighting on for the rights of minorities. Willy Loman obviously is not a very content dude. His own job sucks - especially since he's getting older and traveling around is not very easy. On top of that, his kids are epic failures in his eyes. His first son, Biff, flamed out after being the star football player in high school. His other son, Happy, was still mad about being the "other son" growing up. Neither of Willy's sons are very successful by Willy's standards, while his brother Ben and his next door neighbors were very successful. So Willy kills himself, in hopes of providing a means for his sons to become successful through the life insurance money that they would receive. The oddity only continues when one considers that by Willy's standards he was probably more successful than somebody like Cora Tucker - but then we see who really was more successful.

Charity!

I've decided to encourage people to contribute to the Black Expo. As a white dude, this might seem a little weird and perhaps intrusive to a predominately black event. I've never even been to the Black Expo. But the Black Expo intrigues me because it looks like a great opportunity for blacks and people of other races to join together and look at how America can be better shaped for equality.
It is not a secret that many blacks are disadvantaged at a young age: "The poverty rate of Indiana Black youth, ages 0-17 is 152% greater than the poverty rate of the total youth population in Indiana". This is an appalling statistic - how is America supposed to be equal when people can't even start on equal playing fields? There's tons of more statistics that show that blacks have disadvantages in society. Who's fault this is is unimportant, but what is important is that everybody has an equal opportunity in America and the Black Expo looks like a good opportunity for acquiring information on this.

Cora!

Blog – Is Cora Tucker successful? By what definition?

Cora Tucker is successful because she believes she is. In some aspects her measure of success is very similar to the ones presented by Emerson. Emerson proposed that self-reliance is success - and that defines Cora Tucker. From her disadvantaged beginnings to her role as a community leader, she has become successful by being confident in her abilities. But, her success can also be attributed to her work with (and helping) other people - an antitheses of Emerson's views. I think that Tucker has taken the best of multiple views of success and achieved them all - she's self-reliant, she's a humanitarian, she's made a huge impact on her community, and she's happy. Perhaps the only form of success she hasn't achieved is the one of material objects, and anyone with an ounce of decency in their heart can say that this is the least important form of success. Cora Tucker is very successful.

Successful

Blog – What is Emerson saying it takes to be successful? Do you agree? Is it that easy

Emerson says to be successful you must be confident (even arrogant), non-conforming, unapologetic, inconsistent, misunderstood, self-sufficient, truthful, solitary, a non-traveler, unique, and you must be yourself. Basically, Emerson says that to be successful you have to do what you want to do and not worry about what other people think. He seems to be very anti-society and anti-government based upon his writing. Emerson suggests that society is the cause for so many people being unsuccessful and that to be successful one must not conform to the standards of society and no apologize about it either. Uniqueness, being yourself, is what Emerson believes is the key ingredient to success. He also adds some random ideas into the equation as well, such as not being a traveler.
I don't agree with Emerson for one reason: many people become succesful by building off of other people's ideas. "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it" (George Santayana). The inverse of this quote works as well: those who pay attention to history are likely to build upon it. Otherwise, I think that Emerson's ideas are spot-on (except for his random blurb about not traveling). People get too caught up in society's definition of success - a house, a car, a family, etc. that they miss out on the real success - being yourself.
Becoming successful is not easy. By Emerson's standards it's a ginormous task: dismiss all those years of society's definition of success being pounded into you. Learning how to feel successful without much physical proof (i.e. material objects) is not easy. Becoming any of the things that Emerson says that it takes to be successful is counter-intuitive, natural (based on society being natural - which it is for most people), and therefore, difficult.

Engaging Text

Blog – ‘Engaging the Text’ #2 on p. 322

The essay does make a case that the wealthy are exploiting the poor. Gregory Mantsios explicitly says that capitalism is designed to give the powerflul people money and keep poorer people poor. Mantsios doesn't just assume this, he offers statistics showing how this works, such as SAT scores. Mantsios shows that the richer one is the higher SAT score they are likely to get, and the easier it will be for them to get into college, and therefore to get a job, etc... In addition, he points out that rich people keep money in the family. He says that 86% of people who make 100,000 dollars a year received assets that contributed a "substantial amount" to their financial situation. There certainly are other interpretations of the data that Mantsios provides, especially regarding the middle class. Mantsios defines the middle class as just 4% of the population. But the middle class could also be defined as an ever-changing group of people in the middle of how much money people actually make, as opposed to his method of taking all the money and dividing it by the number of people.

Idyllic Themes Contrasting

Blog – In what way does Cruz’s story contrast the idyllic themes of Alger? Are they also similar in some ways?

Cruz's story contrasts the idyllic themes of Alger in very obvious ways. Horatio Alger's stories about Ragged Dick consist of one omnipresent story-line: Ragged Dick is poor and has all the odds against him but he overcomes them through hard work, merit, and a tad bit of luck. Horatio Alger's stories attempt to offer every American hope: that if you work hard enough, and you're a good person, you can get as far in life as you want. Stephen Cruz shares that he first believed in the Ragged Dick stories. Cruz himself was rising up in society. But he realized that it wasn't just because of his hard work as he wanted to believe. Cruz was moving up because of the laws regarding racial equality in the workforce, because he was a Latino who could speak English like a "white person". Essentially what Cruz realized was that the American Dream is not available for everyone. Had it not been for the racial equality laws, minorities would have no equality in the workforce at all. But that doesn't mean Cruz is satisfied with the laws then, as he realizes that he isn't being kept around for his skills and hard work, but to make the company look good legally.

Dick

Blog – Dick is essentially rewarded for his actions with the job opportunity of a lifetime. What implicit argument is the story making about what it takes to be successful?

The implicit argument that the story is making about what it takes to be successful is a combination of two things: luck and effort. The story essentially says that there are chances for everyone to act upon their opportunities like Dick acted on the opportunity to save the boy. It encourages one to act upon these opportunities of goodwill because you very well might end up lucky. There are many Mr. Rockwell's out there who will offer you the opportunity of a lifetime "for saving their son" (or whatever the opportunity may be). The author does not, however, suggest this is all a matter of luck. The author takes another step into guaranteeing that good things will happen if you capitalize on your opportunities. The author implicitly argues that you get out of an opportunity what you put in. Just as Dick risks his life to save the boy, he receives the opportunity to change his life. Essentially what the author is arguing is that hard work will render you lucky.

Triangle for Ad

Visual

Blog – Some say we are becoming a visual society. Is a visual argument more persuasive than a written one? Why or why not?

Sometimes a visual argument is more persuasive than a written one. For example, a video of people getting killed is way more effective way of saying war should be avoided than a paper simply pointing out that people are killed. Using the shock-factor of a visual argument is an easy way of winning the emotional aspect of an argument. On the other hand, a visual argument cannot tell the whole side to an argument, and is most effective if used as an aid to a written or spoken argument.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Blog – What ethical responsibilities does an author have in using ‘ethos’ and ‘pathos’? Does our media, or our government, often live up to those ethical expectations.

An author has an ethical responsibility not to lie. Lying causes one to doubt the sincerity of anything else the author has written. Trust in what the author says is a very sacred thing, but it must be given automatically or else you wouldn't read what the author wrote. But if the author lies, they've broken that sacred trust of validity. That's not to say that one cannot lie in such situations as Patricia Hampl, but that must be fully understood by the reader.

Our government and media certainly do fail to live up to these ethical expectations. George Bush knew there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bill Clinton said that he, "did not have sexual relations with (Monica Lewinsky)". These are just a couple of examples of the government lying to us. The media similarly lies too, Most recently an internet meme came about that truly exposed how lies occur all the time in the media.

Evidence

Blog – Analyze the way that David Langley uses evidence in his piece on skateboarding. You might find it useful to compare his use of evidence to that of Michael Levin (“A Case for Torture”).

David Langley uses very little actual evidence in his argument against unfair skateboarding laws. The evidence Langley uses comes mostly from his experience. But compared to facts, experience is minute, questionable in credibility. He is a skateboarder, that is believable, and he did have some rough experiences with the law, or else he would not be protesting it. But his usage of such terms as "unfair treatment" and his calling of laws as "ambiguous" lead to some doubt about whether he's just a mad rebel or a person with a serious cause.

Why Bother

Blog – Explain the statement that “real-world arguments seldom prove anything” (p. 88). If so, why bother learning a system like Toulmin’s?

Real-world arguments rarely prove anything because very few concepts can actually be proved. Proving something requires the same result no matter how many times the proof procedure is run. Essentially you must prove that the proof procedure works an infinite number of times. According to Wikipedia, there is another way to prove something, called Tautology. Regardless, most things in this universe that have been proven are mathematical or scientific, not literal. Simply arguing will not prove anything (except that you can speak).
So, why bother learning a system like Toulmin's? It's excellent for making sure you think about every viewpoint of an argument. It also helps discover the "warrant" and the "grounds" of a viewpoint. Toulmin's system is strangely reminiscent of the United States judiciary system - which is an unrelated but compelling reason to learn Toulmin's system as well.

Biotech Food

It seems to me that there are two issues with Biotech Food: (1) the effects of "artificial gene arranging" and (2) how the companies that produce biotech food inform the consumer as to what is in their products. According to the example essay written by Lisa Turner given in Writing Arguments, some of the effects of consuming biotech food could include "cancer and cardiac problems". Ultimately, the risk of consuming biotech food lies on the consumer, unless of course, the consumer has been lied to. This brings us to the second point. If the company does not fully inform the consumer of the ingredients in its food or it gives false information then the company is at fault, not to mention acting illegally. The Lanham Act was passed in 1946 to prevent companies creating "false advertising". As a consumer I would be utterly disgusted if a company did this, but assuming the company is playing it clean, the choice of whether to eat biotech food is completely up to the individual.

Ad vs. Cartoon

Blog – Compare the ad on p. 24 to the cartoon on p. 1. How do their genres influence their arguments?

The ad on page 24 conveys a different meaning than the cartoon on page 1 because of its genre. The ad presents the factual side of the argument – that genetically engineered foods should be required to have labeling on them marking them as such. It is an example of explicit argument – it clearly presents its side of the argument. The political cartoon, on the other hand, is an example of implicit argument. It subtly pokes fun at the people (like the ones who made the ad) who are so caught up in the debate over genetically engineered food that they forget there are people in the world who don’t have any food. Cartoons fall under the genre of opinions while ads fall under the genre of information (albeit often incorrect or exaggerated information).

Implicit vs. Explicit Arguments

Implicit arguments and explicit arguments differ through the way the arguments are presented. Explicit arguments are the most formal way of arguing, In an explicit argument key points are plainly presented towards reaching a truth. An implicit argument is much more subtle, occurring with the aid of pictures or poems. In an implicit argument, the points or truth are implied. An example of an implicit argument could be a photo of a war veteran being hugged by another war veteran. In the picture one of the veterans has lost his arm. But the picture portrays heroism. It glorifies patriotism and sacrifice. The arguer may then present a poem exposing the horror of war – the inhumane occurrences that are bigger than heroism and whatever other sentimental feelings the picture conveyed. This is an example of an implicit argument in which the main points are not stated but implied.

Memory

Often I wonder if my life will ever top my first 9 years. Growing up where I’m from, the way I grew up, was the culmination of experience. Sometimes I wonder, in a non-conceited way, if I have more memories than other people. I grew up in a different country and therefore a different school, a different neighborhood, and a different community. I could write eons upon eons about my experiences. It seems like I lived there way longer than 9 years. I can explicitly remember my schools: the preschool/kindergarten and then Lion’s Primary School. I left school at lunchtime and then was home-schooled until late afternoon. What I remember most, though, were the people. Take a couple of back roads off the one that runs by the hospital and there was my neighborhood with its identical houses protected by an army of speed bumps and ditches. Every day after school I played soccer with the kids in the central park. They were friendly kids who spoke English alongside a multitude of other languages. Occasionally we played basketball on the makeshift court in my driveway. I had many pets: a dog, several cats, some chickens and rabbits, and a couple of goats. I wouldn’t have traded the experiences for anything, even though my life may have reached its climax. I feel that this is the story of my life, more than anything I’ve ever done and probably more than anything I’ll ever do.

Reflect on anything in the class so far

Out of all the exciting and great fun we’ve had in this class, nothing has been more enthralling or defining than Marcus’s challenging statement that we are over-thinking stuff. I have read books about Ancient Greek Myths describing battles with Cyclops. I have read books that metaphorically transition a girl from real life to fantasyland through a wardrobe. I have even read a book about a kid who could say good-night to the moon while a cow jumped over it. But nothing, nothing compares to the profoundness of one statement by Marcus, ‘perhaps we are over thinking stuff’. Some will argue that’s the point of school, the point of school is to over study every possible angle. I don’t normally write in this alternate interpretation of writing instructions. I don’t normally write about things that are a non-issue (I hope I don’t come off sounding like I’m complaining - I like the way we think about things in class, it’s great). But there is something to be said for simplistic interpretation. The Great Gatsby, to me, meant something entirely different before we discussed the book. I think a great point to stress in literature is that books can mean more than what a class concludes at the end of the period. They can even mean less. I feel like this is where we are going in our discussions about “I could tell you stories”.

Language Evolution

Does language evolve? Is there a time when the language you speak changes? Explain your position.

Religious views considered, evolution is undeniable. There’s two types of evolution – natural and artificial. We (humans) are an example of natural evolution, iPods (and all their generations) are an example of artificial evolution. Language falls somewhere in between them. Language is a natural human skill and tool, but also something that has been developed by people over centuries and millenniums. I suppose the earliest form of language was emotional, maybe the time the first human looked into the second’s eyes. Regardless of whether verbal communication or artistic communication was the next development in language, it’s easy to follow/imagine the progress from there. Language might be the fastest non-technological form of evolution that exists. In the last 50 years, I can, off the top of my head, list quite a few words that have been invented or changed meanings quite a bit: gay, cool, sweet, swagger, hot, University High School, rap, videogame, internet, sneakers, and on and on… There is never a time when the language we/I speak is not changing.

Entering Music

A reflection upon my life would find those moments that profoundly influenced me occurred amiss the moments of chaos that have sporadically interfered with my life’s course. Searching for moments that profoundly influenced me in the absence of other defining moments is like searching for a needle in a haystack. I found a singular example in my hours of reflection, a simple discovery in 9^th grade study hall. The story begins before that, back in 8^th grade when my Spanish teacher, in his quirky manner played “Dear Mama” for the class. I liked the song, but it stored away only in my memory, as my interest in music was less than existing in my younger years. 9^th grade study halls were free periods of computer time. On the rare occasions I had homework to do it was an afterthought. Upon my boredom I began imitating the other kids in study hall – I decided I would listen to music even though I hadn’t the slightest idea that I even liked it. A reflection upon my brief encounters with music brought me upon two moments – my flirtation with country music in 4^th grade and the song by 2pac that my self-proclaimed “hood” Spanish teacher had played during class. I searched “Dear Mama” in Youtube and was hooked. Somehow in the course of a year my maturity had subconsciously expanded into the capacity of understanding music. I was hooked. After running through all the 2pac songs I could find in the YouTube search query I moved on to Nas, then Eminem, and Lupe Fiasco, and Kanye West, and so on … a continuing cycle to this day. Like Hampl, one rather uneventful moment profoundly influenced me into understanding a form of literary expression.

Hamelt Act 1 Modernized

Marcellus starts out by asking (mostly to himself, but also to Horatio and Barnardo) why they are out on watch all night and all day when there is no war. He complains that they even have to work on Sundays. Horatio replies that he has heard rumors that a war may be on the verge of breaking out. He says that the former king (who they believe is the ghost they have encountered) was challenged to combat by the king of Norway, Fortinbras. He then says that their former king killed Fortinbras, which by prior agreement meant that Denmark received all the land that Fortinbras was in charge of. Horatio continues by saying the son of Fortinbras, also named Fortinbras, is determined to reclaim the land that Denmark and the former king's heir, Hamlet, received. 

Feed Feedback

M.T. Anderson clearly was trying to create the book of a generation when he wrote Feed. The success of his aspirations, however, do not quite equal his effort. Feed seems to lack real character development and portrays his extremely pessimistic views of the future. There comes a point where a person becomes too negative that people generally ignore him/her. M.T. Anderson comes dangerously close to that point. That doesn’t, however, mean that there wasn’t any success in his novel. It was well constructed (characters aside) and the setting of the novel was imaginatively realistic – a hard feat to accomplish in a science-fiction novel.
The character that bothered me the most was Titus. I realize he was shallow by design, but I couldn’t figure out who he was. Sometimes he was portrayed differently from his friends – he didn’t go into mal (the futuristic equivalent of drugs), he was caring towards Violet, he had a sense about him that he wasn’t just his feed. Then other times I was led to believe that he was just another bland personality without any real care for the world, such as when he breaks up with Violet, or when he deletes her memories. Overall, Titus is a frustratingly shallow character that is difficult to understand or relate to. In fact, the same can be said about almost every character in the book, save Violet and her father. They were all hard to relate to because they seemed so unreal, so careless, and so human-less. A lot of it had to do with the nature of the novel, but for such a fantastic book, M.T. Anderson’s characters seemed unreal.
What I liked most about Feed was the world that M.T. Anderson created in the novel. Without removing any feasibility, he used his powerful imagination to create a world on the verge of self-destruction that is run by advanced technology and overrun by crimes existent since the beginning of time. Political corruption and the advent of computers has replaced many of the troubles that humans face on an emotional side (which explains why Titus had so much trouble dealing with the emotions that Violet brought with her) but as M.T. Anderson asks, is that substitute really the direction we want society to be headed? The novel clearly answers itself in that regard. I think that M.T. Anderson’s view of the future are extreme (although I’m not ruling it out) but I do think that he brings up important topics anyway. Computers do enhance our lives (heck, I’m writing this on one), and are an important part of our everyday lives – something that cannot and will not be replaced. I do fear the day that computer replace out ability to think and feel emotions, and hopefully that day will never happen. Life is nothing without our ability to think and feel emotions. One of the wisest and most memorable passages I’ve ever read came from a book about basketball. On the topic of pre-game nervousness it said to be thankful that you are able to feel these emotions, that there are so many people in this world working 9 to 5 in cubicles who go through the motions never to feel the ups and downs of life. Regardless of what book it came from or the subject at which it was written in, I think that this is an important reminder for all of us. Feelings are not replaceable, and when they are, everything gets, for lack of a better word, screwed up.

Black In America

Race and racism in America is a very touchy subject and, like many sensitive topics, an extremely important one. While many of us have opinions and questions about racism, it is not something we talk about freely because of it’s grave history in our country. Racism in America is a very paradoxical subject, it is a part of what made us into the great nation we are today, but is also a representation of our country’s greatest crimes against humanity for 200-plus years. While it is possible to have an open discussion about racism and race, it is extremely difficult because you can never speak for another race of people, and you don’t want to put those people on the spot and act like they are the sole spokespeople for their race. An open discussion is also not the correct forum for discussing the most sensitive of issues as you don’t want to offend or allow somebody to paralyze their peer dignity by voicing opinions in inappropriate taste. For these reasons, the T.V. report Black In America is the perfect platform to address one of America’s most burdening issues.
Black In America is a captivating news report. Delivered by a black newscaster, it goes into the lives of different black people from very diversified backgrounds. While the focus of the report claims to be black men, it really is a report that transcends the barriers of gender and age. The report was very clear and specific in general, and a lot of the points they made shed light into the crisis of black people, in general, not being as advantaged in society as people of other races. There were several points in the report (though more like suggestions), however, that were utterly ridiculous. One example is when they were interviewing a twenty-five year old man in prison. He claimed that he didn’t know that an education could lead to a successful life. He repeatedly stated that if he had known he would’ve chosen that path. I find this to be a rather blatant attempt by the prisoner to defend himself, even though nobody is questioning his morality, and that he trying to place the blame on ignorance or his background rather than his effort. I find it ludicrous to believe that nobody never told him that education could get him somewhere in life. It is true that I am an advantaged, white teenager, but at what point do we draw the line between opportunity and blatant ignorance / making things up? I do fully agree that education opportunities for blacks are fewer and generally of less quality, however, and this troubles me. But it is possible to become anything you want in America. Another part of the report that really bugged me was when they were talking about fatherhood. The report was quick to point out the interviewed husband/father’s shortcomings as a parent, they didn’t make much deal of the fact that his wife was out and about having babies with other men. While I don’t condone either parent’s actions, to suggest that one was more troubilizing that the other shows a shortcoming in perception and equal reporting. It is probably true that black men are less around their families than black women, but the example they chose did nothing to justify this point. While the report was chock-full of facts, two really stood out to me. The first was that 75% of blacks felt they were treated unfairly compared to only 44% of whites feeling the same way. Clearly there is some disparity in the perceived difficulties that blacks face in America. The other interesting fact that was shared in the report was that black men hold just 5% of management jobs in America. This is a shockingly low number, and clearly an issue. How are black people in America going to become more equal in society if they aren’t given the opportunities?

Epistolary

Steve Kluger craftily reveals the novel “Last Days of Summer” by sharing actions without consequences. The most recent example of this is when Joey writes a letter to Mrs. Roosevelt about “if his father was president”. We know that Joey was having trouble writing this letter because the author shares Joey’s half-written, discarded rough drafts. And we know that Joey takes a unique approach to the letter because we see the reaction of his teacher and principal. We don’t, however, see the letter until after we learn that his neighbor is a Nazi spy, he had his Bar Mitzvah, and that he has matured in his relationship with Rachel. This is, however, only one of the constant events happening in the novel. The book consists of numerous story lines, all running in between and around each other. This can be attributed to the newspaper clippings that Kluger includes in between letters between characters. World War II and Pearl Harbor occur during the timeline of the book, and the author makes sure that the reader knows the time frame. Adding more intrigue to the book is the relationship between the characters. Through letters between each other we learn more about the characters. Joey writes Charlie, Charlie writes Hazel, Hazel writes Charlie, Stuke writes Joey, Stephen T. Early writes Joey, Carrie writes Charlie, and so on. In essence we are watching the world through the eyes of 6 characters. Then, of course, there are also the report cards, where we see that Joey does excellent in school in all things unrelated to behavior. Besides providing humor to the book, the report cards also share with us the nature of Joey: an unruly, smart kid who does what he wants. But we also see the maturity in Joey through the letters between characters discussing his relationship with Charlie, who becomes a father figure for the needy boy. Clearly a unique approach to authoring a book, Steve Kluger is able to transcend the fundamentals of writing through his epistolary penmanship.