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.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)