I was able to write a solid 2 1/2 pages today. After developing decent paragraphs supporting both cases I am genuinely torn at what I think is right.
Also I asked my sister, an 18 year old currently a freshman at IU, if she would answer similar questions to the ones I sent to Ms. Unger and Wes and she said yes but only after she comes home from bloomington. So, I won't be able to include her thoughts in my expository essay but hopefully she can contribute a actual college students perspective in my final draft.
I need to find a non electronic source soon, I thought I could interview the Butler chairman, but my sister said she really wasn't in contact with his son anymore and that it would be "weird." So I guess that is not an option. I am struggling with this because the controversy over the law is pretty recent eliminating many book sources, but also isn't really written about in newspapers that I receive. Hopefully I can find one soon!

I wrote my introduction last night, and was also able to find more support of sustaining the law. Senator Lutenberg, the person who drafted and fought for the law to be raised in 1984 from 18 to 21, has dedicated a website to calling out and publicly condemning all college faculty members who are in support of the new drinking age. At first I found this to be kind of extreme, but after reading many of his web links included on his site I found numbers related to alcohol-related auto accidents. I was even more outraged at the number of deaths that were a result of underage binge drinking. Before tonight I had already established my position, but after looking at concrete numbers I am questioning whether or not the decision would be in benefits for the health and well being of teens and early adults as an entirety.

I drafted 5 questions and asked Wes and Ms. Unger if they could email me the answers by the end of this week. Hopefully this will add a more personal perspective and from brief conversation I think they support the decreasing of the drinking age.
Also, when I was researching before I found it hard to find logical arguments against the laws passing. But I found a lot of credible arguments on the MADD (mothers against drunk driving) site last night. I am definitely going to use this for my draft due on friday. Tonight I am going to work on the essay, and hopefully finish at least 3 pages.

Surprisingly most of my research from this weekend was strongly in support of the law. I need to find an adult with some sort of credibility and logic to their argument. I found a bunch of ranting parents but no accounts that are against the law for justified reasons. I'm going to ask a few teachers around school this week their thoughts. Although they don't teach at the college level they can relate and are in a field very similar to ones of professors at colleges.

I haven't really done much more research, but I did call my sister because her friend's father is a Butler faculty member that is in support of passing the law. She said I could most likely interview him so I am planning on contacting him this weekend and asking to conduct a online interview over email. If this is plausible, I will draft some questions soon. That is really all that has changed since I posted last, hopefully I will start my first essay this weekend.

I'm writing my paper after I post this blog and probably should be doing it now instead of doing this. I plan on basically fleshing out what I had listened to from the interview and then coming up with two questions that my paper should address and answer. I don't really know how that will turn into 2 pages but... I guess I will have to make it work. I am thinking about whether or not to consider broadening my subject to the entire matter over the law passing or only in the atmosphere around college, I am leaning towards everything because I don't think the college perspective is enough to write a whole paper about.

Tonight I was listening to an interview, that my mom asked me to watch about underage drinking. Her intent was to scare me about drinking and driving but I got a bigger and more helpful idea from this radio interview. These ladies and mother's of college students were irate at the fact that some college staff was promoting a law that would decrease the drinking age to 18 years old. Instead of listening to them jabber on and on about how the colleges were only trying to decrease legal liabilities they face and not the well being of their children, I searched for the interview where a college chairman was telling us how we should consider the benefits of a younger alcohol consumption age in the atmosphere of a college campus.

The stream got all screwed up and stopped working, so I couldn't listen to the rest of his explanation and position, but I think I would rather do this than my previous ideas. The other ones are kind of typical, and I feel like I could find many papers discussing those issues that would similarly imitate my paper. I haven't heard much about the controversy over this law, but I believe it to be interesting and it is a little bit more relevant to my life considering I will be 18 in less that two years and hopefully attending a college.

So after I came up with four, I thought to be decent topics, I was listening to an interview on the radio and I liked what they were talking about a lot more. My other options were okay, but I think I would get bored with them quickly.
My new idea was sparked from a radio station interview. The station was interviewing a Butler chairmen, I didn't catch his name, about the perplexity colleges are facing in supporting laws that would lower the alcohol consumption age to 18. Surprisingly to me, many college board members, presidents, and chairs do support the change. The specific man being interviewed also was a supporter of the age limit being lowered to 18. I haven't heard much about this either way, pro or against the law, but the subject matter is fresh and this is my initial account of the issue as a whole, hopefully this will help the whole getting bored factor. It also is becoming more and more relevant because I will be going off to the "big bad party scene," some refer to college as, soon enough.

So I haven't made a final decision about what I want to "propose," but I am throwing around a few topics. I think media influence among teenage girls could work but the topic seems a little bit cliche. And then I thought about the accessibility of birth control/contraceptives to teens or people in general, but I'm not so sure I want to spend 2 months thinking about that. I could write about the degradation of women popularly apparent among rap lyrics and music videos. And my final thought was the massive amount of pressure placed on young athletes from coaches parents and trainers to succeed. I know all of these are random and hold no substantial relationship to one another, but I feel like I have a small tie to each one. So now I need to figure out which one I want to spend 2 months researching and writing about. And that is really all I've got.

Ellis's hatred toward blacks faded as he realized that similar to himself, a low income white man, blacks were also being controlled and manipulated by the upper class white community. He discovered through " eyeball to eyeball" conversation that he shared the same struggles that the people he exerted some much energy in hating did. Although it seems to be a fairy-tale and idealistic, but not achievable, way of changing, it was successful in Ellis's experience. He was " born again", he felt as though his life had changed forever and he didn't have to live with the guilt of hate. I don't necessarily think this story could be possible on a heavier scale. As much as we would like it to become feasible, in all realities it simply is not. Ellis's change was a result of personal encounters and compassion he found with a black women in his society. If this method was applied to the greater society it wouldn't provoke the same result. Changes wouldn't be immediate and not everyone will be able or have the chance or the person to feel compassion with. It also involved chance, Ellis had to take a chance in befriending or even listening to someone of the race he absolutely loathed, and the general racist population isn't willing to take that chance.

Yoshino is saying that mainstream is a myth by stating that no mainstream actually exists. Our society can't achieve a mainstream person or expectation, because mainstream is subjective. A "normal" person to me isn't the same as a "normal" person to you, or my parents, or my neighbor, or the president or anyone else. The judgment of labeling someone normal becomes opinionated and one idea of mainstream will always differ from the next. Yoshino also addresses that by being mainstream you must achieve a quality of average accomplishment in every characteristic of life, and that too is unachievable.

I think he supports his argument well. He includes many situations involving many different kinds of people which makes his essay relatable to most readers. He talks about how everyone is trying to become normal but nobody can or will become this because it doesn't exist.

My idea of mainstream prior to reading this was someone who is average, typical, and in some cases perceived as boring. But after considering Yoshino's points, I think really mainstream is defined by the people who an individual considers mainstream and not by the ultimate community.

When Linda finally reaches the north she is only faced with a disappointment. The utopia she had dreamt of while lonely living in the attic quickly crashed as she experienced racism in the north similar to the racism she felt in the south as a slave. Physically she was living a "free" life but the way whites treated her was no different. She was not forced to follow rules regarding her skin color, the complete opposite of what she had imagined for herself in the north. In some aspects the south was even better, yes she didn't have to live with the fear of a beating as a punishment, but the people in the South were honest about their immoral behavior, where as in the north they denied it.
She gains her freedom by being bought, the same exact way her freedom was held from her in the South. She was fleeing the south to find a life better for herself where she could live freely around people who didn't hold her as a second class citizen but the north only offered the same flaws, just in a less upfront manner.

"My children grew finely; and Dr. Flint would often say to me, with an exulting smile, these brats will bring me a handsome sum of money one of these days."
I thought to myself, God being my helper, they should never pass into his hands. It seemed to me I would rather see them killed than have them given up to his power." pg 68


It was difficult for me to choose one passage that emotionally captures my attention more than another. The book is basically all emotional stories explicitly stating the brutality of slavery. I guess i can write about this one where she makes a unimaginable reference to her children and the future she would wish upon them. For a mother to reach an extreme of death to avoid the ownership of her innocent naive children speaks more that a whole book to me. I don't know what exactly it is, but when circumstances are imposed on children it hits home for me. The idea that a mother would rather see her children pass then live the life of slavery is powerful and obviously has resonated with me.

The fact that the book is completely truth is imperative to the validity that the narrative holds. If this slave account was changed or modified, readers could rebut with the idea that the author was only exaggerating the events and emotions to appeal the reader. You can dramatize something for an effect, but because it is all true, the brutality is real and creates an image and puts a name on the experience for the reader. The whole true is the only text that holds credibility.

Also the "unrefined" language and style contributes to the merit. When actual dialect is used it again creates an image that can put the reader there and give them the closest account of slavery possible for someone who is living well beyond those days.

I only watched the News briefly as I ate breakfast before leaving for school, two soccer practices and a family birthday party took up most my night. Differently than the past 3 months of constant discussion and debate among my mom and step dad about the election, they both stood looking at me for something to say, maybe something to get them to stop sulking. I could tell without even glancing at the newscast, that indeed Mccain had lost. The Fox News cast has been on constantly for the last 3 months, and in my house is "the only unbiased newscast," which I doubt. But they were showing Mccain's speech for the most part. Him recognizing all his supporters and wishing Obama the best in his endeavors. They basically made Mccain out to be the nice guy, while Obama with "little experience" took the position. I haven't involved myself much, and truthfully only hear what my parents talk about but by watching this news for a brief 10 minutes I can see where people are swayed. I think the issue becomes what news program you are watching. Every single one manipulates and edits details that falsify the other candidate while amplifying the other.

Honestly, I haven't encountered many instances where I personally witnessed racism. Living in Carmel, Indiana as a typical white teenage girl I have grown up living as a majority.

The only memory that comes to mind is one that I briefly remember from middle school. I went to Orchard, a private, expensive, and predominately white school. Most of my friends were just like me and they lived with parents just like mine. Orchard had always emphasized the importance of diversity, but I never found it in the hallways of my school. We would spend hours reading about injustices, watching movies about rasicim, and discussing prejudices but never could I find a minority within my classmates. As I reached 5th, 6th, and 7th grade I gradually was surrounded with more cultural people. Not only black, but asian, indian, and middle eastern people as well. I felt like the years they spent drilling equality into our heads was actually being represented among our school now. But my respect for Orchard's efforts in creating a diverse community came crashing to a halt when I over heard a conversation between two important adults. They were talking about promotion material, and one person said that we needed to place a black person on the front. The other fired back " Why would we do that? The families who can pay the tuition and who will receive this brochure are not the people who value diversity. We need to approach them with the image of their child." The lady responded casually by agreeing and moved on about her afternoon.

Not to mention names, but these two individuals were role models within the community of Orchard and the audacity they demonstrated to even have this conversation, let alone in front of students, baffled me. Not only was the individual being racist she was also categorizing all the people who could afford to go to school at Orchard as racist too.

In relation to Parrillo the socialization process consists of the prejudices and moral values your parents impose, or influence you to believe as a child. As a young kid you are naturally inclined to follow the lead of you parents, and as your grow to form an opinion in many cases your values are only a reflection of your parents.

I completely agree with this notion. I have experienced this first hand from the time I could engage in a controversial conversation with a peer of my own age. From politics to religion my friends continue to carry out the values their parents instill in them. Whether this effect is direct or indirect it is apparent among almost all kids. I find this to be true because, in the atmosphere of your home you are able to state you opinion with a biased angle. Within the walls of your own home why should someone have to "edit" their opinions or alter the way the present their beliefs? They shouldn't this is own area where it isn't exactly necessary to be pc or to consider all opinions. The youth of the household is only agreeing with the beliefs of the conversations that their parents are promoting.

Not to say that one's idea's and values can not change, or differ from their parents as they grow up and experience life for themselves, but commonly until you reach an age where you engage in life separately from your parents you will unconsciously agree with them. The atmosphere in which kids are most greatly influenced by is their own home, and the parents aren't expected to edit their values within this home, but maybe that isn't exactly a good thing because the most impressionable people are soaking in every word and taking away the closed minded opinions of their parents.

Willy Loman and Cora's biggest difference is their definition of success. Willy is trying to achieve economic and popularity success. He measures his accomplishments by how much money he has made and by the amount of people who "know" him. Cora Tucker's ultimate success is to create a equal opportunity for all people within her community. She could care less whether people like her or not, that isn't her goal at all. Cora is working to enhance the lives of others while Willy is only attempting to better his own family.
Their approach to achieving these goals also differs. Cora consistently works against the system, finding flaws as an outsider and "raising hell" about them to the people who control the inside. She isn't trying to make friends or become well liked, she is there solely because she knows the system that is standing now, isn't consistent to everyone. Willy on the other hand makes him self likable. Society has morphed him into a shallow person, who disregards actual talent and skill and disguises it with a fake facade. He knew his son Biff was never going to be the "smart kid" but his Willy was proud that he was the popular kid and thought that by being well liked Biff would automatically reach success.
The idea or accomplishing these life aspirations from Cora's perspective is attainable, yet Willy will never reach a feeling of ultimate content because his success is defined by the world around him which is constantly changing.

Willy Loman's ideal path to becoming successful is through hard-work and is also amplified through an individual's popularity within their community. He believes that if someone is willing to work toward success then eventually they can achieve that goal. By also being likable and obtaining personal connections the individual can get ahead. He demonstrates this belief within his son, Biff. He encourages Biff to go out there and take advantage of connections that he, his father, has built overtime. Willy thinks that if you know someone they will always help you out and give you a boost, simply because you "know" them. Willy sincerely believes in the idea of Individual Opportunity.
Contrary to Authur Miller's character Willy, he firmly disagrees with the existence of Individual Opportunity. He holds the notion that success is based on luck and is given to people by chance. Hard-work and personal connections aside, the position will be given based on who the employers want. Miller represents his view in most of his other characters. For example Biff, his desire doesn't reflect the ambitions pushed onto him by his status searching father, he is casual and unconcerned in entering America's corporate community. Biff is content and happy with his manual labor lower salary job and the disappointment from Willy doesn't influence Biff or his aspirations, this is Miller demonstrating that the idea of Individual Opportunity is petty and unrealistic.

Why doesn't Willy's wife confront him about his small repetitive actions of self destruction and inquire about his motives for attempting suicide

Cate's speech was the most intriguing to me. She seemed both knowledgeable about her organization and she also presented her argument casually and relaxed which created a personal presentation. Cate included many simple numbers and stats to support her asking of our donation toward Big Brothers Big Sister. Often people ramble off all these numbers, so quickly and randomly that I don't exactly relate them back to their main argument, but she did a good job of including enough numbers to become credible but not too many which would have been overwhelming.
I also have a personal connection to this organization. My dad was a Big Brother to someone that has overtime become a uncle like figure in my life. Although the actual relationship developed before I was born, I know that the support Scott received from my dad changed his attitude toward life drastically. With the combination of Cate's speech and my knowledge of the impact my dad made it makes me want not only support the foundation with money but also maybe in the future my time, by becoming a Big Sister.

JD's speech is the one that hit home with me today. I'm not quite sure if is because his presentation seemed calm and relaxed as if he was casually asking me for a donation in the hallway, or because I had never heard of his organization/school prior to today. The Cristo Ray school is unique in the fact that there aren't many other places like it. When he talked about how teaching them rather than solely giving to them is the greatest gift of all and how ultimately it makes the student attending the program capable of helping themselves it opened my eyes to a different kind of giving. I think this donation will not only further the success of the teenagers at Cristo Ray, but will also provide inspiration in the homes where these underprivileged kids live. JD mentioned how the success of these students can create a desire within kids around the Cristo Ray students, brothers and sisters, cousins, and friends. This program is proactive, in their goals to both educate academically and provide necessary tools for becoming a productive citizen.

So far I have made a Toulmin outline and I am slowly but surely working on my robust outline as well. I found multiple stories posted on the Dress for Success website that support my argument and also appeal to the emotions of the audience. I talked casually with my dad, a business owner, about how much emphasis is put on a potential employee's appearance and attire. I basically have all the numbers and facts I need, now I just have to put it together and make it sound some what intellectual. Thinking about the actual speech makes me feel ill, but I am confident that I could write a solid speech, so I am just going to have to buck up say the thing. Thankfully, Lamags gave us Monday which gives me one more night to stay up stressing, but also to prepare which should be helpful.

I am going to make an attempt at speaking about Dress for Success. Considering I am absolutely terrified... I thought I would choose something that actually inspires me and I THINK, think that is, that when I get up there in front of everyone and every bit of preparation slides right out of my mind, I can off the cuff still find something to say. And considering this is an academic class I probably should include the fact that I chose Dress for Success because it relates to a conversation we had in class about always trying to achieve the same look in order to succeed. We looked at that idea in a negative light during class, but this organization highlights the aspect of looking your best in a positive manner.

As for appealing to my audience I will be surprised with myself to even get up there. But for the sake of my blogging grade I probably could come up with some ideas. I will most likely need to find a specific example where the organization has completely changed the life of an individual. As we have discussed, appealing to the emotions of people are far more powerful than any other technique of rhetorical argument devices, so I will probably go that route. I will emphasize the uniqueness of Dress for Success and the originality of service it provides for women throughout our community. And taking into consideration that shiny bright stickers and candy create motivation throughout our class, maybe some of that will sneak in too.

Emerson makes the claim that in order to be a success you simply have to believe in yourself and your ideas. You have to portray yourself as your actual self and question all that is put in front of you, be an individual and don't conform to typical. I disagree completely. We live in society where everyone is either the same or trying to become the same. People speak the same, act a specific way, and even to a certain extent dress the same way. There is a standard. A quality one must contain to even consider success. Yes, in some cases a unique attribute or undiscovered idea could get you ahead but most commonly taking the right steps and conforming will get you on top.
I also disagree with Emerson’s statement that new work built upon previous work is only half credible. That is completely false, everything thing we do is building upon others. All research, work, or inventions is to further previous study. We would never get anywhere if we relied on one source for every idea. New things are a culmination of multiple people’s ideas and hard work.

I don't get any sense that the author is portraying the rich as people who exploit the poor. Mantsios argues that race, economic birth status, and luck are all factors, but the idea of the rich keeping the poor, poor isn't apparent in his essay. I think people, maybe including Mantsios, do assume this. I know that I personally do. No matter what the occasion might be when someone has a status of any sort higher than yours, naturally you look to them for aid, yet when the help isn't always enough the blame falls into the hands of the successful. So naturally we are inclined to believe poverty is a result of the wealthy not caring.

Mantsios has also made a credible argument when stating that our idea of american opportunity is only a facade. I value his use of numbers, when someone plasters a solid figure on the page I am much more inclined to agree with it. He becomes a credible source when he incorporates multiple statistics and uses accurate data to support the idea that these windows for success are consistently open. He addresses the notions of our country's opportunities, in reality don't exist at all. America is the land of promises, where if you have the drive to do something it is always attainable. How can a nation promise this? We can't.

Both Cruz and Alger's character, Dick, are working toward the same goal of financial success. They both hold a notion in their head that if they work hard and if they follow the systematic steps they will make it. In America if you are determined to reach the top you have that opportunity and if you equip yourself with the right capabilities you WILL succeed.
Although the path in which they actually reached this goal is different, neither of them got their by "taking the right steps." Dick luckily was repaid for his good deed with a job, while Cruz was granted the job because of his ethnicity and the image of diversity he provided.
The reaction of both men were different. As Dick embraced his good fortune and tackled the job head on,Cruz questioned the reasons for his success. Cruz realized that it wasn't he skills or intelligence that got him where he was, in reality it was his ethnicity.
The stories of these men's success and the reaction they provide to it is different, but in some opinion the idea of raising up and coming out on top, when starting from nothing is similar.

Using pathos while arguing can be one the most influential and persuasive rhetorical techniques available. When a writer is able to appeal to the feelings of the reader than it is becomes much easier to have them support your point. People's actions are a reaction to their emotions. The emotional involvement of the reader out weighs the logic of the argument, making the appeal to emotion the most powerful device. Pathos are used everywhere.
Take for example, you are walking down the hygiene isle in Target searching for the right toilet paper. When you see a picture of a cute cuddly puppy plastered across the wrapper, most likely we would grab the brand that makes us feel good, opposed to the generic label. We choose without considering the actual quality of the toilet paper, walking around with a "puppy" in our carts makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside for a moment. This is just a simple example but, it goes to show , that pathos is used everyday and everywhere. Whether it be toilet paper at the grocery store or a monumental speech our president makes, appealing positively to the emotions of your listeners or readers will always be beneficial to your argument.

Pseudo Argument

People who believe pseudo arguments, reach their conclusions with no reason or logic and they are not willing to consider any other opinion. Basically it is their way or the highway. "Their claims are true because they say so, period." These people are most likely associated with a larger group or party. In most cases their ignorance leads them to believing these false arguments. They aren't willing to obtain enough knowledge of the opposing view to even debate or question the other belief, in result they end up fighting. Which evidentially never leads to a compromise or civil settlement. By arguing you are supposed to reach a conclusion or at least enlighten your self about someone else's opinion, irrelevant to the fact that you disagree. Using pseudo arguments these conclusions are never reached.
The most common example I have witnesses is in political debates between teenagers. Often, both sides are only spewing off ideas that have been fed into their minds by their parents. They never discuss the actual positions of the candidates or the global issues being debated, they are too busy bashing the other person.

The hero begins his story on a boat ride as a reward to himself for earning 100 dollars as a shoe shiner. Dick aspires to hold a more respectable job. He is improving his English and perfecting his speech to further his capabilities, so that eventually he can obtain a position as a store clerk. Coincidentally, a young boy has fallen overboard on this same boat and courageously Dick jumps in after him. Saving the boy’s life Dick instantly becomes a hero, and in return the boy’s father, a wealthy businessman, repays him with adequate clothing and a new job. Dick was naïve to the fact that this boy’s father was rich, and naïve to the idea that he would be rewarded for his good deed, but on instinct he reacted heroically and was rewarded for his actions.
The author is implicitly arguing that rewards and good happenings are given back in return of good deeds. Dick’s intentions were solely to save that little boy, he wasn’t seeking a gift in return. The circumstance brought Dick upon a better job but it was completely unexpected and ended up being much more appreciated, because it was unanticipated.
I also think that the author might be arguing, that luck and contingency is a factor. It was by coincident that Dick was the man able save the boy, it was only fortunate that the boy’s father was wealthy and willing to repay him with a job. Although Dick had been working to become eligible for a job as a store clerk that improvement was irrelevant as to how he actually became a store clerk. Luckily the father felt a everlasting debt toward Dick, and was able to reward him with what Dick had been seeking.

There is no question that we have become a visual society! Possibly, in the act of persuading one could argue which method, verbal or visual, is most effective. I think it is all relevant to the audience. When addressing a young group of second graders they are much more likely to respond to a massive bright bold picture, than a slide of written words. The youth has become much more responsive to images while maybe older people respond similarly to a speech.

ie. Friday's presentation. If the people from Invisible Children were to stand in front of us rambling on about the crisis in Uganda, sadly the attention of the audience most likely would have been dull, yet when we WATCHED teenagers a lot like ourselves suffer or we were given a face as a symbol of the issue in majority we listened attentively and the presentation reached us on a more powerful level.

Media and visual stimulation has overtaken our society. Communicating simply through face to face dialogue is quickly decreasing. With access to things like facebook, instant messaging, and picture texts the rising generation are more familiar and comfortable exchanging with visual support.

It is simply more effective to argue in a visual manner. While other methods of argument can be successful, an image is much more simple and most likely more powerful.

In general, analyzing torture is controversial, but I firmly believe the use of torture is solely situational. You must consider many factors of why it could be effective, who you are effecting, and if the torture is worth the greater result. Each circumstance requires a vast amount of examination; although many times where it could be effective the time is limited and analysis is not an option. Morality is also a major key in applying torture, you must consider whether injuring someone else is making you also in the wrong or if the greater good of the people will be helped.
Levin’s interpretation of torture is hard to disagree with. He uses dramatic situations and harsh conditions that support his opinion. When he presents his reader with circumstances such as mass amounts of babies dying and the alternative is torturing someone and the result will change it is impossible to not agree. He exaggerates his examples allowing no other option but to agree.
I believe that if torture is the ONLY option to save lives in mass amounts, then it should be enforced. Every situation requires interpretation and a long analysis of the benefits. To risk someone else’s life for another you must know and be 100% sure that the torture is worth it.

Both arguments are successful. I agree with both statements made through their arguments, contrary to the fact that they are arguing opposite opinions. On page 1 the cartoon is for GE existing in food because the person is starving and foods that contain GE don’t need as much water to grow, so this, makes it seem like the water will be going to people in need. How can you argue that someone should starve? You can’t, that makes the cartoon successful and persuasive to accept GE enhanced food. The advertisement on page 24 also is victorious in creating a strong unarguable statement for the reader. The general public should be notified and have complete access to the things that make up their food. That in my eyes is also unarguable. And argument is composed of mostly manipulation, the way you can get your reader to think, in both cases they have manipulated me into believing what they want.

Explicit- when a person takes a distinct side and demonstrates their personal opinion on the issue, using and telling facts and statements to support their stand to the audience

Implicit- when a visual, audio, or text inspires an opinion of the audience. The author or artist doesn’t lay out his perspective but creates a piece where the audience makes a judgment

The picture from example # 5 is an implicit argument. The picture is showing rather than telling the way the photographer sees the idea of war and service. The audience and people have to view the image and come up with an explanation by themselves, it is all person interpretation.
Most commonly, I think people argue the opposite way. They immediately take a stand and start to ramble off all the reasons why they are right. They begin to deny all other idea and start an explicit argument. A person creates a statement or thesis to stand by and that is the core of their paper or speech or how ever they are engaged in an argument.

After many days spent studying and learning about Costa Rica, we finally reached the orphanage, a place where I felt like we could make the most difference and connect with the people of Costa Rica on a raw and personal level. The kids didn’t waste time getting to know us, before you had the chance to say your name they are already asking “do you have any money?” “Is that your boyfriend?” “Will you give me a piggyback ride.” I was excited about how friendly and welcoming the young kids were, but also saddened at the conditions they were living in. Hours passed as I played soccer, colored Dora pictures, swung the jump rope, was taught how to dance, and my favorite, watching the children take hundreds of pictures of us together, we began to leave when Aurlina, the small chubby coco colored hair 3 year old little girl who hadn’t left my leg all day looked at me with her beautiful brown eyes and reached for arms as she pleaded we not leave. “ Don’t go yet, please! You can stay here, we can share a room and play all day.” She had the hope in her eyes that in reality we didn’t have to leave, that eventually if she begged enough all of us would stay. The toys, toothbrushes and books we brought to them didn’t matter, at least not to the kids, what they wanted most was individual attention the feeling that someone would consistently be by their side. By the end of the day each child had latched themselves onto a teenager or teacher’s leg and had become their friend for the day. It struck me as Aurlina begged me not to go that truthfully we hadn’t made a difference at all. The day would pass; we would drive off on our huge gas guzzling bus, get on an airplane and fly home, going back to school and leaving all those longing faces hoping for our return. Even though we had visited and helped for a day leaving behind hundreds of dollars worth of helping goods, we didn’t give the children what they wanted or needed most. Guilt started to become my memory rather than the warm feeling of helping others and improving the lives of those innocent precious children.

The concept of always having two contradictory thoughts in your mind is what has resonated with me most so far in class. The discussion and comments made in relation to this idea have prompted me to question myself, and whether or not I always fit into this specific perception of human relationships. The relationship of how I perceive myself is obviously different than how other people see me, but the real question is do my actions reflect the perceptions of me coming from other people. I think yes, I think all people act in response to others reactions. People continue to search for acceptance no matter what group they are attempting to become a part of. Even the so-called “outsiders” or people trying to NOT fit in are in realty fitting in, yet they are fitting in with the outcasts. Our culture as human beings has a characteristic of wanting to be with others, our nature is to feel a part of something, despite the fact that we might have to change ourselves to become a recognized part of the group. We have grown up being altered and advised to be a specific way or play a certain part. Forget the fact that maybe those roles are different from each other, they community you grow up in shapes the adult and individual you will become. The atmosphere of the person is ultimately deciding who the person is.
Now that I have put it in words it becomes kind of creepy. To realize you in truth aren’t yourself unless your are being accepted as your self is scary. This makes life seem like a constant strive and steps of changes being dictated by the people and places you surround yourself with.

Language Evolving

Yes, our language has changed vastly over time and will continue to change everyday we continue to speak it. The English language is fluent, communities and culture influence the way each person speaks. The spoken word is the most important and most used form of communication. Different people and places alter language and the dialect certain groups use to speak to one another. A form of communication must change with the people and place it is spoken from it had to adapt to the society using it.
Words like, tight, struggle, and ballin have become a common word for young adults and teenagers, and even though these words have existed much longer than the last 5 years, they have taken on new meaning and are now being used in new contexts. Also words like shall and thou have died out from common use. Most likely you can still find them in formal texts and literature but you won’t here those old English words used in the hallways at high school.
I think for sure that generations not only separate people with age, but also with their vocabulary and the context, which they play with words. I wouldn’t say some words to my parents that I use frequently with my friends and the idea or meaning being assumed from my parents or grandparents would be misinterpreted. For example tight, in my head it means to be cool or sweet, but in my grandparents minds they think of close together or tight fitting. It only goes to show you how quickly and dramatically language evolves.

Response to "Red Sky in the Morning"

Hampl is inspired by an encounter with a complete stranger to reflect and try to understand the importance and meaning of memoirs and the value of words. She realizes how much more life has to say, but the people who have stories and experiences to tell are limited with the vocabulary understood.
I have never been presented with a short amount of words or phrases that captured and lead my mind to inquire as deeply as Hampl did, but I might have come close.
I was pilfering through my older sister's doors when I noticed a long hand written letter wrinkled under a stack of magazines. I began to read and as I finished tears began to fill my eyes. The note, it was a birthday card from Audrie's 18th Birthday left from my mom a few months ago. First of all my mom doesn't write long lengthy letters, especially on birthdays, at my house "it is ALWAYS your birthday," that caught me off guard. Secondly, the note addressed how much my mom appreciated the fact that Audrie, the sister that claims to not want anything to do with her four younger siblings, is huge role model and how proud my mom is to call my sister her daughter and the best influence on her younger children. Maybe to some families this isn't that meaningful of an event but in my house, where we never tell each other how much we love them and how important they are to us, because we all have five thousand other things going on, I have never felt connected with my sister especially through a note that was neither written or addressed to me. I began to realize how much I do admire Audrie, how I always seem to be immulating her actions, but never on purpose. As much as we downsize our relationship in reality I value it more than most things in life, and maybe it took words coming from my mom to acknowledge it.

Hi !!

Hi!