Blog Post for 10/30

The strategies involved for fight club have their roots in critical thinking/analysis. One has to look at both sides of the issue and investigate the existing valid points that one could use for an argument. What this means is one has to look into how one's argument could be countered and therefore, how to respond to those counters. Another strategy is being aware and properly addressing the audience. This is part of critical thinking because one has to "analyze" their audience in order to appropriately cater their rhetoric to their audience.

Once one has an understanding of these concepts, one can implement them into their papers. Personally, when I write, as a result of this critical thinking part of audience analysis, I have been more conscientious of who my audience is and how I should cater my language to said audience. Having the experience of fight club has made it easier to know how to effectively communicate with my audience because I have had exposure to my primary audience.

However, there are some aspects that remain challenging. For example, it is difficult to find a myriad of supporting points for some arguments and when I have to argue a certain position yet there is not much substance to it, I have learned to make the best with what I have got, but the struggle is trying to make a great argument out of something that inherently does not provide much of a platform to do so.

Also, regarding papers, it is often difficult to explain certain things because reading the example off of a page is one thing, but hearing it in person over direct communication is more effective and therefore easier to understand. Also, if any confusion exists, it is much easier to clarify it in person than over writing.