What is rhetoric?

             When starting English class this year I never fully understood what rhetoric was. In the past, I was always taught that rhetoric was a skill that many public speakers possess, but I was never told exactly what it is. In addition, the word rhetoric always had the same connotation to me as the word rhetorical, which now I know they aren’t the same. Throughout the course of English 1900, I believe that I’ve been able to create my own definition of the word. I believe that rhetoric is art of effective speaking and presenting. The issue with the definition is that the word deserves so much more than a simple definition. Throughout the course we’ve learned how to effectively express our own arguments through writing and in speech. Through fight club we were able to organize our own list of pros and cons and then were given the task of arguing for a certain side. This allowed us to effectively formulate an argument and be able to clearly and effectively explain it to our adversary. As we had more and more fight clubs, we as a class were able to learn to skills in the art of argumentation. Through time we were able to explicitly explain ourselves instead of babbling about a topic we barely know. I know that by the end of the year, I was able to articulate my side of argument clearly and was able to have solid conversations with my opponent that helped find a correct answer for the conversation. In addition to doing well with rhetoric in the public speaking aspect, we also improved our rhetoric throughout the paper. When we started the paper, we basically wrote down what we believed was a correct argumentative paper. In reality, as we went along in the year, we took our paper brick by brick. We began with finding who the correct audience was. We learned how to clearly propose what our solutions are. We learned how to correctly research and find information to support our clearly proposed solution. In addition, we learned through They Say, I Say to tie all of work together in order to fully flow and correctly combine our argument into one perfect essay. Once we finished these steps, the purpose was to easily be able to fully address our solution clearly, to the right audience, with resourceful and purposeful tasks, while being able to fully flow to the point that others fully understand what you are trying to say. That is what I believe is the definition of rhetoric. I believe the course was set up to help learn this definition in a long but successful class. Most of us didn’t know what the word meant but by the end of the semester, everyone in the class is able to define what rhetoric means. Now and days, everyone in the world needs to be fluent in rhetoric, because that is a concept that we are involved with every day. We must be fully prepared to express ourselves and our words correctly and effectively. 

Multimedia Project

Podcast

Link: https://soundcloud.com/user-768976657/fc-dallas-podcast-with-jack-hazzard-special-guest-billy-reynolds

Fight Club 11/19- Analyzing the President's Move

Pros:

• He should have stepped in and stopped the racism. 
• The President had plenty of time to address the issue, and by him choosing not too it portrayed him poorly. 
• A good President is involved with his students and their well-being. If there is ever any sign of a President who lacks this there purpose is absent. 
• By having a new President it will give students hope, and will help them move on from the issue. Even if the current President were to attempt to solve the problem, the students may still resent him. In other words, in times if stress there needs a be a change. 
• Ethically speking, by the President being uninvolved it shows his lack of pride towards the University. He put himself before the well-being of the students. 

Cons:

• By stepping down he isn't solving the problem. Maybe he should have taken the threats as a symbol to take action. 

• Why would the new President be any better? Now that the school is without a President, nothing can be resolved until another one comes in. 
• They are just delaying the issue. 
• College students tend to over-react to sensative topics. 
• Gahndi and MLK would never ask anyone to step down, instead they would try to resolve the problem instead of making it bigger. By the President leaving, that just shows how unstable the University is. 
• Politically speaking, if the President were to leave everything would blow up and matters would only get worse, It is important for leaders to be responsible for their actions. 

Research Paper Rhetorical Analysis

Writing this research paper, in my opinion, was extremely exhausting, but at the same, it was rewarding. I believe that when a teacher is looking for a student to fully participate in their paper, they should allow the student to pick a topic dear to them. In this case, we were given the challenge to find a topic that hits home to us and thus made most of us more passionate about writing this paper.  I appreciated the idea of taking our time to develop one paper, instead of shooting out multiple undeveloped papers, much like other classes I hear about. This is a good idea because instead of making constant mistakes, we are able to slowly build a final project that could be some of our best writing. With splitting up the paper's parts, we are able to firmly focus on perfecting a certain area, such as the audience and proposal. I, for one, believed I benefited by focusing on the audience and proposal. Before I started cramming out my paper, I had too many ideas on my topic being thrown out, if I had left all those details in, you would be reading a 30 page mess. With developing my proposal and audience, I was able to cut down my argument, and let it hit my audience strong. With a trip to library we learned to research effectively. Then, by being told to attend Writing Services we were shown that there is help if we need it. Constant reading of They Say, I Say helped us remember the simple, yet hugely effective, aspects that all papers need to contain. Overall, I'd like to think we were given a strong road to follow in order to help us write a perfect rhetorical essay.

I believe we should have had more in-class essays so that we, as students, can better understand what our teacher looks for in style. Yes, we've been told we need fix certain things, but we've see that mostly once. If we had more feedback on minor assignments, I think our papers would improve because of those critiques, we'd be able to keep them in the back of our minds because of decency and repetiveness. So by the time the paper rolls around, we are able to be a little more prepared.

Disparity in Women as CEO's and political leaders

Pro:

• Women tend to value team efforts more than men, they're more generous
• bring more harmony which results in better results for the company because people will be treated more fairly since they wont feel threatened because of the teamwork within the workforce
• they won't be replaced, they will just be given the higher level jobs
• advantages to gender diverse workforce because it allows for a more diverse customer base
• since men and women have different view points, they can better problem solve because of the different types of views
• debt in america - when more women work, the economies grow, and if you include more women in the political arena, they can better understand what women want 

Con:

• if you look at any statistic, the amount of women in the workforce and politics is increasing every year
• no action needs to be taken because the problem is working itself out
• most of the people in leadership positions are starting to die out and will have to be replaced by the younger generation
• there are more women in college now 
• every year there are more women in political positions, eventually they are starting to run for the most high powers
• they are becoming more strong-willed on their own
• people are starting to have different ideas about patriarchy 
• prime minister from Germany has been doing a good job

Crash Landing, Part 2 - Blog 11/13

(Crashed Landing)

(11/6/15)

Captain Hazzard’s Log 1: “We have crashed on a remote planet…surrounded by thick, musty air and complete total darkness (ellipsis). I, Captain Hazzard the Great (epithet), must take care of my frightened crew. This wasteland is ominous. The ground around us seems hungry and thirsty for our very souls (figurative language). My medic has been frightened ever since the crash. He’s (contraction) been screaming, “We are all going to die,” a generalization I do not want to be a part of. To calm him down, I told him “everything will be ok,” but the irony is, we are far from it.

Captain Hazzard’s Log 2: “We can’t sit around any longer. We are heading to the hills (which are frightening) straight ahead (parenthesis) to gain higher ground and to look for a way out. I asked our field expert to give us data on the path towards the hills. She said we had a 6 miles of walking, along with the temperature, 23 Celsius, and oxygen levels, which are healthy. I beganediting her work and checking over to see if all of her facts were trustworthy and correct. I look over her work because as of late because we cannot trust this women, for she has perjured herself in the past (enthymeme). But for now, her facts checked out. We will start hiking at dawn.”

Captain Hazzard’s Log 3: “As we were walking towards the hills, I made an inference by looking at my first lieutenant, he seemed ill. We sat him down and asked what was wrong. He proclaimed that his breathing was failing. Soon after, he passed away (euphemism). His bodied turned zombie like. As we were leaving, I swore he had woken up, but I dismissed the thought, only thinking it was my mind playing tricks.  I will miss him, his repertoire contained a large amount of skills and experience that many of the other crew members didn’t have. The rest of the crew never liked him. They believed that he was talented, but only because his parents were rich enough to afford him higher-level schooling (paralipsis). After this blow, the crew was as dead as a door-nail (simile). We closed up shop, we had about 2 miles to go. But night began to fall. As the head of the group, I needed to keep the body going before it lost hope (synecdoche).

Captain Hazzard’s Log 4: “What is a hill? A hill is ‘a naturally raised area of land, not as high or craggy as a mountain (denotation).’ Well, in my opinion, the hill was hell (metaphor). Climbing that humungous pile of rock took the life out of me, but when we reached the top. Our hopes flew away as fast as bee (hyperbole). We looked over the ridge and there was nothing but plans. My crew became hysterical. The buffoonery they part took in to cope was sheer madness. And much like my first lieutenant, they began to pass out. First my medic, then my field expert. I am alone. I will continue to walk across these plains in order to find hope, but the battery on my log book is running low. So this will be the last you hear of me. I am heading to what I believe is north. Bona Ventura."

Captain Hazzard’s Log 5: “…… (zombie roar)”

(Crashed Landing, Part 2) – New Blog

(11/9/2015)

Sergeant McNamee’s Log 1: “’Where are you Captain? Where’d you wonder off to (apostrophe)?’ I said that to myself constantly. My recover crew and I have just recovered Captain Hazzard’s Log book and listened to all the logs. Listening to his crash and death of teammates left my team and I in sheer panic (effect). Captain Hazzard was always good at effectively expressing a situation, the art of rhetoric. His way of using symbols, similes, and metaphors to set up the stage and scenery always matched the atmosphere and imagery to the exact detail when he sent out log reports on other missions. The Captain had true wit of his situation and it effectively showed in his logs. After listening to the rest of the logs, the mood of my team fell drastically. I looked to my team, and yelled at them with a sharp tone, ‘Let’s go and find the Captain, it doesn’t do any good to sit around and cry.’ So then, we headed out following the footprints he left behind.

Sergeant McNamee’s Log 2: “The irony behind this is that the Captain was always saving me in situations, and now it’s up to me to save him! He is the Captain, this was a very strange and uncomfortable new situation. In this story I was the protagonist, I must find and save my captain, but the antagonist is the harsh terrain, as well as the monsters we heard on the Logs. We kept following the path until we heard noises in the bushes. I directed my team keep their weapons on the bushes. We stopped moving. We were scared. The allusion presented in front of us was nothing but fear. But then the Captain’s Medic came out and we were delighted. But something was wrong. He ran to attack us, my private put a bullet in to his head. POW (onomatopoeia)! But the medic kept moving, he was zombie like. Why didn’t he die? I told my team to fire at will until he stopped moving. But soon after, all around us there were more of those creatures. The scene was terrifying. We had around 100 on all sides. If we didn’t run, we were surely to be killed (tautology). I screamed to my crew to run back to the ship. And so they did.

Major McNamee’s Log 3: “We made it off of that demon of a planet. But we never were able to find out what happened to the Captain. Our planet had decided to eradicate those beats and send in a full blown army at the end of the week. I was going back, but this time I would find the Captain. He is still alive. I know this because his ship started the distress beckon again along with a Morse code transmission saying, ‘STILL ALIVE!’” 

Crashed Landing

Captain Hazzard’s Log 1: “We have crashed on a remote planet…surrounded by thick, musty air and complete total darkness (ellipsis). I, Captain Hazzard the Great (epithet), must take care of my frightened crew. This wasteland is ominous. The ground around us seems hungry and thirsty for our very souls (figurative language). My medic has been frightened ever since the crash. He’s (contraction) been screaming, “We are all going to die,” a generalization I do not want to be a part of. To calm him down, I told him “everything will be ok,” but the irony is, we are far from it.

Captain Hazzard’s Log 2: “We can’t sit around any longer. We are heading to the hills (which are frightening) straight ahead (parenthesis) to gain higher ground and to look for a way out. I asked our field expert to give us data on the path towards the hills. She said we had a 6 miles of walking, along with the temperature, 23 Celsius, and oxygen levels, which are healthy. I began editing her work and checking over to see if all of her facts were trustworthy and correct. I look over her work because as of late because we cannot trust this women, for she has perjured herself in the past (enthymeme). But for now, her facts checked out. We will start hiking at dawn.”

Captain Hazzard’s Log 3: “As we were walking towards the hills, I made an inference by looking at my first lieutenant, he seemed ill. We sat him down and asked what was wrong. He proclaimed that his breathing was failing. Soon after, he passed away (euphemism). His bodied turned zombie like. As we were leaving, I swore he had woken up, but I dismissed the thought, only thinking it was my mind playing tricks.  I will miss him, his repertoire contained a large amount of skills and experience that many of the other crew members didn’t have. The rest of the crew never liked him. They believed that he was talented, but only because his parents were rich enough to afford him higher-level schooling (paralipsis). After this blow, the crew was as dead as a door-nail (simile). We closed up shop, we had about 2 miles to go. But night began to fall. As the head of the group, I needed to keep the body going before it lost hope (synecdoche).

Captain Hazzard’s Log 4: “What is a hill? A hill is ‘a naturally raised area of land, not as high or craggy as a mountain (denotation).’ Well, in my opinion, the hill was hell (metaphor). Climbing that humungous pile of rock took the life out of me, but when we reached the top. Our hopes flew away as fast as bee (hyperbole). We looked over the ridge and there was nothing but plans. My crew became hysterical. The buffoonery they part took in to cope was sheer madness. And much like my first lieutenant, they began to pass out. First my medic, then my field expert. I am alone. I will continue to walk across these plains in order to find hope, but the battery on my log book is running low. So this will be the last you hear of me. I am heading to what I believe is north. Bona Ventura.

Captain Hazzard’s Log 5: “…… (zombie roar)”

Pro's and Con's of GMO's

Jack - scribe

McManus - moderator
1) Why not just give impoverish countries the technology to help?
- because the USA is capitalistic
2)  If the world doesn't want them, then why give them to poor countries.
3) If they prolong shelf life of food, why would someone want a month long orange.
4) If plants can resist weed, what happens if the weeds become resistant.

Pro - Abigail
- With GMO's you get more food
- It'll help the extra 2 billion people that will fill the world by 2050
- All from WebMD
- Farmers can grow more food as these foods can grow in droughts and are less likely to die from disease
- Not using these tools will push us back in 20-40 in food production
- causes less stress on the environment
- gets rid of weeds
- help grow better crops faster, more food for consumers
- lower risk of crop failures
- better resistant to extreme weather, example cold winter
- longer life, allows easier transport
- helpful to send food to impoverish countries
- less chemicals that reduces pollution
- better nutrition
- up the amount of minerals in the vitamin, which is more nutritious

1)      Insect Resistance - Some GMO foods have been modified to make them more resistant to insect pests. The University of California in San Diego reports that a toxic bacterium can be added to crops to make them insect repellent, yet safe for human use. This can reduce the amount of pesticide chemicals used on the plants, thus potentially reducing exposure to pesticides.

2)      Environmental Protection - Oklahoma State University reports that the increase of GMO crops and animals often requires less chemicals, time and tools, and may help to reduce environmental pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and soil erosion. This can improve the general beauty and health of the environment surrounding farms and contribute to the sustaining of better air and water quality, which can indirectly benefit your personal well-being.

3)      More Nutritious Foods - The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations reports that some GMO foods have been engineered to be more nutritious in terms of mineral or vitamin content. Not only does this help you get the nutrients you need, it can also play a significant role in battling malnutrition in the developing world. The United Nations advises that vitamin A-enhanced rice is helping to reduce global vitamin A deficiencies.

4)      Better overall quality and taste - Through the modification of foods, the flavors can be enhanced. Peppers can become spicier or sweeter. Corn can become sweeter. Difficult flavors can become more palatable.

5)      More resistant to disease - Plants and animals that have been genetically modified can become more resistant to the unexpected problems of disease. Think of it as a vaccine for that plant or animal, except that the vaccine is encoded into the genetics instead of a shot given to the immune system.

Con - Andrew
- have been banned in most other major countries
- 60% of countries banned - they aren't safe
- no benefactor
- food grows at same rate of time
- caused many super strains of insects and weeds - according to Brown
- pesticides are still used and stronger are used to kill these new weeds and insects
- pattonable - so they have the risk of putting hard working farmers out of work
- 80% of processed food in the US
- significant increase in diseases and cancers

1)      Allergic Reactions - GMO foods can present significant allergy risks to people, according to Brown University. Genetic modification often mixes or adds proteins that weren't indigenous to the original plant or animal, causing new allergic reactions in the human body. In some cases, proteins from an organism that you're allergic to may be added to an organism that you weren't originally allergic to, prompting the same allergic reaction experienced from the first organism.

2)      Decreased Antibiotic Efficacy - Some GMO foods have had antibiotic features built into them to make them immune or resistant to diseases or viruses, according to Iowa State University. When you eat them, these antibiotic markers persist in your body and can make actual antibiotic medications less effective. The university warns that such ingestion of GMO foods and regular exposure to antibiotics may be contributing to the decreased effectiveness of antibiotic drugs that is being noticed in hospitals around the world.

3)      Gene Transfer - A constant risk of GMO foods is that the modified genes of the organisms may escape into the wild. Brown University warns that herbicide-resistant genes from commercial crops may cross into the wild weed population, thus creating "superweeds" that are impossible to kill with herbicides. A related risk is that the escape of genetically enhanced animals and vegetation can create new super-organisms that can out-compete natural animal and plant populations to drive certain species into extinction.

4)      There is no economic value - GMO foods take just as long to mature and take just as much effort to grow, meaning that there is no real economic value to growing GMO foods when compared to non-GMO foods.

5)      Environmental damage - By growing plants or raising livestock in environmental conditions that normally wouldn’t support them, there is the potential of irrevocably damaging that environment. This is often seen through GMO crossbreading – weeds, for example, that can be crossed with GMO plants can often become resistant to herbicides, creating the need for more GMO efforts.

Counters:
- Yes, GMOs help impoverished nations, but not best for the US
- Thought they make the food cheaper, but is it cheaper if you have cancer

Links: 1)      http://www.livestrong.com/article/213053-pros-cons-of-gmo-foods/

http://healthresearchfunding.org/pros-cons-genetically-modified-foods/

WINNER: Andrew

Flip the Switch?

Jack Hazzard- Don't flip the switch (Con)
Danny McNamee- Flip the switch(Pro)
Andrew Elston- Scribe/ Mediator

Fight Club

Pros- Less people would die, the inevitable will happen 

- why is it matter who is to blame in reality you're actually saving 4 people

-The train is coming any way so you cant blame the person who flips the switch either way

-It's the logical thing to do, save more lives 

-90 % of people would reverse the car to kill the one person rather than do nothing with the 5 

- If you do nothing you are responsible for the lives of the 5 people that you killed rather than just the 1 

-The mans organs in the hospital are worth the lives of 5 other people

-Overall if death is morally right its better to kill the one rather than the 5

Cons

-a culture that sacrifices its own don't last as long

-it breaks religious commandment of thall shall not kill

- if you pull the lever you yourself are solely responsible for killing that person, but in essence if you let the 5 people die you are just a bystander.

-in the same 90% article most people when faced with the actual circumstances chicken out in the end much like a solider in war

- instead of killing the fat man try and get the fat person to yell with you to get the workers to move than you can save all your lives.

-example with the movie the dark nigh and the boat scenario

-in the end people do the right thing

Pro

- it doesn't matter who kills a person, if you save more people than you're a hero

Con

- but if you pull the switch by definition you are committing man slaughter

Pro

-(no response and admits defeat)

Fight Club Strategies

A strategy that we should start to throw in to our very own paper from Fight Club is the idea of looking at every issue from both sides of the argument. I enjoy how we are given a very difficult and uncomfortable discussion, we need to get the pros and cons of the article. This way we have two things work. First, people will be able to make smarter and better articulated arguments that keep the other side in mind, instead of fully believing their side is truly right. Second, looking at both sides help us young teenagers make our own well-researched opinions. The easiest part about these assignments is that we all have our own perspective on these matters already. Most of these topics that have been proposed will always be present in our society, and hopefully as young teens, our generation can fix these issues in the future. The hardest part is when you are already decided on your side, and you have to switch in the debate. It’s hard to throw away your own thoughts and opinion you’ve been with for a while and quickly change it and fight it. Yes this is a challenge, but I believe it’ll help make us better arguers because we know both sides, and won’t make biased statements. When discussing what a verbal environment makes easier compared to writing I would first think about tone. I personally rather write because it gives me time to think, but with talking, sometimes I feel like a blabbering idiot who can’t articulate his own argument. But going back to tone, I believe when you are in person, you can see and hear your opposition’s emotions and voice, which I believe sometimes is lost in writing. When I read articles, I feel as if the writer is just being sarcastic or informational. 

Dallas Flag

Watch Roman Mar' TED Talk where he explains to us what makes a good flag in an inventive and unique way. All Chicago citizens should watch!

If we compare Dallas, Texas' flag to the TED Talk video we can see that the flag mostly falls under his rules except for the fact of writing. I enjoy the flag because it basically is a rearrangement of the Texas flag. They both contain the same the colors red, white and blue, but also they both contain the single lone star. The single lone star is a huge staple in Texan culture, for the sole reason that we are considered the "Lone Star State." Most Texans use our flag as a badge of honor, so in result when Dallas developed their flag, they kept to the same guidelines as the states flag. Besides the rearrangement of the flag from Texas to Dallas, Dallas also added their own symbol in the middle. This badge, in my opinion, makes the flag look tacky, but if you take it away, it'll look empty.


This is the flag I have in mind when creating thinking of Dallas. The design is simple in so many ways but it's simplistic, yet the boldness creates a sense of honor and courage. When compared to the state flag, these two designs share the same aspects, the three same colors: red, white, and blue. The blue stands for loyalty. The red stands for bravery. And the white stands for purity. But the main part of the flag is still there, the "lone star." When compared to the Ted Talk video, we must compare my flag to the 5 steps  Roman Mar has created. First, can a child remember and be able to draw it. Yes, when looking at my flag it's simplistic design is what should stand out. You should see the three colors but most of all you should look to middle and see the most important part, the "lone star." Second, are there words? No, the original Dallas flag had the name of the city on it, the flag looked tacky as if someone just put a sticker on the top of the lone star. As they in the video, "if you need to write the name of what you are representing in a flag, your symbolism has failed." Third, use 2-3 basic colors. As you can see the flag only has 3 colors, red, white, and blue. Fourth, use meaningful symbolism. As I wrote above, each colors means their own thing for our respective state and city. And last, number 5 is be distinctive or be related. My creation is very bold and distinctive but also relates to our favorite flag, the Texas flag. This close distinction helps Texans see that Dallas holds the states true virtues still.

Addicts, Mythmakers, and Philosophers

In Alan Brody’s short article “Addicts, Mythmakers and Philosophers,” the smaller section known as ‘The Devil’s Gambit’ brings an interesting view to the read. Brody begins by analyzing the assumption that many people assume that, “when an addict expresses a commitment to stop an addiction, but doesn’t, they’re expressing either an unresolved ambivalence or a resolution to stop at some later time” (24). In other words (135), the addict has an urge and understanding to stop whatever they’re addicted to, but believe they don’t have to quit just yet. Instead, the addict can just push off. To put it another way (135), the addicts are “lazy,” meaning they can quit now, but due to their addiction they just won’t. In Brody’s view, “continued drug use (for example) might not be due to an inadequacy over self-regulation, but a result of choice” (46). To take a case in point (136), this is what the section is all about. Brody’s main argument is that it’s not up to the “inadequacy over self-regulation” but instead it’s up to the addicts choices. This is better explained with Brody’s story about the devil and the man “who loved the drinking parties there” (136). The man was offered a way out of hell and into heaven. The Devil proclaimed that “as long as he was willing to quit drinking he could immediately go to heaven, where he would forever have a better time.” The protagonist has an easy way out, but the devil also offered to a “great send-off party now” for him. The man decides to have the party. The devil continues to offer him this party every day, showing that the man will never leave the parties, even though if he does, he’ll be able to return home. The story agrees completely with Brody’s idea that the addict has a choice, but instead they just can’t quit due to the “inadequacy over self-regulation.”

Graff, Gerald, Cathy Birkenstein, and Russel Durst. They Say / I Say. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2015. Print.

Brody, Alan. "Addicts, Mythmakers, and Philosophers." Philosophy Now. Philosophy Now: 2012. Web. 15 Oct. 2015.

What is Original? Fight Club: October 15th, 2015

Why would more than 500 artists sample the same song?

• Con: Piece of inspiration, reminder of history, see how far we have come, creates a sense of innovation and a new product
• To prove originality the podcast mentions different artists like Bruno Mars - Uptown Funk is pop, paul mccartney is rock/alternative, amy winehouse is soul 
• by providing artists from each genre, creating their own spin on a common phrase, why would it not be a new song?
• The podcast mentions We Cant Stop, thpugh she uses La Di Di from Duggy fresh, it sounds nothing like the original, its actually different in the lyrics, spell things differently to avoid copyright
• in addition, artists also proclaim the legitness and originality of sampling because they're reinventing a new sound
• feel as though the music is speaking to them, and giving it the love they need 
• due to previous legal issues, artists have not realized the issues with copyright, they have begin to give artists credit by using their names in the song, using "royal rights" 
• fall out boy paying uma thurman and pulp fiction 

• Pro: the base of that new song is from somewhere else, so it's not original
• we fool ourselves with originality
• subconsciously stealing - not original
• even the best artists 
• we live in a post-sampling era, so everything that people are taking has already been done so it cant be original
• often times artists over-borrow to the point where it is ripping off and not just sampling - copyright
• Lack of acknowledgement without credit given, no matter how much of a spin you take to it it is still copying

What point does it get to where is copyright - answered up there

Fashion!

Does copying in Fashion keep it fresh

Pro:

• Bizarre knockoff - less wealthy people start buying so then wealthier people start to use that trend
• main inspiration is street style, probably more cost efficient
• fashion designers can get repetitive, but it  can get harder to differentiate but you want to be in the in group
• the trends that come about within each generation often dictate the market, trends come from another designer and are spun to please an audience
• style is when a designer makes something up and it won't fade like a trend would

Con:

• "There is no such thing as plagiarism in fashion" (Except labels!!!)
• little property protection and only thing you can copy is label
• We have to remember that denotative and connotative are different
• keep in mind, copying is the rule! 
• podcast says that world thrives from thieves, they're not stealing they're borrowing
• bizarre knockoff: fashions fade, but style is eternal
• although one generation brings in an article of clothing, it will be replicated and improved
• even though you start with one object, by the end it will be a completely different object

Technology

Where do good ideas come from?

• Con:
• no new ideas anymore
• ideas come back similar than there is no progress
• Steve Jobs made fun off "fake 
• Pro
• God ideas come from genius
• some fail to place themselves correctly

The Coddling of the American Mind

In Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt’s article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” they explain the nationwide phenomenon that plagues colleges all across America, students now-in-days are more sensitive to “jokes” and microaggressions. In their article, Lukianoff and Haidt define a microaggression as “small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless.” (46) My opinion of the article is that I agree with the fact that they believe colleges and their students have become so insensitive when it comes to casually speaking, but I’d like to point out that not every student or college is that way. (62) I am happy that people are beginning to stand up for harsh criticism and destructive language, but at the same time, it seems as if no one can take a joke. I’ve always been a fan of satirical TV shows such as South Park and Family Guy, who all sputter nasty jokes against a variety of shaky topics. (24) These shows are given huge ratings and contain a large amount of followers who appreciate the jokes. This reveals that not everyone is so sensitives on microaggressions. But on the other, Lukianoff and Haidt have found that college kids are insensitive about these microaggressions. Throughout the article, the authors show us instances where college kids overreact about a meager joke. For example, what drove me crazy was when they brought up the story about a teacher’s daughter wearing a Game of Thrones’ shirt. The T-shirt read “I will take what is mine with fire & blood.” For most people, they would read the shirt and laugh that a young child is sponsoring a huge block buster TV show. But in this case, the administrators came to believe that when the word “Fire” was introduced, it could refer to AK-47s. Now, even if you didn’t know the show, I highly doubt most people would imagine an AK-47. In my opinion, that irrational reference is completely over thought and profound. Common sense would believe that with such bold claims, most people would believe that you should just take this case and sweep it under the rug, but we’ve become so sensitive and scared that we must analyze every little detail. (24) Another example of college kids overreacting is when Lukianoff and Haidt discuss the comedian issue. They say that iconic comedians such as Chris Rock, Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher “have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students, saying too many of them can’t take a joke,” thus, refusing to perform at college campuses. Have we come to such debauchery that we can’t even watch a comedian at our college anymore?

The end of the article was very interesting. I enjoyed how Lukianoff and Haidt had composed three ways to fix this issue. They believed that students had been sheltered throughout their lives due to crime and violence and that shows through how people act today. This issue has led to kids not leaving their shelter and seeing what the world is really like. Both Lukainoff and Haidt believe that in order to grow ourselves and get rid of our sensitive nature, we must follow these rules. First, they set up the belief that colleges themselves should take action about this behavior by promoting that, “Rather than trying to protect students from words and ideas that they will inevitably encounter, colleges should do all they can to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control.” This is understandable because when college is over, these students must be ready for the real world, which is “full of words and idea that they cannot control.” Next, Lukianoff and Haidt believe that professors shouldn’t be put under such harsh scrutiny for what they say, they describe “Professors should be free to use trigger warnings if they choose to do so, but by explicitly discouraging the practice, universities would help fortify the faculty against student requests for such warnings.” This means that proffesors should be allowed to add any language and input that they believe is beneficial to the student learning without being under the scrutiny of being fire or harassed. Last, Lukianoff and Haidt look exactly at the colleges for the change in students, they proclaim that, “universities should rethink the skills and values they most want to impart to their incoming students.” (47) If universities rethink their ethics and mission statements, students can then pick what college they want to belong to that shares the same beliefs and thoughts as them, and likely not join one that causes them to be upset with the schools verbalization.

 Lukianoff, Greg, and Jonathan Haidt. "The Coddling of the American Mind." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, Sept. 2015. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.

Graff, Gerald, Cathy Birkenstein, and Russel Durst. They Say / I Say. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2015. Print.

Bad Blood - October 2nd

When comparing these two songs, a huge difference stands out between them, which is their tone. We all know, and if you didn’t, that Taylor Swift’s song is directed towards her “beef” with fellow Pop star Katy Perry. In this context, the song is most nearly about Taylor’s upset feelings towards Katy Perry. If so, then the song pacts a tone that is hateful and spiteful, as if it gives off a chant that is yelled before battle. In more depth on the aspect of a battle, the whole music shows Taylor prepping a team to take on her arch nemesis, Arsyn. Thus, proving that Taylor Swift’s version of the song is made in spite, whereas Ryan Adams’ version seems to address a love aspect. His tone seems to more about a loved one he has had a falling out with. The song is more somber than Taylor’s rendition, which shows their difference in tone.

               Although the two share the same lyrics, they differ in what they mean by them. For example, when the lyrics say “Oh, it’s so sad to think about the good times, You and I,” (15-16) you can pick up the connotation that Taylor’s good times are more of a friendship aspect whereas Ryan Adam’s seems to be about some he dearly loved. In addition, the chorus says, “’Cause baby now we got bad blood, you know it used to be mad love,” (1-2) which gives off the impression that they once were deeply connected but due to unfortunate circumstances, a separation occurred and caused this song to be made. Once again, this lyric gives of the impression that to Taylor, it’s about an argument, but to Adams, it’s more about the loss of someone that was close to them.

In conclusion, I believe both Taylor and Adams gave off their message effectively. Swift's message was that she was upset with Katy Perry and is going to get stronger and better in order to fight her, theoretically. Adams message seems to be that he has lost someone dear to him due to a falling out or issue, which is tone gives off effectively. 

Martin, Max. (Producer) Bad Blood [Music Video] Available May 17, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcIy9NiNbmo

Adams, Ryan. (Producer) Bad Blood [Audio Video] Available September 17, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V-8VP5dnrQ

Should everyone go to college - Fight Club?

Pro - Jessica

• Even though education is the lowest paying, it is necessary to go to college because you have to
• 14% of people with high school diplomas make as much money as people with a bachelor's degree
• You want to be able to support yourself and a family comfortably
• If you have a mechanical engineering degree, you are expected to earn $35,000 more than a typical high school graduate
• Research shows that there is a positive correlation to going to college
• There is more financial aid than people realize

Con - Rachel 

• Not every bachelor's degree is a smart investment
• For the arts, it might be better to just get into the profession rather than go to college
• If you have a STEM job with a high school diploma, then you are likely to make more money than someone with a bachelor's degree in the humanities, arts, and education
• Financial aid process needs improvement, because it is not easy for poor families to know about programs and receive financial aid
• College is only a wise decision if you make wise decision throughout college

Arguments - 9/25

To answer the first question, "Do people argue?," the simple answer is yes. Now going more in depth on an argument, a huge question to the argument is, why does this concern you? For example, you all know I am a huge soccer fan, so for my example argument I'll discuss the fact that the MLS (Major League Soccer) will one day become a major league such as the EPL and La Liga. So why does this argument matter to me? From playing soccer my whole life and being American, it would make sense for me to care for American soccer (MLS). In my opinion, I'd love for something I cherish to be the best it can be. This means, if someone undersizes what I enjoy, I will retaliate and argue to stand my ground. This idea can relate to every modern day argument. People have opinions and values, and these opinions and values aren't the same as others. This means there will be a disagreement. But a disagreement isn't an argument. I believe that when someone undermines another's values, and that said person retaliates, that is an argument. I believe arguments can and cannot prove to accomplish something. I believe the best result of an argument is being able to get your point across and if that person retains your argument. With my example of the MLS, I know people will believe it won't be anything in the future, but hopefully by me arguing with a proper argument, such as using stats and facts, I can possibly put in their heads that there is a chance. A proper argument shouldn't be about winning or losing, unless it's a debate class. Arguments are solely based off of being able to get your message of in a proper and eloquent way. The purpose of an argument shouldn't be about hurting the other person. In no way should your reason for arguing with another person be to hurt them. That is cynical and twisted, a true moral being wouldn't want to harm the other, the arguer just wants the other to understand their point of view and what side they have taken. I would never attack someone for not liking the MLS, I can argue and tell them why I believe their thoughts aren't fully thought through, but I'm not going to manipulate them just to "win." Arguing is much more than winning. It's about making a difference using perfectly sound rhetoric to show others why you believe in such a cause. 

       Arguing is found in most classes now and days, which I believe is an awesome thing. I believe now and days we live in a society where miscommunication often occurs. I believe if in classes, students should learn how to properly explain their thoughts and beliefs in an eloquent and sophisticated style. People in my life tend to argue for the sake of arguing it seems, and I believe that if we all learned how to better communicate, these arguments would turn into lessons. Professors should respond to criticism well, but I believe most people are afraid to argue someone due to the fact that the teacher holds a higher position. 

Fight Club 9/24: Against Meat

Jack - Scribe

Andrew - Moderator:
1) Is family or yourself is more important?
2) Why are chicken and carrots are symbolic for the culture?
3) If chicken and carrots are so important to his grandma, why would he support his own individuality?
4) In a constant changing society, is it ok to change tradition?
5) How does this passage demonstrate the power of nature vs nurture?

Maddie - Pro: 1) Lots of reasons to why Vegetarianism is good
- regular meat eating is bad for the environment
- family concerns shouldn't over shadow your own concerns, make your own traditions
- choose to raise their kids in whatever way they want to (still apart of real family, but making their own traditions)
- new diet wouldn't create division in family
- if he hadn't chosen to be vegetarian, he'd live his life as a lie
3) Respect her by eating
- should follow what he believes
4) everything is changing, politics, world, is changing
- history
5) change is great

- nurture how you were raised

- nature is what you believe

Gottsacker - Against:
1) Family is everything
- care about you
- certain practices that are held traditional and things such as these are greater than the individual, it's being a part of a community, and to be a part of a community you must show these beliefs and uphold them
- Grandma's meal is important part of the family's life and he is preventing this meal from being an important part of his kids' life
2) Represents coming together as a community and as a family
- important to family
- Grandmother kept her values in WW2 when she was starving
- he is providing for his family and his kids are doing well
- if Grandmother put all of that pain and suffering to keep her values, he should keep those values
5) goes against tradition
- nurtured himself

"Gottsacker won." - Andrew

"Elastic Heart" Rhetorical Analysis

Using the given texts and resources available, I am able to determine the rhetorical analysis for the music video “Elastic Heart” by Australian singer, Sia. Beginning a rhetorical analysis requires the ability to understand what the artists is attempting to appeal. For the most part there about three types of appeals: pathos, ethos, and logos.  Through watching the video and reading the lyrics, my conclusion to what type of appeal Sia shows is pathos. In Texas ATM’s rhetorical analysis cite, they refer to pathos as “pathetic.” Their definition of the “pathetic” appeal is that it “invokes the audience’s emotion to gain acceptance and approval from the ideas expressed.”[1] I decided this appeal due to the fact that the lyrics describe a war of love, and the music video expresses a man who cannot leave his cage, literally and figuratively.

               So how does Sia use Ethos in her video and lyrics? With the lyrics, Sia shows her challenge of not being able to “conquer love” (line 2). Sia continues throughout the rest of the song showing how her feelings and emotions were played with and stretched. The song explains that she is strong and has an “elastic heart,” revealing she is in control of her emotions. By showing her struggles in her relationship, it is easy for a typical person to feel the same. Any person that has ever been in some type of a relationship has experienced the sadness that comes with a break up or disconnection. Sia’s song helps people relate to her emotions. Throughout the song, she explains her emotional torment by claiming that “there were so many red flags” (line 6) thus proving she wasn’t able to accept the warnings that this relationship had caused her pain. Further in the song, Sia claims “You did not break me” (line 9) which is a common phrased used when discussing a break up, thus relating to most people, or her audience. Last, Sia wraps up the song stating her reason for the song by claiming, “It’s hard to lose a chosen one,” (line 26) which shows that in the end this song is about losing someone. In this day of age, most people have lost someone whether it be with relationship or death, meaning most people can relate to this song by Sia.

               When watching the video, you see one man (Shia LaBeouf) and one girl (Maddie Ziegler) looking at one another. At the time 0:25 you begin to see these two people begin to communicate through dance. The video shows Shia LaBeouf’s character trying to understand why this girl is messing with him. He doesn’t understand what’s going on and thus tries to connect with the strange girl. At minute 2:00 you see Shia is able to get close with the girl. They begin to act and work together in sync. At 2:20 the girl then bites Shia, showing that he cannot trust this girl. She then at 2:55 leaves the cage, but Shia can’t. She returns at 3:17 and the two begin to bond again. At minute 4:00, Maddie Ziegler’s character tries to take Shia LaBeouf out the cage, but he won’t fit.

               This video really shows how people are when making new relationships. At first you don’t understand the person, and you need time to learn about them. Once you share intimate time together, you begin to want to stay with one another, example is when Maddie Ziegler’s character comes back in to the cage. In the end, the two characters were going to walk away with each other but Shia couldn’t leave the cage, which means to me that he wasn’t ready to leave his safety in the cage.

               With the video, Sia appeals to people’s emotions once again. She takes the fact that we are all scared of creating new relationships with others, and expresses the torment it can bring.

---

[1]  "University Writing Center - Rhetorical Analysis." University Writing Center - Rhetorical Analysis. Texas A&M, 2015. Web. 18 Sept. 2015. <http://writingcenter.tamu.edu/Students/Handouts-Guides/Guides-(What-Are-You-Writing-)/Academic-Writing/Analysis/Rhetorical-Analysis>

fa

The Weeknd, and Diplo. Elastic Heart. Sia. Diplo (Greg Kurstin), 2013. MP3

Fight Club: Campaign to Get Rid of Single-Sex Classrooms (9/17/15)

Pros:

• It takes out the gender stereotype
• Women head towards math and analytical paths, and vice versa with men towards literature
• Men and women learn better in different environments
• "Girls cannot leave it to boys to dissect the frog, and boys can't leave it to girls to edit the newspaper."
• Men go to a male only school to learn be gentlemen better
• Statistically, girls who go to co-ed schools don't lean towards analytical career paths, which is exactly the opposite for women how attend female only schools.

Cons:

• If you separate by gender, men and women can't learn from each other
• Isolating by gender will give people a different insight on the world
• "Girls cannot leave it to boys to dissect the frog, and boys can't leave it to girls to edit the newspaper." 
• If you separate them, then you're avoiding the problem instead of facing it hands on
• Prepares them for the future
• It may not seem like the best thing for them at the time, but in reality, nothing is better
• High school is the foundation for the real world, so high school should be consistent with reality
• Better test scores-- why are they relevant?
• Is it proven that better test scores will set men and women up better in reality?
• There aren't any well-designed research that proves that single-sex education improves academic achievement
• There is good evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and "legitimizes institutional sexism"

Moderator:

• What do you guys think about the comparison of the gender organization and race organization?
• Pro and Con: The segregation issue is separate from gender organization
• Both sides agree that men and women are created equal, the gender organization isn't part of a race issue.
• Do you think co-ed education affects society and how people conduct themselves professionally?
• Pro: It takes out the whole "popularity" feel
• Con: Co-ed kind of tames men and women from acting out
• There isn't necessarily anyone you want impress in an all men/all women school