TA: Audience Awareness

Continuing my efforts to better analyze the rhetoric and audiences of larger articles, I read “Why they should stay” from The Economist. The author’s main question is what are the consequences of immediately pulling out troops out of Iraq on Iraqis? This in answered by the view that pulling troops immediately out of Iraq would decimate any hope for stability because pulling out of Iraq would withdraw the security forces needed to protect the people. The target audience are educated people against the war in Iraq, who desire a quicker troop withdrawal but are open to discussion. This is where the article really shines as it constantly keeps in mind its audience.

The Economist spares no trouble disarming the optimistic report of General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker’s optimistic report on Iraq’s progress. The author seems to be one of the readers, with all the same assumptions and concerns regarding Iraq. This greatly builds the author’s credibility.

The main thrust of the argument is carried out by logic. This is because the specific audience wouldn’t accept any emotional-laid stories, or any authoritative quotes coming from General Petraeus or other leaders. Instead, pure reason is used to convince the reader that “the strong case (for staying in Iraq) is that if America leaves, things will get even worse.” Logic is where the audience can be persuaded.

The author also looks at other sides of the issue, anticipating concerns that the reader might have. For instance, the paper discusses that America will probably not “support an indefinite war whose sole remaining purpose [is] to prevent the situation in Iraq from becoming even worse.” However, it’s pointed out that it is still much too early to know if “Iraq can be mended.” Statistics and polls are also used to drive the author’s point home by logic.

The entire argument is brilliantly tailored its audience. The rhetoric is sufficient for the reader, uses logic typical for an intelligent reader and has accurate information. The most impressive thing is how relevant everything is to the audience—everything from the statistics, to the conclusion is made for an audience that is already against the war in Iraq and wants it to end. The author is very successful in the above rhetoric and I would say that this is a beautiful example of both knowing one’s audience and making everything relevant to them.

(Thanks to The Economist September 15th 2007, pp. 13)

RA: Guernica

I had the opportunity to see Guernica in person at the Prado in Madrid last month. Thus it is my choice for rhetorical analysis. The painting asks, what are the consequences of war on society and more generally on all humanity? The obvious answer is that war destroys humanity because bombing innocent victims creates nightmarish chaos in the otherwise normal lives of common people. The target audience for this piece of art is the apathetic public: those generally unaware of the terrible tragedy at Guernica as well as those who knew about the bombing and did nothing. The implicit assumption is easily accepted by the audience—anything which creates nightmarish chaos in an otherwise normal life destroys humanity. Picasso uses a variety of methods to convey this to his viewers. There is much emotion in the painting as all the painting is done in dark colors with abstract and freakish figures. People are being burned alive; a horse cries out with a wild and maddened look; a woman weeps over a dead child with a howl of unreal pain on her face. Pity and despair are shown by a woman leaning out the window holding a simple candle which illuminates the horror all around. And above the chaos floats an on looking eye with a light bulb as its pupil, perhaps a symbol of a world viewing the mayhem through the lens of the media, but doing nothing to stop it. The fact that Guernica was created by Picasso adds to the authority of the argument. He is a famous painter well known throughout the world. Also adding to this is the fact that Picasso is himself a native Spaniard making him well acquainted with the misery of the bombing and the civil war in his own homeland. Though Picasso’s work is generally chaotic, his depiction of Guernica makes logical sense to the reader that war is chaos—never before has the abstract made so much sense because war is indeed a black nightmare. Through his rhetoric Picasso succeeds to a great measure in convincing his audience of the horrors of war.
To see a copy of the painting visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(painting).

FW: Personality Tests

I wonder about all these personality tests that get flung about the internet. It seems that a lot are attributed to the Dali Lama but there is never any evidence to back up this claim. While some of these are fun and just involve the sharing of little known information with your friends, others require you to make a wish and promise you its fulfillment if only if you send the email out to a certain number of people. And I quote (from the most recently received one), “[if you send this to] 0-4 persons: Your life will improve slightly. 5-9 persons: Your life will improve to your liking. 9-14 persons: You will have at least 5 surprises in the next three weeks. 15 or more persons: Your life will improve drastically and all that you wish will come true.” So why do I have to send it around to people to get my wish?

A few of my friends have done big personality tests going to a clinic of sorts (it sounded like some fun). I wonder if the symbols used in such tests truly do describe a person. For instance, there was something in one of the tests about going through a forest seeing an animal and being asked to describe it and how you would confront it. This is supposed to describe how you see your problems and how you deal with them. Then there was also something about a cottage, maybe a gnome with a key and a body of water all which are symbolic of one’s own personality. The funniest test I found out there on the internet (my whole five minutes of searching) was drawing a pig, which tells you all about yourself.

Not that I’m discrediting the tests however. Just why send them in the first place and then condition the promise on sending the same email to more people? I’ve talked with my brother about the science of reading other’s handwriting which I found to be a fascinating subject: crossing the letter t up high reveals lots of confidence while a low cross on the t shows lack of confidence. Maybe the way we view symbols really does show our personality. That, at least, I can believe. (So is the glass half full or half empty?)

TA: The Dreaded A1 Term!

Here are some musings to refine my A1 skills (yes, I must work on seasoning my steak with that oh too delicius liquid amber!) .
What are the consequences of using discovery methods on students understanding of mathematics?
Using discovery methods to teach students will improve their understanding of math because calculus students have learned mathematics better by learning the material on their own and working together with other students in an effort to synthesize and utilize math.

The implicit assumption here is that anything which helps students to learn the material on their own and work together in groups with other students will improve their understanding of math.

The A1 term here is a specific group of calculus students who will be used to show that in all reality discovery methods worked to increase understanding. By doing so, this same conclusion can be generalized to the most (if not all) mathematics students. The A1 term is not necessary but using the specific example gives some clarity. It also refines our statement that discovery methods will be useful towards math students, instead of students in all fields. This could also be more specialized towards just applying to upper division math students or just those that are in calculus. However, doing so would throw out the need to have an A1 term.

Another example of what might work for the A1 term is the following.
Playing bagpipes destroys other’s peace because playing loud music with high pitched notes harms the ear drums of those without earplugs.

This is a much better A1 term which clears up the A term greatly. “Playing loud music with high pitched notes” definitely falls under the umbrella of “Playing bagpipes.” Thus this is an example of an enthymeme where an A1 term is greatly needed.

FW: Poetry-What is Man

A poem dedicated to God.

O what is man that Thou art mindful of him?
Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels.
Thou art King, Ruler, Master and God
Yet choosest the name Father?

“How oft have I called you,” ye say,
“Called you by the mouth of my servants,
By the voice of tempests, of lightnings, of natures blows
Of mercy, glory and the riches of everlasting life
But ye would not!”

What is man that Thou art mindful of him?
To be patient with him, entreat him and show him grace?
That Thou wouldst command him to call upon Thee,
To seek Thy aid and give Thee praise;
Shouldst Ye not have else to do?

What is man that Thou art mindful of him, dear Lord?
That Thou wouldst pay his sins and bear his pains?
Which cost so great a price; even the blood of eternity?

Yet Thou hast promised that in some day,
We shall see as we are seen.

We see through a glass darkly; But then face to face:
Now in part I know the why;

But then shall I know, even as I am known.
In essence the matter lies: A son of God am I.

RA: Gold's Gym Double Strike

I went to Gold’s Gym and was sold to by two different people. The first guy argued that joining Gold’s Gym would increase my manliness because the gym would bulk me up. His assumption didn’t go over very well (anything which would bulk me up would increase my manliness) because it seemed to imply I wasn’t manly enough. He came off as a strong macho man who knew what he was doing (he would help me bulk up by taking some sort of legal drug that had gained him twenty pounds in one month!). He was probably attempting to appear as great guy or role model for me to follow. His arguing was typical in describing the greatness of Gold’s Gym (employee sacrifices, the best machines in the U.S., etc.). Gold’s Gym was hands down the very best gym out there and if I thought differently that meant I didn’t know jack about anything. He continually referred to himself as a trainer and not a sales representative but it certainly didn’t feel that way. His argument was a little too sufficient—too much information I didn’t care about. He had mostly accurate information in explaining the why their machines were so good and the strange weight gaining pill. However his relevancy towards me was lacking (too much extra information and too little personal information)—I wanted to gain some muscle but not become a macho head.

The other salesman, Matt, was much more relevant in his argument. He tried to make the whole argument relevant to me, even pointing out a machine to build up my left arm for the bagpipes. To him, joining the gym would be a good thing for me. He established credibility by talking like a normal person (we seemed to have a lot in common) who found the gym to be a great place for health, increasing strength and becoming better. He also made really good comparisons with Gold’s gym others without cutting them down. Matt was persistent in getting me to join but when I declined a few times he let me go. Overall the biggest difference was his approach and the relevancy of his argument. I felt bad rejecting the offer to go to the gym and who knows I might end up going there just because of how he used rhetoric!

TA: Enthymeme practice--TEACHER CHEATING!

As a citation note most all of this argument is based from the book Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. I’m working on analyzing arguments in the format of an enthymeme (using a great example I might add) and expanding it to what I might do if this were a paper I were to write.

Enthymeme: Imposing penalties and benefits for schools that attain certain scores on issued standardized tests extinguishes student’s learning because having these incentives breeds cheating from both teachers and students.

The implicit argument here is that anything which fosters teacher and student cheating will also stagnate student’s learning. This is a solid assumption which would click with the target audience; the specific audience being the CEO of the public school system of the area. This same enthymeme could also be expanded to use with teachers however it is more effective to persuade those who can change the actual test policies. The reasoning of the argument is typical in that most people believe that cheating hurts students more than it does them good. I would have to construct an argument which included sufficient information on the subject with accurate information (for instance utilizing various studies which have been done on the effect of teacher cheating in Chicago, etc.). I’m not sure to what extent this is a current problem in Provo schools but it has been in a problem in Chicago and I imagine in many other places. I would have to do a lot of research to make sure which issues are relevant and which are not. For instance giving $25,000 to the teachers who have high scoring students will probably not be an issue today but there will be other more relevant incentives that ought to be looked at.

RA: Wendy's is Serving Breakfast?

This is an effective advertisement that persuades people who are busy but care about eating good quality food to eat at Wendy’s for breakfast. Wendy’s does this through their wording and display of colors and layout. Listed in bold, the advertisement says “Just because you’re pressed for time, doesn’t mean you should be pressed for quality.” This speaks directly to those who are in a hurry but who would rather eat a good quality meal. This also implies that eating at other fast food places means sacrificing quality for time. Wendy’s’ previous repertoire of good food, in addition to their current emphasis on quality serves to persuade the reader that the breakfast at Wendy’s will be just as good as their lunch and dinner. Thus logically satisfied customers of Wendy’s food will be happy and full customers with their new morning menu. The fact that Wendy’s is now serving breakfast draws the question out to many (myself included) “What are they serving? And will it be like the rest of the fast food junk served in the wee hours of the day?”

The add repeats that breakfast at Wendy’s is “fresh,” “right,” “made the way (breakfast) ought to be” implying that other fast food restaurants don’t have good food. The layout is swabbed with bright colors of yellow and orange, denoting the horizon of a new dawn with the sun just lighting up the earth. The pictures of food have bursts of light coming out of them emphasizing early morning time, a time to eat! “FREE” is written all over the coupons leading readers to actually want to go to Wendy’s to try their breakfast—in addition to this it seems that the coupons are easily redeemable for actual free food! Wendy’s serves only “Custom Bean Coffee by Folgers Gourmet Selection” adding to their authority as a restaurant who knows good breakfast. However the pictures of the food itself is reminiscent of McDonald’s and other fast food and does not denote that there is higher quality breakfast food at Wendy’s. Overall however, with the emphasis good eating (backed by the experience of previous customers and Wendy’s current advertisement), the aesthetic presentation and the offers for free food, this is a persuasive piece of paper which will draw most readers to try Wendy’s breakfast or in the least to think of them when they’re hungry.

FW: Why Pants?

I must first add a disclaimer that I had never before begun to think of these things till I went into bagpiping. I remember donning my first kilt and walking around in it thinking, This is quite fun! It was after I had done a few parades and had been seen in public in my kilt, that I began to ask myself, why do men wear pants? And in addition why do women wear skirts?

Luckily my querying landed me in a conversation with a good friend of mine. I asked him what he thought about the subject pointing out that many Scottish still wear kilts (though I’m not too sure how commonplace this is). He replied that he had his own skirt he wore at night to bed, something he picked up from the Orient. Many men in Asia wear a loose robe or something of a skirt to sleep in or even to walk around in. We came to the conclusion that wearing pants is, in all actuality, barbaric. The Romans wore skirts (togas as well) while the barbarian tribes wore pants. My friend informed me (and this is unconfirmed as of yet) that the Romans actually passed a law banning all pants from Rome to keep the Barbarians out! But alas, Rome fell, the Barbarians triumphed over the civilized culture of the day and pants emerged victorious. Thus it is my belief that pants is more of a cultural norm inherited from Barbarian tribes than anything else.

One can take a look at those still donning the skirt such as in Scotland (kilts), in Malaysia (sarongs), Japan, the Middle East, the Islands of Polynesia and in all sorts of places to see examples of the man-skirt. Not that I’m calling for a skirt revolution (though some would—I found some funny and very strange websites while doing some google research on this subject). I don’t believe that just as pants have become acceptable for women that the skirt will someday be acceptable for men living in the United States. No not all—nor would I necessarily endorse such a change! What does the future hold for the man-skirt? I don’t know nor do I care much about it, though I still do like to pull out my kilt for a parade or two every now and then.