Saturday, October 10, 2009
ra#5
JFK's speech in which he designated himself a jelly doughnut has many examples of his ethos (not all of them positive). First of all President Kennedy was in fact the President of the United States, at that point in time a respected posistion often regarded as leader of the free world, and thus already had a significant ethos. The citizens of west Berlin were surrounded by communist Germany and appreciated their freedom, and thus would listen to the "leader of the free world". Not only was Kennedy's position respected Kennedy also established himself as a "learned" man by using the latin ,"civis Roman sum" (I am a citizen of rome) this gave him the appearance of being smart. Then Kennedy made a huge mistake, "Ich bin ein Berliner" or in english, "I am a jelly doughnut", who respects a person who calls themself a jelly doughnut. Although Kennedy was trying to establish himself as a metaphorical resident of Berlin what he really did was degrade his ethos, and thus his argument. I disagree with Joel's assertion that Kennedy's use of German increased his ethos, on the contrary Kennedy's failure to use proper german grammar undoubtedly made him appear negligent and superficial to those who spoke the german language, he could not even take the time to learn to say one simple german sentence. Of course President Kennedy was still the president of the U.S. and his ethos as president undoubtedly outweighed his failed attempt at german.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Lehi's Discourse on Everything
For my essay analyzing the use of logic, I will look at Lehi's explanation of the plan of happiness and how he describes the creation, the fall, the atonement, and the resurrection as inextricably linked as found in 2 Nephi 2.
Lehi makes sure that all of his assumptions are stated clearly. In v. 5, he gives his assumptions that "men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto them." He goes on to say that because of this law, or the commandments we have received from God, on our own we are doomed to be miserable.
By itself this argument is depressing, but Lehi's purpose in arguing is not to prove a point that has depressing implications. He immediately explains that we can be redeemed from our violations of the law by the sacrifice of the Messiah. The goal of this sacrifice was to"answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit," so we need not be cut off from God's presence by the law.
Lehi further explains that the law is a good thing in v. 10 when he explains that the end or purpose of the law is so that we can be happy, because "the punishment that is affixed [to the law] is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement." Here he has made the assertion that because there is a punishment for breaking the law, there must be happiness to be gained by being innocent before the law through the atonement. Lehi does not try to trick us and not back up this assertion, but instead explains in v. 11 why "all things must needs be a compound in one."
In verses 13 and 14, Lehi does my favorite thing with logical statements, which is to focus his argument on something uplifting. He says that if there is no law and no sin, ultimately there could be no God and no creation. But his purpose is not to tell us sad things, but as he says, "I speak unto you these for your profit and learning," and "I have none other object save it be the everlasting welfare of your souls."
and that the points he is trying to back up logically are relevant to us
I haven't mentioned anywhere how in v. 8 Lehi links up missionary work and the resurrection to this, or in v. 23 how he applies the ideas of all things being a compound in one
~This essay needs to be more focused on how Lehi demonstrates good logical reasoning without anything like deception.
/IS A DRAFT
Lehi makes sure that all of his assumptions are stated clearly. In v. 5, he gives his assumptions that "men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto them." He goes on to say that because of this law, or the commandments we have received from God, on our own we are doomed to be miserable.
By itself this argument is depressing, but Lehi's purpose in arguing is not to prove a point that has depressing implications. He immediately explains that we can be redeemed from our violations of the law by the sacrifice of the Messiah. The goal of this sacrifice was to"answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit," so we need not be cut off from God's presence by the law.
Lehi further explains that the law is a good thing in v. 10 when he explains that the end or purpose of the law is so that we can be happy, because "the punishment that is affixed [to the law] is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement." Here he has made the assertion that because there is a punishment for breaking the law, there must be happiness to be gained by being innocent before the law through the atonement. Lehi does not try to trick us and not back up this assertion, but instead explains in v. 11 why "all things must needs be a compound in one."
In verses 13 and 14, Lehi does my favorite thing with logical statements, which is to focus his argument on something uplifting. He says that if there is no law and no sin, ultimately there could be no God and no creation. But his purpose is not to tell us sad things, but as he says, "I speak unto you these for your profit and learning," and "I have none other object save it be the everlasting welfare of your souls."
and that the points he is trying to back up logically are relevant to us
I haven't mentioned anywhere how in v. 8 Lehi links up missionary work and the resurrection to this, or in v. 23 how he applies the ideas of all things being a compound in one
~This essay needs to be more focused on how Lehi demonstrates good logical reasoning without anything like deception.
/IS A DRAFT
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Ra#4
Martin Luther King jr's "I have a Dream" speech is a clear demonstration of audience analysis, as well as language tools. Not only does it adress his literal audience (those gathered to hear him speak), it also adresses those who oppose him, and those who are neutrel. King knows that his audience, the ones actually there, want rights for colored people, so that's what he talks about (duh), but more interesting is how he talks about it. King knew that those opposed to his view would likely read or hear his speech and try to criticize it and disprove it, so he used very credible sources to make his point, sources that his enemies were familiar with. One of these sources was the Bible (amos 5:24, which deals with justice, and Isaiah 40:4-5, which says that "the glory of the lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together"), King knew most of his enemies were from the south, and were very familiar with the Bible, thus he quoted a source his audience was familiar with. In addition King knew that his audience would probably not criticize the Bible, and thus established for himself a solid source for his argument. King's quotation of the Bible also appealed to thise christioans who were undecided on issues of race. In addition to the Bible King also used sources from the American past. One of these sources is the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence, which states "all men are created equal". King's opponents were all americans, who all certainly valued their independence. King's use of the Declaration of Independence shows that he correctly interpreted his audience and presented information that they accepted to prove his point, no american, against, for or, undecided on equal rights would argue with the Declaration of Independence. King also used the song "My country Tis of thee" in which one line reads "From every mountain side let freedom ring" to show his point. King also made great use of language tools. King's primary language tool was the allusion, to the past works mentioned above, the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, etc. These allusions while supporting his point also made him appear smart and well read, which he was. In addition to the obvious allusions to past events King also used a more subtle one, he began the main part of his speech "Five score years ago", comparing his speech to the Gettysburg address. By alluding albeit subtly to the Gettysburg Address king makes his speech an anthem for freedom similar to the Gettysburg Address in that the issue of race rights was at its height, much like the Civil War was at its height at Gettysburg. King clearly understood that not only his friends but his enemies, and everyone in between would see or hear his speech, and thus used documents from American History, and World history to prove his point showing his ability to analyze an audience and use language tools, particularly allusions.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Just A Game-Revised
This is a revision of my previous post of Just A Game.
I read Just A Game in the August 2009 Ensign. This article details some of the rising issues brought about by the online gaming genre. This article was written by Charles D. Knutson of Brigham Young University Computer Science Department, and Kyle K. Oswald from LDS Family Services. I think a natural ethos occurs when a reader sees the qualifications of these two men listed at the beginning of the article. When referring to video game addiction and its effects on family, most people will generally think that someone from the BYU computer science department is an authority. The same is true of someone who works in LDS family services in regards to the effects of any addiction on the family.
The authors make another good ethos appeal to their audience at the end of paragraph five: "We hope that the explanations, suggestions, and prophetic counsel included in this article may be helpful to individuals and families as they seek the guidance of the Spirit in finding balance in their lives." In this sentence, most readers will gain a sense of the authors' concern for them personally. They use the word "hope" to give positive connotation and convey their concerns in a way that seems parental and caring. Next they identify their rhetoric as "explanations (and) suggestions" versus criticism, and finally throw in "prophetic counsel" as a fail-safe to any who would challenge their position. Prophetic counsel is in the upper echelon of ethos appeals to an LDS audience.
There are several stories given in the article about individuals dropping out of school, neglecting responsibilities, and straining family relationships as a result of playing video games. The authors mention David A. Bednar recently addressing the world of virtual reality in a CES fireside. He addressed the subject as having "both immediate and eternal implications". This does two things for the audience in this article. From a kairos standpoint, it shows that the LDS leadership is currently concerned with this problem. Secondly, referring to a specific "prophetic counsel" builds even more ethos for the authors. They do this again in the next paragraph, including a significant segment from M. Russell Ballard's article in the July 2004 Ensign, "Be Strong in the Lord".
Why the sudden interest in virtual reality in the LDS church leadership? Primarily, subscriptions to these online games is higher today than ever before. The brethren have obviously seen a need to address this issue, as we are now in a day where a person can access the internet from just about anywhere. People all over the world and even in the LDS church are being lured into spending much of their time in virtual reality. The timing of these messages from the leadership of the Church is most likely an attempt to stem the assault on its members before the problem gets out of hand.
I noticed that this article was released in the August issue. I suspect that this was done to coincide with students returning to school this fall. Reminding students to prioritize their studies and curricular activities, and to be aware of the ever-present distractions offered by the internet is an attempt at preventative maintenance. Hopefully, it will be successful to at least a small degree.
I think that the article accomplishes its goal for the most part, but I would have changed the timing of the headings within the online version. This was done effectively in the magazine by placing the "Am I Addicted" heading as an insert prior to the solution "Where Can I Find Spiritual Help and Hope". I think that those who read the online version would have been better served this way. Obviously, if a person reading this article is not addicted, then they don't really need to find spiritual help and hope regarding said addiction. With this adjustment, Elder Ballard's statements are better positioned to persuade those in denial to re-analyze their gaming habit with a more eternal perspective.
Per some comments from my esteemed mentor James Goldberg, I feel that I should comment on the effects that the visual presentation of this article in the print version had on its ethos. Sadly, after establishing good credibility for themselves through the aforementioned means, the authors' ethos is denigrated by the poor quality of the accompanying graphics. The artwork is unattractive, cartoon-ish, and altogether unappealing. The computer monitor taking the form of a ravenous monster devouring the family is a bit extreme. In fact, the premise of the artwork has the computer as the source of treachery instead of the individual, and this somewhat undermines the spirit of the article.
I read Just A Game in the August 2009 Ensign. This article details some of the rising issues brought about by the online gaming genre. This article was written by Charles D. Knutson of Brigham Young University Computer Science Department, and Kyle K. Oswald from LDS Family Services. I think a natural ethos occurs when a reader sees the qualifications of these two men listed at the beginning of the article. When referring to video game addiction and its effects on family, most people will generally think that someone from the BYU computer science department is an authority. The same is true of someone who works in LDS family services in regards to the effects of any addiction on the family.
The authors make another good ethos appeal to their audience at the end of paragraph five: "We hope that the explanations, suggestions, and prophetic counsel included in this article may be helpful to individuals and families as they seek the guidance of the Spirit in finding balance in their lives." In this sentence, most readers will gain a sense of the authors' concern for them personally. They use the word "hope" to give positive connotation and convey their concerns in a way that seems parental and caring. Next they identify their rhetoric as "explanations (and) suggestions" versus criticism, and finally throw in "prophetic counsel" as a fail-safe to any who would challenge their position. Prophetic counsel is in the upper echelon of ethos appeals to an LDS audience.
There are several stories given in the article about individuals dropping out of school, neglecting responsibilities, and straining family relationships as a result of playing video games. The authors mention David A. Bednar recently addressing the world of virtual reality in a CES fireside. He addressed the subject as having "both immediate and eternal implications". This does two things for the audience in this article. From a kairos standpoint, it shows that the LDS leadership is currently concerned with this problem. Secondly, referring to a specific "prophetic counsel" builds even more ethos for the authors. They do this again in the next paragraph, including a significant segment from M. Russell Ballard's article in the July 2004 Ensign, "Be Strong in the Lord".
Why the sudden interest in virtual reality in the LDS church leadership? Primarily, subscriptions to these online games is higher today than ever before. The brethren have obviously seen a need to address this issue, as we are now in a day where a person can access the internet from just about anywhere. People all over the world and even in the LDS church are being lured into spending much of their time in virtual reality. The timing of these messages from the leadership of the Church is most likely an attempt to stem the assault on its members before the problem gets out of hand.
I noticed that this article was released in the August issue. I suspect that this was done to coincide with students returning to school this fall. Reminding students to prioritize their studies and curricular activities, and to be aware of the ever-present distractions offered by the internet is an attempt at preventative maintenance. Hopefully, it will be successful to at least a small degree.
I think that the article accomplishes its goal for the most part, but I would have changed the timing of the headings within the online version. This was done effectively in the magazine by placing the "Am I Addicted" heading as an insert prior to the solution "Where Can I Find Spiritual Help and Hope". I think that those who read the online version would have been better served this way. Obviously, if a person reading this article is not addicted, then they don't really need to find spiritual help and hope regarding said addiction. With this adjustment, Elder Ballard's statements are better positioned to persuade those in denial to re-analyze their gaming habit with a more eternal perspective.
Per some comments from my esteemed mentor James Goldberg, I feel that I should comment on the effects that the visual presentation of this article in the print version had on its ethos. Sadly, after establishing good credibility for themselves through the aforementioned means, the authors' ethos is denigrated by the poor quality of the accompanying graphics. The artwork is unattractive, cartoon-ish, and altogether unappealing. The computer monitor taking the form of a ravenous monster devouring the family is a bit extreme. In fact, the premise of the artwork has the computer as the source of treachery instead of the individual, and this somewhat undermines the spirit of the article.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Pride is Ugly as Sin
I read Brandon's post on President Ezra Taft Benson's talk Beware of Pride, and I thought that it deserved further analysis. I will focus on the way Benson's use of language helps his persuasive power, but I won't shy away from his use of other rhetorical devices.
From the start, President Benson shows that he's not trying to accuse and belittle us by saying "May I commend you faithful Saints who are striving to flood the earth and your lives with the Book of Mormon." When he segues into speaking on pride, instead of explicitly calling us prideful, he notes how he wants to help us avoid the destruction in the Book of Mormon, which might help us be willing to listen to him.
He also establishes his choice to speak on this subject as divinely ordained when he says "This message has been weighing heavily on my soul for some time. I know the Lord wants this message delivered now." Brandon wrote of how this associates him with ancient prophets as well. President Benson wanted to target all Church members, so anyone who wants to avoid destruction or believes in heeding prophets today or in the past is exhorted to pay attention.
To make sure we know what President Benson and the scriptures are referring to, he gives a definition of pride. "The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowmen. Enmity means “hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition.” It is the power by which Satan wishes to reign over us." We can see how enmity is a part of pride in the rest of the examples he gives, and how if we are humble instead of trying to compete, we can "conquer... enmity toward our brothers and sisters, esteem... them as ourselves, and lift... them as high or higher than we are."
When Benson gave examples of what proud people do, one struck me as particularly powerful. Because "the proud depend upon the world to tell them whether they have value or not, ... pride is ugly. It says, "If you succeed, I am a failure."" He is justified in calling pride ugly, with the implications that both pride and its results should be repulsive to us. The attitude of "If you succeed, I am a failure" entails a lack of cooperation that has a terrible on us spiritually by damning us, or stopping our progression. In addition, as merely a temporal thing, pride will lead to a lower average standard of living because of the lack of cooperation and the destructive competition that can happen if someone focuses on making others fail rather than seeking their own or others' success.
President Benson uses repetition to describe facets of pride, the benefits of humility, and how we can become humble. (I wouldn't dare to call it anaphora, because then it would look like I was just copying Brandon.) This is effective because it adds a rhythmic quality to his statements. He starts off his descriptions of of what repenting of pride could do for us with the phrase "Think of" and all of his exhortations to be humble with "We can choose to be humble by..." By phrasing it this way, he avoids ordering us to do anything and follows the Lord's injunction relating to persuasion: "No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned." (D&C 121:41)
From the start, President Benson shows that he's not trying to accuse and belittle us by saying "May I commend you faithful Saints who are striving to flood the earth and your lives with the Book of Mormon." When he segues into speaking on pride, instead of explicitly calling us prideful, he notes how he wants to help us avoid the destruction in the Book of Mormon, which might help us be willing to listen to him.
He also establishes his choice to speak on this subject as divinely ordained when he says "This message has been weighing heavily on my soul for some time. I know the Lord wants this message delivered now." Brandon wrote of how this associates him with ancient prophets as well. President Benson wanted to target all Church members, so anyone who wants to avoid destruction or believes in heeding prophets today or in the past is exhorted to pay attention.
To make sure we know what President Benson and the scriptures are referring to, he gives a definition of pride. "The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowmen. Enmity means “hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition.” It is the power by which Satan wishes to reign over us." We can see how enmity is a part of pride in the rest of the examples he gives, and how if we are humble instead of trying to compete, we can "conquer... enmity toward our brothers and sisters, esteem... them as ourselves, and lift... them as high or higher than we are."
When Benson gave examples of what proud people do, one struck me as particularly powerful. Because "the proud depend upon the world to tell them whether they have value or not, ... pride is ugly. It says, "If you succeed, I am a failure."" He is justified in calling pride ugly, with the implications that both pride and its results should be repulsive to us. The attitude of "If you succeed, I am a failure" entails a lack of cooperation that has a terrible on us spiritually by damning us, or stopping our progression. In addition, as merely a temporal thing, pride will lead to a lower average standard of living because of the lack of cooperation and the destructive competition that can happen if someone focuses on making others fail rather than seeking their own or others' success.
President Benson uses repetition to describe facets of pride, the benefits of humility, and how we can become humble. (I wouldn't dare to call it anaphora, because then it would look like I was just copying Brandon.) This is effective because it adds a rhythmic quality to his statements. He starts off his descriptions of of what repenting of pride could do for us with the phrase "Think of" and all of his exhortations to be humble with "We can choose to be humble by..." By phrasing it this way, he avoids ordering us to do anything and follows the Lord's injunction relating to persuasion: "No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned." (D&C 121:41)
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Wal-Martians- Logical Fallacies
Although I think Barbara Ehrenreich did a good job of using pathos and logos in her Wal-Martians writing, I feel there are quite a few fallacies in her logic. Granted, she uses a lot of hyperbole, her logical fallacies should not escape scrutiny. The truth is that Walmart isn't responsible for any city having turns in its economic stability. The fault simply cannot be put upon them. Surely there may have been some small businesses who have closed their doors as a result of Walmart's presence, but where were the loyal customers to the Mom-and-Pop's? Did Wal-Martians zap their brains and their abilities to function independently? Were they robbed of their choices to shop at other stores? Of course not. No business can be expected to curtail their own growth to save those businesses affected by their success. The fault lies with the community and those businesses who could not adapt and improvise to address the competition.
Ms. Ehrenreich accuses Walmart of "abysmally low wages". There is no real evidence in her article detailing what these wages are, although I'm not sure it matters. Walmart pays its employees above minimum wage, to my knowledge, with some benefits offered to the majority. How much should stacking shopping carts and greeting people pay? Are these jobs really underpaid? Perhaps the fact that they even pay people to do these jobs instead of just eliminating "Greeter" from the payroll is a gesture of kindness by Walmart. Additionally, Ms. Ehrenreich's argument that Walmart's wages are horrible removes all responsibility from the employees being "victimized". These people have the agency to seek employment elsewhere, go to school, start their own business, etc. To paint them as helpless in their Walmart predicament is inane.
I think Ms. Ehrenreich steps a little over the line when she finally accuses Walmart of being criminal. She says Walmart is being faced with charges of sex-discrimination and non-payment of wages, as well as accusations of locking employees in at night without help in medical emergencies. These are charges and accusations. The validity of them is not apparent. She just skips right to "Confronted with its crimes", and assumes that Walmart is 100% guilty. In the USA it is intended that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Even if some of the charges and accusations are justified, Walmart cannot be held absolutely accountable for the individual actions of its employees, only for its company policies. Individuals need to be held accountable for their actions. If an employee is asked to do something unethical, that employee is liable for his/her choice, as is the person who asked him/her to act unethically.
Ms. Ehrenreich accuses Walmart of "abysmally low wages". There is no real evidence in her article detailing what these wages are, although I'm not sure it matters. Walmart pays its employees above minimum wage, to my knowledge, with some benefits offered to the majority. How much should stacking shopping carts and greeting people pay? Are these jobs really underpaid? Perhaps the fact that they even pay people to do these jobs instead of just eliminating "Greeter" from the payroll is a gesture of kindness by Walmart. Additionally, Ms. Ehrenreich's argument that Walmart's wages are horrible removes all responsibility from the employees being "victimized". These people have the agency to seek employment elsewhere, go to school, start their own business, etc. To paint them as helpless in their Walmart predicament is inane.
I think Ms. Ehrenreich steps a little over the line when she finally accuses Walmart of being criminal. She says Walmart is being faced with charges of sex-discrimination and non-payment of wages, as well as accusations of locking employees in at night without help in medical emergencies. These are charges and accusations. The validity of them is not apparent. She just skips right to "Confronted with its crimes", and assumes that Walmart is 100% guilty. In the USA it is intended that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Even if some of the charges and accusations are justified, Walmart cannot be held absolutely accountable for the individual actions of its employees, only for its company policies. Individuals need to be held accountable for their actions. If an employee is asked to do something unethical, that employee is liable for his/her choice, as is the person who asked him/her to act unethically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
