Visual Arguments

I believe that we are becoming a more visual society. More and more advertising is focused on visual media, such as television, billboards, magazines, and even t-shirts, as opposed to fully written advertisements. For example, I thought that of the two ecstasy advertisements, the one with the visually catching font seemed more effective to the general public, especially people leaning toward doubt. Personally, I find it much easier to look at a picture that glorifies a product or idea than to read an entire paragraph. And if I'm in a car, I don't have time to read the entire paragraph, so a picture is much more accessible. Not only can I "see the whole picture" (pun intended), but I don't have to immediately think about what the picture means; I can easily recall what it looked like and think about it a few seconds later. Now, don't get me wrong; I like visual arguments as much as the next guy, but they aren't very effective without some sort of explanatory writing. Yes, we are becoming a more visual society, but writing is and will be a major part of our society, especially in regards to advertising.
A+!

Athletes or "Half-letes"?

In David Langley's piece, he gives several pieces of evidence which relate to his argument. Before I started reading, I just assumed that he would rant and rave about the possibility of certain hypothetical situations, and then proceed his argument on these. I was pleasantly surprised when he gave several true stories to back up his claims. The stories did not villainize the police officers and other disagreeing parties, as is a common (and genuinely naïve) tactic, but explained the cause for the problem as a simple misunderstanding. It was very clear that he was trying to cater to the skeptic's mind, which is a very good tactic for persuasion.

Real World Arguments

"Real world arguments seldom prove anything" is based on Aristotle's concept that there is no truth in this world. Since there is no truth, an argument based on not truth would be useless. They can only used to give reasons based on evidence, since nothing can truly be proven.

Biotech Food Debate

I agree with the FDA in that only GMOs with substantially different chemical or nutrient compositions should be labeled. For example, if an apple tree is modified to have tougher bark on the trunk, but the fruit is not affected, then it should not be labeled because the product is not changed. On a different note, if corn is altered to have more vitamin C, then I believe that it should be labeled, because it is substantially different from its original source. To have none or all GMOs labeled would be either wrong or a hassle.

Propaganda...? I'd have to see it to believe it!

I think that the fact the the cartoon is a cartoon which is an implicit visual argument, and not a more explicit argument such as an advertisement, really helps with its effectiveness. Most people would think that an advertisement with lots of words is just created to push the point of the author; the cartoon makes the reader think about what is actually happening. Most people would assume that a cartoon holds more truth than an advertisement, and this is simply because the reader comes up with his or her own conclusion based on where the visual evidence leads, which makes it seem as if the reader is actually observing a real scenario, instead of reading sentences that only claim to give the truth. This proves the effectiveness of "showing, not telling", a technique commonly lauded as holy by a former English teacher of mine. It also shows that the sentiment of "I'd have to see it to believe it" is more prevalent than commonly thought.
[KWAMENEWTON]

Implicit vs. Explicit Arguments

An explicit argument is an argument which blatantly states its position, lists main points, and defends it without shame. These can be effective in certain situations. For example, if one were to find it necessary to prove that Alexander Hamilton was the creator of jazz, twelve-tone, two-step, and stepping stones, one would need to list evidence that supports his or her claim, as well as directly refute any other notions perceived as amassed absurdity. Explicit arguments, however, are not as effective when being used to make someone think deeply about a particular topic, as the whole point of the argument is to explain one's thought process in a straightforward manner. Implicit arguments are quite excellent for this type of reasoning, however. Instead of giving the cause and effect, as do explicit arguments, it gives just the cause, so that the recipient can procure the effect from his or her own consciousness. Just as these both have their strengths and weaknesses, it would be a very effective strategy to combine the two; this could produce a very profound effect.

Personal Story

I remember the first time I played a jazz solo, back when I was in 6th grade. I had no idea what a #9 was, or how to move in the circle of fifths in a ii-V-I lick. But there I was, facing an audience of parents, students, and other random people, getting ready to play "El Gato Gordo". I tried to stay calm, but my knees were shaking like a newborn calf. The rest was just a blur. I remember when it was over; the crowd cheered, I stood up and nodded my head in acknowledgement, and then sat back down again to do it again in another song. Not only was the sense of relief overwhelming, but it gave me the confidence to keep playing, not only during the next song, but for the rest of the year, and possibly for the rest of my life.

Peace, son. Or daughter.

Class Experience

Since I've only been in this class for about four weeks, I really can't assess my situation with much accuracy, but one could assume that I have "lulled myself into a false sense of security". I have neither been keeping up with my blogging schedule nor posting comments on other people's blogs regularly; I plan on doing both of these things in the near future. I also am having an extremely difficult time mustering up an idea for my personal memoir. One idea I am thinking about is writing about the first time that I played a jazz solo in jazz band. It was in the sixth grade, and I had absolutely no idea what I was doing. To make a long story short, I made sure I looked sharp, didn't play flat, and acted natural. Or maybe I could write about the time that I got married. Oh wait, that never happened. Anyway, without further ado, here is my rating of this class so far: 4/5. Peace, son. Or daughter.

Wild Tongue

The first thing that I noticed when reading “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” was Anzaldúa’s metaphor of her dentist visit. I liked how she used the phrases “cleaning out my roots” and “We’re going to have to do something about your tongue”; they add an interesting style to the piece. After writing the previous two sentences, I realized that the passage was part of a quote. I still enjoy the way she infuses the Spanish with English; it gives me a glimpse of what language must be like at times for her.
There are definitely times when the language I speak, English, changes. The internet has spawned thousand of possibilities for new words and usages, as has television and other mass media. I also am constantly coining new words and phrases; eventually one of them will catch on to the rest of society.