English has been the bane of my existence ever since I could remember. From the moment I hit kindergarten, I would choose coloring and number over letters and words. With that said my dislike for English class only grew stronger as I grew older. My high school English teacher would never give me higher than a 70% on any paper I wrote (even though we did at least a major paper a week) all four years of high school. I found this extremely frustrating because although I did everything she required from me, I would never get even close to an A on the paper. Because of this I became even better friends with math and science. There were formulas. There were formats. There were good grades. I seemed to be so much more successful and happy in the world of math and science. For this reason, I became very prejudice against English. Little did I realize that a few years later I would actually enjoy writing a paper.
It is interesting to look back at the Inventory of Concerns that I wrote at the beginning of the year. It sounds so bitter and guarded toward my enemy, English, and rightly so because it was. The theme of the Inventory of Concerns was that I was interested in learning the truth through everything I did. By the truth I meant, not anything that has to do with English because I knew that it was all relative and therefore not worth taking into account. English was comprised of opinions, not facts. And I wanted facts, not mere opinions. I guess that means that as a person I was very closed minded. Not that I wouldn’t consider other people’s beliefs or opinions, but that if they wanted me to make their beliefs and opinions as my own, they had to appeal to me through logic. Consequently, if I tried to convince anyone else to believe as I believed, I would give then lots and lots of facts and statistics and logical reasons as to why I was right, but never anything more.
All that to explain that going into this semester of English I already had a bad attitude and had drawn conclusions about the class before it had even started. The first unit served to support my strong dislike for anything that had to do with English. My initial impressions about rhetoric was that it was a way for sneaky politicians, overbearing parents, and annoying salesmen to make you do things that you don’t want to do. Rhetoric was this sneaky, tricky, evil, conniving (you get the picture) way to trick people into believing what you want them to believe, regardless if what you believed is the truth or not. In a way, I was right about rhetoric. But what I didn’t initially understand is that rhetoric is just a tool. Like a gun, you can use it to protect or to kill. The tool is not responsible for how it is used, that is the responsibility of the person using it. After hating the beginning of rhetoric, I was very relieved when I had this revelation and wrote it into my blog entry on the Joy and Campbell articles. In the blog entry for February 20, 2009 entitled “Ethics of Rhetoric (Joy/Campbell articles)” I wrote, “Ethical writing leads to a proper use of Rhetoric, writing to argue a valid point. Whereas, using rhetoric improperly to argue for arguments sake is unethical.” In my opinion, I think this was the first step I took in the right direction. I began to understand that writing is a tool that can be used of lots of different purposes. Whether it is scientific writing explaining the results of an experiment, using rhetoric to explain an opinion, or just writing a novel to entertain, it is simply a tool.
Going into the second unit, I was really excited to use rhetoric to prove something to someone. I thought that if I had the truth than it was my job to explain it to others. And finally I had met the area of English that I was good at, arguing with facts. I started writing my first draft and I figured out that it wasn’t going to be as fun as I anticipated because I had to argue both sides of one controversy. If I had been writing on any topic that I cared about or thought that I knew the answer to, I would not have been able to successfully argue the other side. It would have been unethical writing in my opinion. Why would you ever argue what you don’t believe in? It’s hard enough to figure out what you believe and try to convince others that it is true, once you add the dimension of arguing against what you personally believe, it becomes even harder. Luckily I had no strong opinions on Marijuana legalization so I was able to argue both sides. That experience was a very insightful experience. I realized that I am a very strongly opinionated person. I have a belief on anything that affects my life personally. I don’t think that I am opposed to altering those opinions as long as there are solid, logical reasons as to why I should. My hopes of liking English and rhetoric were further crush by the existence of ethos and pathos. At first I didn’t understand why they were useful or helpful. I thought to myself that all the sob stories about starving children in Africa is the aspect or rhetoric that people use when they can’t otherwise convince people to support their cause. I did not want to be an unethical writer, so I resisted using both ethos and pathos throughout the entire second unit.
Once again I was annoyed with English coming into the third unit. I hated revising. Especially the type of revision that involved not just changing a few grammatical mistakes, but completely starting over with a blank page. However, the best thing I did the entire semester was take a chance. I finally tried something that I hadn’t tried yet. I stopped trying to dodge the bullets of English by avoiding what I didn’t like to do, and admitted to what I didn’t enjoy in English. When I did this, I had a lot of apprehension because I knew that the next step was going to be that annoy process of actually fixing it. Then it happened. I started to do the revision and realized how easy it was to write my opinion and utilize my audience’s emotions to get them to understand my point of view. After I completed the revision, I thought that the flow of the argument with was much more natural with the presences of ethos and pathos before the use of logos.
I learned that I was wrong about the effect of opinions and emotions on the people you are trying to explain the truth to. I guess I either underestimated their importance or was just not willing to address anyone who is not like myself in that they do not rely on logic to make decisions. In reality, I would tend to think most people are not like me. Emotions and trust are two very important aspect of relationships to many people. Although I personally do not think this way, many people believe in and trust illogical aspects of their emotions and are more apt to make a decision based on a gut feeling than to carefully think through all the pros and cons of a certain choice. For this reason, it is essential to establish a trust with people, an ethos, and a sympathy for people’s situations, pathos, before you can convince them of a certain truth through logos.
My views of English have changed. I understand now that rhetoric is a tool. It is not a perversion of truth, although it can be used to do that, but it is a different aspect of truth. Rhetoric is a tool that can be used to show others what the truth is. The beauty is that it allows for various different, artistic approaches to convey the same idea. I had fun writing the revision, because I was able to use a creative side of myself that I didn’t even know existed. I was also able to release the opinionated, outspoken person that I actually am to speak my mind on a certain subject and not restrict myself by hiding behind the facts of a subject. It is the responsibility of the writer to be ethical in their writing and convey only the truth, not try to trick their readers into thinking one thing or another for arguments sake. Understanding rhetoric and the ethics of rhetoric has opened new doors to me as a person. I know that I like to write and be creative and let people know what I think. I also would like to try things that I have never done before. I would like to pursue a new interest by getting involved in public speaking about different issues that I am passionate about. I have also learned that listening is an important aspect in conveying the truth because no one will listen to me if I do not listen to them. Overall, my new understanding of English will help me interact with others by being able to communicate to others the truth that I know so that knowledge can shared.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Cover Memo Revision
My revision involved attempting to write the first draft of the second unit using only pathos and ethos appeals instead of logos. This involved taking out the arguments based on facts, basically the entire first paper, and adding in personal stories and my opinion. I believe that by first establishing my ethos I will be able to establish a trust with my reader, and then I can use pathos and logos to convince my reader that my opinion is something that they should believe using rhetorical analysis. My strategy is to establish my ethos by letting my reader that I understand how they are feeling and the questions that they have. Then I will finish my ethnical appeal by stating my opinion on the issue of Marijuana legalization. Throughout the rest of the paper, I my goal is to use stories to argue why legalizing Marijuana is a bad thing. The concluding paragraph is made up of appeals to logos to conclude the argument of my paper.
The first step in writing my revision was to develop my ethos as the introduction to my argument. I thought that the most effective way to do this would be to show the reader that I could sympathize with how the audience was feeling and what questions this might bring up in their mind. In the first paragraph I asked the reader a series of rhetorical questions. I said, “You can’t help but ask questions such as, why should people lose jobs because the economy is so bad, when legalizing Marijuana could stimulate the economy? Why should harmless people go to prison simply for Marijuana possession? Why should the violence and crime of the black market continue to be a threat to the safety of my friends and family?” This allowed the audience to have a connection with me because they understand that I know what they are feeling and that I am sitting in the same place they are sitting because the questions that I have are the same questions that they have. In second paragraph, I explained the story of my audience, a woman who has a child in prison for Marijuana, to my readers. I did this primarily by continuing explaining my sympathy for the emotions and questions of the audience. The topic sentence explains the development of the entire paragraph. I wrote, “As a mother like yourself, I understand that watching your child go to prison for Marijuana possession brings many emotions and questions”. I then go on to explain how the mother, my audience, would feel and question her son’s imprisonment. The first two paragraphs successfully establish a connection with my audience through ethical appeal.
In the next two paragraphs I used stories from real people who struggled with Marijuana addiction as a pathetic appeal. I began with the story of a teenager who struggled with Marijuana use, in the third paragraph. I used this to illustrate what could have happened to someone who would be allowed to continue down the path of a drug addiction. I explain it by saying, “. It is very painful for you to watch someone who you care about move from the point of curiosity, through experimentation, deep into the heart of addiction. Here is a story of a typical teenager’s [Brad’s] interaction with drugs.” I explain the details of the consequences of Brad’s addiction and how it is typical to teenagers today. The next story is of the consequences of a drug addiction of a child on a mother and a family. It begins with, “Marijuana abuse affects the family and friends of the person who is addicted as well. Here is a story of a mother who finds out that her children are using Marijuana.” I use this story to explain the consequence of addiction on a family, specifically the mother. This will be affective because the audience, the mother, will relate with the feelings that this story causes, such as not wanting a child to be hurt and not wanting to be hurt herself. These feelings make will make her reflect on her life and her relationship with her son. It will also make her think of the possible consequences that her and her child will have if he had been allowed to develop a serious addiction that would be allowed to continue. Through these stories, I made a pathetic appeal to my audience. This served two purposes, first to develop my overall argument and second to further develop the ethos of my argument.
The next two paragraphs are conclusions of the pathos arguments and a conclusion to the entire argument throughout the paper. The final paragraph includes some appeals to logos to solidify the ethnical appeals. These logical arguments are the same that are included in the first draft of the second unit, but they are not explained as fully. I think that these logos arguments help conclude the appeals to pathos and ethos that were established throughout the paper.
Throughout the paper I used different types of sentences that were developed using the copy and compose activity in class. These sentences were good for emphasis and bringing out emotion. Because of this I used these primarily in the second paragraph of my revision where I told the story of the audience. The first type of sentence was the virtual sentence in paragraph two. After listing a series of questions and emotions I write, “Anger. Fear. Frustration.” It serves to slow the reader down and break up the typical type of complex or simple sentences that I normally write. In the same paragraph I use the interrupted sentence using an explanation. In the middle of explaining what the audience is feeling I insert an explanation of why the audience feels this way. I say, “You believe—in reality you are emotionally convinced—that legalization as a way to not only free him, but also help others who were in the same situation as he was right before he went to jail.” This serves to give insight into what is actually underneath the audience’s emotions, giving depths to my ethical appeal because I will appear to be more knowledgeable about what is actually going on. The next type of sentence is the svmploce, which shows a progressive story of a life. In the third paragraph I write, “No mother wants to watch her child go from a rebel, to a social recluse, to an adult who cannot face his problems.” This serves to show the progression of an addiction from an innocent teen to an adult with serious issues. In the last paragraph I used the symmetrical sentence saying, “Legalization will never equal liberty.” This give emphasis to its simple, but memorable content, by differing in structure. The most common type of sentence I utilize that is different than my normal style is the rhetorical questions. An example of this is in the first paragraph when I ask, “But is this reason alone enough to change the United State policies from prohibition to legalization?” I don’t intend for the reader to actually answer this question yet, but I do intend for the reader to think about the question that I asked. It also allows for me to state my opinion, developing my ethos.
Overall I think that this revision was successful. As a writer I think I learned the importance of developing my ethos and drawing a reader in with a pathetic appeal. On the other hand, I do not think that using lots of logical appeals is bad, as long as they are used with both appeals to pathos and ethos as well. As a writer in the future, I will try to write papers that are more balanced in terms of what rhetorical appeals I use. My first draft was comprised of all logos, and my revision was made up of mostly pathos and ethos, with just a little bit of logos. I believe that the best type of paper would be neither of these, but instead a mixture of the two papers allowing for not only the logical, intelligent arguments to be formed, but also the strong connection with the reader. I understand now that the logical argument cannot be successful without the ethical and pathetic appeals first.
The first step in writing my revision was to develop my ethos as the introduction to my argument. I thought that the most effective way to do this would be to show the reader that I could sympathize with how the audience was feeling and what questions this might bring up in their mind. In the first paragraph I asked the reader a series of rhetorical questions. I said, “You can’t help but ask questions such as, why should people lose jobs because the economy is so bad, when legalizing Marijuana could stimulate the economy? Why should harmless people go to prison simply for Marijuana possession? Why should the violence and crime of the black market continue to be a threat to the safety of my friends and family?” This allowed the audience to have a connection with me because they understand that I know what they are feeling and that I am sitting in the same place they are sitting because the questions that I have are the same questions that they have. In second paragraph, I explained the story of my audience, a woman who has a child in prison for Marijuana, to my readers. I did this primarily by continuing explaining my sympathy for the emotions and questions of the audience. The topic sentence explains the development of the entire paragraph. I wrote, “As a mother like yourself, I understand that watching your child go to prison for Marijuana possession brings many emotions and questions”. I then go on to explain how the mother, my audience, would feel and question her son’s imprisonment. The first two paragraphs successfully establish a connection with my audience through ethical appeal.
In the next two paragraphs I used stories from real people who struggled with Marijuana addiction as a pathetic appeal. I began with the story of a teenager who struggled with Marijuana use, in the third paragraph. I used this to illustrate what could have happened to someone who would be allowed to continue down the path of a drug addiction. I explain it by saying, “. It is very painful for you to watch someone who you care about move from the point of curiosity, through experimentation, deep into the heart of addiction. Here is a story of a typical teenager’s [Brad’s] interaction with drugs.” I explain the details of the consequences of Brad’s addiction and how it is typical to teenagers today. The next story is of the consequences of a drug addiction of a child on a mother and a family. It begins with, “Marijuana abuse affects the family and friends of the person who is addicted as well. Here is a story of a mother who finds out that her children are using Marijuana.” I use this story to explain the consequence of addiction on a family, specifically the mother. This will be affective because the audience, the mother, will relate with the feelings that this story causes, such as not wanting a child to be hurt and not wanting to be hurt herself. These feelings make will make her reflect on her life and her relationship with her son. It will also make her think of the possible consequences that her and her child will have if he had been allowed to develop a serious addiction that would be allowed to continue. Through these stories, I made a pathetic appeal to my audience. This served two purposes, first to develop my overall argument and second to further develop the ethos of my argument.
The next two paragraphs are conclusions of the pathos arguments and a conclusion to the entire argument throughout the paper. The final paragraph includes some appeals to logos to solidify the ethnical appeals. These logical arguments are the same that are included in the first draft of the second unit, but they are not explained as fully. I think that these logos arguments help conclude the appeals to pathos and ethos that were established throughout the paper.
Throughout the paper I used different types of sentences that were developed using the copy and compose activity in class. These sentences were good for emphasis and bringing out emotion. Because of this I used these primarily in the second paragraph of my revision where I told the story of the audience. The first type of sentence was the virtual sentence in paragraph two. After listing a series of questions and emotions I write, “Anger. Fear. Frustration.” It serves to slow the reader down and break up the typical type of complex or simple sentences that I normally write. In the same paragraph I use the interrupted sentence using an explanation. In the middle of explaining what the audience is feeling I insert an explanation of why the audience feels this way. I say, “You believe—in reality you are emotionally convinced—that legalization as a way to not only free him, but also help others who were in the same situation as he was right before he went to jail.” This serves to give insight into what is actually underneath the audience’s emotions, giving depths to my ethical appeal because I will appear to be more knowledgeable about what is actually going on. The next type of sentence is the svmploce, which shows a progressive story of a life. In the third paragraph I write, “No mother wants to watch her child go from a rebel, to a social recluse, to an adult who cannot face his problems.” This serves to show the progression of an addiction from an innocent teen to an adult with serious issues. In the last paragraph I used the symmetrical sentence saying, “Legalization will never equal liberty.” This give emphasis to its simple, but memorable content, by differing in structure. The most common type of sentence I utilize that is different than my normal style is the rhetorical questions. An example of this is in the first paragraph when I ask, “But is this reason alone enough to change the United State policies from prohibition to legalization?” I don’t intend for the reader to actually answer this question yet, but I do intend for the reader to think about the question that I asked. It also allows for me to state my opinion, developing my ethos.
Overall I think that this revision was successful. As a writer I think I learned the importance of developing my ethos and drawing a reader in with a pathetic appeal. On the other hand, I do not think that using lots of logical appeals is bad, as long as they are used with both appeals to pathos and ethos as well. As a writer in the future, I will try to write papers that are more balanced in terms of what rhetorical appeals I use. My first draft was comprised of all logos, and my revision was made up of mostly pathos and ethos, with just a little bit of logos. I believe that the best type of paper would be neither of these, but instead a mixture of the two papers allowing for not only the logical, intelligent arguments to be formed, but also the strong connection with the reader. I understand now that the logical argument cannot be successful without the ethical and pathetic appeals first.
Cover Memo
Through this semester I have learned to like English. Before I had complaints about English because it was not concrete enough, like math and science. I like to explore and learn many things, but only if I can actually find the answer. I am a complete perfectionist, therefore I hate to revise things because I believe that I got it perfect the first time. I realize now that English, specifically rhetoric, is a tool that you can use to show to other people what you have learned. It won't ever be perfect or complete because you can always learn more. I find it exciting to use rhetoric to creatively and effectively communicate my ideas to others. This could be in the form of a conversation, a scientific report, or an essay. It is important to keep developing my skills as a writer because I know that I will use them a lot in the future.
Final Self Assessment Memo
Throughout my academic life as a writer, I have only been good at a couple types of writing. The first is technical writing, such as lab write ups, science experiments, or reports. This type of writing is me telling others what I know, learned, or discovered. Technical writing only includes facts; it does not include what I think about the subject or how I feel about the subject. I think that I am good at factual writing because that is what I like to read. If I am going to learn about a particular subject, I want to know all the facts, so that I can make a decision about what I think about that subject. I do not want to read someone’s opinion on the subject because I don’t really care about his or her opinion, I want my own opinion. Consequently I like to stay in the world of science and math where there is one definite answer and it can be proven as true.
Throughout my years as a student, various English teachers have tried to make me incorporate emotions and opinions into my papers and my primary goal in their class was to trick them into thinking I was doing what they asked me to do, but not actually do it. I would disguise my opinion by stating it as a fact and supporting it with evidence. Overall, I think that all of the papers I have written throughout the years were made up of my opinion because I was the one choosing which facts and arguments would make up my papers, but I would never state “I believe…” in any paper I ever wrote. To express emotion I would use facts that may or may not bring up a certain amount of emotion in the reader, but never, of my own accord, use a personal story.
When you take someone like me and put me into the world of rhetorical analysis, you will find that my papers include primarily logos arguments. I don’t really use ethos or pathos arguments because those types of arguments would not appeal to me as a reader. I did ok in the first unit because I could read a story and analyze what types of appeals the author was making. However, I struggled when I had to incorporate a personal story of rhetoric into my paper. In my second draft of unit two entitled “Everyday Rhetoric” I attempted to give a story to illustrate the rhetoric in action. I used a story about a woman, who was not me and did not have a name or background, who went to the grocery store and bought girl scout cookies even though they were not on her list. The problem with this story is that it was so impersonal, it had absolutely no pathos appeal, because no one cares about a nameless woman, who didn’t ever exist. After a long, painful process of resisting letting go of that story, I finally included a story about my roommate convincing me to start jogging with her in the final draft. This was a step in the right direction; however, I simply used this story to illustrate different aspects of rhetoric, meaning I just used the story as a fact, not an ethnical or pathetic appeal.
Throughout the first unit, I never included how someone using rhetoric on me affected my opinions or emotions. I never really included any type of appeal, other than logos, throughout the first unit, but the assignment was more about analysis so I could still perform the assignment without using pathos or ethos. I simply wrote my papers on what rhetoric was and how it affected people’s everyday life. I never included what emotions and reactions rhetoric stirred up in people who experience it as an emotional appeal, nor did I explain to the reader what rhetoric means to me and how I felt about it as an ethnical appeal. The first unit allowed me to get away without using any type of appeal besides logos because I could state what rhetoric was and what it did. I could also state how it affected people and how to use it. All of these arguments could easily be made using only facts.
I ran into more trouble in the second unit when I had to use different rhetorical appeals to convince an audience of my opinion. My first essay was awful in this respect. Again I was successful in my logos appeals, but I did not include any ethos or pathos. Because of this my first draft did not incorporate any type of my opinion on the subject of Marijuana legalization. In a persuasive essay, the opinion of the writer is critical to the success of the paper. My first draft went through all the facts of prohibition, good and bad, proving the good and disproving the bad. Although this was not my intention, my first draft seemed to be more like beating the reader over the head with facts, than explaining to them why legalizing Marijuana is wrong. The next two drafts were easier to incorporate a pathos appeal into. For the second draft of unit two, where I was writing about why prohibition was wrong, I found a story from the news about a couple who were registered medical Marijuana users that were arrested for Marijuana possession in the state of Washington. This story was easy to take and present the Olson couple as victims of the injustice of Marijuana prohibition. I was able to create a pathos appeal through that story and string it along throughout the entire paper and even into the third draft.
My revision for unit three will be the first draft of unit two, where I failed in my attempts to incorporate ethos and pathos appeal. I will be writing to a different audience this time, an audience who would be more moved by emotion than logic. Instead of writing to a group of people who believe that Marijuana should be legalized, I will be writing to a mother of a child who is in prison for Marijuana possession. This will be a challenge because it is nearly impossible to convince a mother that something is better for society even though it may not be better for her child at that point in time. She will not be persuaded by facts, because she is primarily attached to Marijuana legalization emotionally because she thinks it is wrong that her child is in prison. She associate legalization of Marijuana with the unjust punishment of her child. To break that emotionally based opinion, I will need to use an appeal to pathos. Also, in order for me to use a pathetic appeal, she will need to trust me first. This means I will first need to make an ethnical appeal to gain her trust, before she will even consider listening to what I have to say. I think the best way to do this is to write her a personal letter. It will be a challenge to write the letter in a way that the reader understands the situation without me simply explaining the story because that is not something that you would find in a personal letter. My goal in this revision is to only use pathetic and ethnical appeals, using facts at only the beginning and end as the groundwork for my opinion. This would be in essence flipping my normal writing style where I would possibly start with a story, if I had to, and then go into a strait four pages of logical appeal and conclude with a restatement of the facts and how they are applicable to everyday life.
If I can accomplish this revision, I will improve dramatically as a persuasive writer. I know that not putting my opinion in persuasive essays hurts my ethical appeal more than it helps it. And most people do not want to hear pages and pages of facts because it could make them feel overwhelmed with the amount of information or like I am treating them as if they were stupid. I do not want my readers to feel either. I seem to think that talking about my opinion in a paper is not right because it is tricking others into thinking what I think. But without my opinion about a subject, readers will not trust me as a writer; therefore, they will dismiss any arguments I make to them logically before they ever consider their validity. First I must establish a trust, or ethos, between my readers and myself through my opinion and pathos, then I can convince them that my opinion is right through logos.
Throughout my years as a student, various English teachers have tried to make me incorporate emotions and opinions into my papers and my primary goal in their class was to trick them into thinking I was doing what they asked me to do, but not actually do it. I would disguise my opinion by stating it as a fact and supporting it with evidence. Overall, I think that all of the papers I have written throughout the years were made up of my opinion because I was the one choosing which facts and arguments would make up my papers, but I would never state “I believe…” in any paper I ever wrote. To express emotion I would use facts that may or may not bring up a certain amount of emotion in the reader, but never, of my own accord, use a personal story.
When you take someone like me and put me into the world of rhetorical analysis, you will find that my papers include primarily logos arguments. I don’t really use ethos or pathos arguments because those types of arguments would not appeal to me as a reader. I did ok in the first unit because I could read a story and analyze what types of appeals the author was making. However, I struggled when I had to incorporate a personal story of rhetoric into my paper. In my second draft of unit two entitled “Everyday Rhetoric” I attempted to give a story to illustrate the rhetoric in action. I used a story about a woman, who was not me and did not have a name or background, who went to the grocery store and bought girl scout cookies even though they were not on her list. The problem with this story is that it was so impersonal, it had absolutely no pathos appeal, because no one cares about a nameless woman, who didn’t ever exist. After a long, painful process of resisting letting go of that story, I finally included a story about my roommate convincing me to start jogging with her in the final draft. This was a step in the right direction; however, I simply used this story to illustrate different aspects of rhetoric, meaning I just used the story as a fact, not an ethnical or pathetic appeal.
Throughout the first unit, I never included how someone using rhetoric on me affected my opinions or emotions. I never really included any type of appeal, other than logos, throughout the first unit, but the assignment was more about analysis so I could still perform the assignment without using pathos or ethos. I simply wrote my papers on what rhetoric was and how it affected people’s everyday life. I never included what emotions and reactions rhetoric stirred up in people who experience it as an emotional appeal, nor did I explain to the reader what rhetoric means to me and how I felt about it as an ethnical appeal. The first unit allowed me to get away without using any type of appeal besides logos because I could state what rhetoric was and what it did. I could also state how it affected people and how to use it. All of these arguments could easily be made using only facts.
I ran into more trouble in the second unit when I had to use different rhetorical appeals to convince an audience of my opinion. My first essay was awful in this respect. Again I was successful in my logos appeals, but I did not include any ethos or pathos. Because of this my first draft did not incorporate any type of my opinion on the subject of Marijuana legalization. In a persuasive essay, the opinion of the writer is critical to the success of the paper. My first draft went through all the facts of prohibition, good and bad, proving the good and disproving the bad. Although this was not my intention, my first draft seemed to be more like beating the reader over the head with facts, than explaining to them why legalizing Marijuana is wrong. The next two drafts were easier to incorporate a pathos appeal into. For the second draft of unit two, where I was writing about why prohibition was wrong, I found a story from the news about a couple who were registered medical Marijuana users that were arrested for Marijuana possession in the state of Washington. This story was easy to take and present the Olson couple as victims of the injustice of Marijuana prohibition. I was able to create a pathos appeal through that story and string it along throughout the entire paper and even into the third draft.
My revision for unit three will be the first draft of unit two, where I failed in my attempts to incorporate ethos and pathos appeal. I will be writing to a different audience this time, an audience who would be more moved by emotion than logic. Instead of writing to a group of people who believe that Marijuana should be legalized, I will be writing to a mother of a child who is in prison for Marijuana possession. This will be a challenge because it is nearly impossible to convince a mother that something is better for society even though it may not be better for her child at that point in time. She will not be persuaded by facts, because she is primarily attached to Marijuana legalization emotionally because she thinks it is wrong that her child is in prison. She associate legalization of Marijuana with the unjust punishment of her child. To break that emotionally based opinion, I will need to use an appeal to pathos. Also, in order for me to use a pathetic appeal, she will need to trust me first. This means I will first need to make an ethnical appeal to gain her trust, before she will even consider listening to what I have to say. I think the best way to do this is to write her a personal letter. It will be a challenge to write the letter in a way that the reader understands the situation without me simply explaining the story because that is not something that you would find in a personal letter. My goal in this revision is to only use pathetic and ethnical appeals, using facts at only the beginning and end as the groundwork for my opinion. This would be in essence flipping my normal writing style where I would possibly start with a story, if I had to, and then go into a strait four pages of logical appeal and conclude with a restatement of the facts and how they are applicable to everyday life.
If I can accomplish this revision, I will improve dramatically as a persuasive writer. I know that not putting my opinion in persuasive essays hurts my ethical appeal more than it helps it. And most people do not want to hear pages and pages of facts because it could make them feel overwhelmed with the amount of information or like I am treating them as if they were stupid. I do not want my readers to feel either. I seem to think that talking about my opinion in a paper is not right because it is tricking others into thinking what I think. But without my opinion about a subject, readers will not trust me as a writer; therefore, they will dismiss any arguments I make to them logically before they ever consider their validity. First I must establish a trust, or ethos, between my readers and myself through my opinion and pathos, then I can convince them that my opinion is right through logos.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Self Assessment Memo
As a writer, I think I pretend to be very objective. I like to write in such a manner that I only include facts; however, my pretense comes in the form that I am very selective about the facts that I include in my paper. Even if I have to put my opinion into a paper, I will state that opinion as a fact and not indicate it as my opinion. For example in my first draft of the unit 2 controversy paper I begin my paper with a parallel of why decision making involves more than just the consequences of one action chosen. Although this may give the reader a good basis for the paper, it does not give them any emotional attachment. In the same paper, I make the claim that an increase in Marijuana use will negatively affect society, but I do not illustrate it with something the reader can relate to. I think that as part of my objectiveness I avoid trying to "trick" my readers into thinking the way I do using something like emotion that is not necessarily based in fact. At the same time, I only give the reader enough facts to believe my side of the controversy.
In unit 3 I will edit my first draft of the Unit 2 controversy portfolio to involve more of an emotional appeal and to give a more diverse spread of facts and my own opinions. This will improve my writing because it will allow my reader to have a connection and a deeper understanding of what I am writing and also allow them to be connected to me through the use of my own personal opinions.
In unit 3 I will edit my first draft of the Unit 2 controversy portfolio to involve more of an emotional appeal and to give a more diverse spread of facts and my own opinions. This will improve my writing because it will allow my reader to have a connection and a deeper understanding of what I am writing and also allow them to be connected to me through the use of my own personal opinions.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Reflection on Research Paper
Throughout Unit 2, I have become a better writer and learner. Before I researched and learned about the different aspects of Marijuana legalization, my projects for school always consisted of something I already knew a lot about. Whereas for this project, I knew very little about the political controversy of Marijuana or the different affects of Marijuana on the body. Through the research process I learned how to teach myself through reading and finding facts and scrutinizing other people's arguments. I also learned how to write a more convincing argumentative paper by balancing arguments for a controversy and arguments against that controversy. This allows the reader to go through the same process of thinking and learning as I did when I did the research. This adds to the ethos of your argument because you are showing the reader that you did the research and you understand both sides. The part of this project that I resisted the most was doing the research. At first it seemed pointless because I would get information from the internet, but it wasn't necessarily credible. Using an academic search, I began using more reliable and interesting sources. Then I began to learn tons of in depth things and became interested in the project. I was just resisting doing the work, but after I started doing the work I discovered that I actually like learning about new things and being involved in current affairs. I think this research paper has made me a better, more educated citizen who has the desire to be involved in political decisions and controversies.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Research Paper Progress Report
It is easy to read lots of articles and take notes and do research using other people's research. But it is difficult to formulate your own argument based upon previous arguments. Editing the Wikipedia article was difficult because you had to make your argument in a precise, business like manner and support it with all the research you have done. It was helpful because it showed that areas that needed more research before it could be fully supported. For example i have found many arguments for and against the legalization of marijuana and also the decriminalization of marijuana, but not very many for leaving the prohibition of marijuana as it currently is. In order to present a well formed argument I need to understand the pros and cons of all three options. The You Tube discussion I found very fun. It tests your knowledge and how well you can defend "your position" (which should be any of them) against an actual person who has a opinion as well. Sometimes in a paper, especially for a class, you can get away with ignoring holes in your arguments. You definitely can't do that when you are actually presenting your argument to a live person. It prevents laziness when writing the paper. Our group has changed a little bit. I still feel like i am mostly in a coordination/leadership position, but we all contribute the same amount of work and effort. This unit is different because it is more important for us all to keep our word and get the work we were each supposed to done when we said we would because everyone else's part depends more on each of our individual parts. For example the You Tube discussion. If people do not contribute when they are supposed to, then others may not be able to build their arguments on time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)