READING RESPONSE: SAM FORMAN’S “THE FUTURE OF FOOD PRODUCTION”

1) How does Forman make various appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos as he tries to persuade you of the problems with current agricultural practices?

Forman appeals to ethos by taking credible and reliable sources to prove his point, such as the Census of Agriculture. One can also see that Forman properly cites his sources and footnotes when necessary. There is also a bibliography at the end of his essay. Pathos is represented in the essay as Forman states the inhumane conditions that livestock is kept and how unnatural this process is. The author appeals to logos by stating that the current way of farming has become industrialized and has become a process to mass produce livestock, instead of the natural way of farming where the livestock is not crunched up together. He also points out the environmental dangers of CAFOs and the consequences that humans and animals face.

2) List the various primary research methods Forman mentions in his essay. Also compile a list of his research sources. Which research sources of his have the most clout for you?

Forman uses interviews with college professors, and the CEO of Freemont Farms. The author also physically visits the farms to make observations on his own. The research sources that Forman has used are the Census of Agriculture (2002), J.E. Ikerd, Environmental Working Group, and the Oxford Dictionary. The resource that has the most clout for me is his personal observations that can not be conveyed that easily in a book or statistic. As a result I feel his personal observations really appeal to pathos.

3) Remember that Sam Forman is (or, was) a freshman like yourself when he wrote this. Yet–as a writer–he comes off as extremely confident and trustworthy. How does he do that?

I believe Sam Forman comes off extremely confident by his tone and professionalism in his writing. He is formal and has a proper argument with sources to bak up his hypothesis. He has the proper format for a report and a proper bibliographic page along with acknowledgements.

EXTRA CREDIT #2 “Writing for the President when the Nation is in Crisis”

1. What were some of the unique exigences behind Kusnet’s and McConnell’s speeches? And how did these exigences influence their speechwriting?

They were issues of the country. Such as 9/11 and economic downfall during Clinton’s time.

For example, Bush had to give a speech to congress on Thursday. Bush told his speechwriters that Americans have questions: “who attacked us?” “why do they hate us?” and “how will we beat the war on terrorism?”. McConnell said that usually a speech requires emotion however, all the drama is there and you don’t have to add drama for 9/11 due to emotion. As a result, Bush did not add any more drama but used simple English. Thus the speech would always be successful.

President Clinton crisis was a national recession. Disillusion with political process, Clinton made sure to address issues as national crisis and wanted to re assure the public and to re-instill national will. This is also due to the fact that after he was elected president the financial crisis became worse.

2. How did Kusnet and McConnell talk about audience considerations when writing various speeches?

A good speech has an emotional and logical aspect. For example, like a sermon in church. A sermon is enthusiastic and also shares knowledge. A speech should first have the speaker identify a common ground with the people. Then the speaker should present the problem, and criticize one self. For example, in one of Clinton’s speech he states “But you’re a politician why should we trust you” Later Clinton assures the audience that he can be trusted. Lastly a speech should heighten the audience’s emotions and uplift them. Bush followed a similar outline except he did not use the words, “me”, “I”, “my” in his speeches to identify with the audience more and not make the speech about him.

3. What kind of unique constraints/affordances bear on writing speeches for the President?

Some constraints are answered above, and speeches are meant to be spoken and heard, not meant to be written and read. When you are writing a speech you need to ask yourself, “Are these words speak-able? Can the speaker pronounce the words? There should ne alliteration and no use the s sound. Make it speak-able. It should be listen-able and understandable. A speech should also have a good outline so you can follow it easily. President Bush put a lot of pressure on his speech writers to write a speech with a good outline.

4. What kind of ethos did these speakers have in their talk? What kind of ethos did they try to create for their presidents? How did they try to create that ethos?

As mentioned above the main ethos the writers tried to create was one of trust and that the president had a solution to the problem. To bring this ethos out, the President would criticize himself and then reassure the crowd that he was the right man for the job. During the end the President would uplift the spirit of the crowd creating an ethos of credibility towards the audience, as the president can solve this problem.

     

        5.Your reaction to this talk?

I found this talk very interesting especially the part in which the speakers talk about the differences between a campaign and a presidential speech. A campaign would lay out the difference and has more edge, intensity and drive. While a presidential speech job is to bring everyone closer together and be on the same page. I also was interested in the differences between speeches in a monarchy (England) and the United States. In Britain a different person is responsible for each of the three major branches. However, the U.S. president is head of state and head of government.

READING RESPONSE: “PLAGIARISM: A MISPLACED EMPHASIS?”

1. What have you previously learned about plagiarism? What is it? Why is it bad? How should you avoid it?

I have learned that plagiarism is when you take someone else’s ideas or work and pass it on as your own personal work. Plagiarism is bad as you will receive a zero on your assignment and in the future you work may not be credible. One can avoid plagiarism by citing any external sources or secondary research you use. You can never be too safe, as a result “When in doubt, CITE IT!”

2. What are the five types of “normal” plagiarism that Martin describes?

The five types of normal plagiarism described by Martin are word for word (when one copies phrases or passages from another source without citing), paraphrasing (word for word plagiarism with a few words changed, however the sentence structure seems to be the same and gives it away), plagiarism of secondary sources (improper citations), plagiarism of a source (no citation of a secondary source), and plagiarism of authorship (putting your name on someone else’s work).

3. Why do students plagiarize? What reasons does Martin offer?

Martin states that most students plagiarize unknowingly as they do not know how to cite their sources properly. However, some students plagiarize due to time constraints or a very close dead line. Some may also plagiarize to take the easy way out and just copy and paste from somewhere on the web to complete an assignment in the hope that the teacher will not notice.

4. What is Institutionalized Plagiarism and how is it different from Competitive Plagiarism? What are some examples of Institutionalized Plagiarism?

Institutionalized plagiarism is a type of plagiarism that is not frowned upon but widely accepted. An example would be ghost writing. This is different from competitive plagiarism as this is the type of plagiarism students are most likely to commit the five “normal” types of plagiarism. Recently the rapper Drake was in the news for using a ghost writer to write the lyrics of his songs. Drake is the performer however the lyrics are not his own intellectual property. This is also similar for speeches made by the President. Recently two speech writers for Presidents came to Purdue and described that there are many speechwriters who work on a single speech for the President.

5. Toward the end of his essay, how does Martin say we should treat plagiarism?

Martin states that we should not treat plagiarism as a crime but rather encourage students to learn from their mistakes and to teach them how to cite their sources correctly. He also feels that Institutionalized Plagiarism is the greater problem between the latter.

READING RESPONSE: THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST TREE OCTOPUS

1. How does the author of this website persuade you to care about this issue? And, more importantly what do you think should be done on behalf  of these rare species?

The author persuades you to take care of this as his tone implies he is trying to talk to you on a one on one basis. This creates the sense of urgency he is trying to portray in order to help this species. The author also choses words like “her” to imply that the octopus is a magnificent creature and personifies it to put emphasis on how dear this topic is to him. As a result, this creates a sense of urgency again. I feel nothing can be done as there is no such thing as a tree octopus.

2) How does the author/designer (Lyle Zapato) of this website create a strong ethos? Which characteristics of the web pages give off semblances of credibility?

The author creates a strong ethos as his claims are supported with strong “evidence” and the personification of the octopus to show that the topic is quite personal and important to the author. The characteristics of the Latin name, link from Webster’s Dictionary, campaign on twitter, media, and Tree Octopus SAFE stickers for textbooks all make this webpage “credible”. I also think that next time the author can use a more neutral background and font to seem more professional. This may make the work seem more credible.

READING RESPONSE: DRISCOLL’S “INTRODUCTION TO PRIMARY RESEARCH”

1) What’s the difference between primary and secondary research? What are the three main methods of primary research? Have conducted research via any of these methods previously?

Primary research is research that you have conducted by yourself. While, secondary research is research that you have acquired from other sources (EX: web, books, newspaper and etc), thus the name secondary. The article states that the three methods to conduct primary research is by surveys, interviews and observations. I have conducted primary research for an essay on economics by all three methods. I conducted surveys to record responses, interviews to ask an epxpert on his opinion and for questions that are open ended, and finally observations by noting down prices.

2) What’s the difference between inductive inquiry and deductive inquiry?

 Inductive inquiry is when the researcher begins with a question and then conducts various types of research to form a conclusion to the question by analyzing responses. These questions tend to be open ended. However, deductive inquiry is when the researcher already knows the conclusion and gathers data to support the conclusion. As a result, these questions are more close ended.

3. What factors can help you decide which primary research methods are best for your research project?

If I have an inductive inquiry, then I would use primary research as I would want to conduct research on my own to conclude an answer. I would use surveys if I wanted to get answers to close ended questions from a vast number of people. This is easier to analyze and efficient. I would make observations all the time as this is a key aspect of primary research. I also feel your observations lead you to which other type/s of primary research you use. I would use interviews if I wanted an experts opinion or answers to open ended questions.

4. What ethical issues might arise when conducting primary research? And how can you avoid and/or work through these issues in a conscientious manner? Can you think of any additional ethical issues that weren’t mentioned in Driscoll’s article?

Some people forget about confidentiality when conducting primary research. This is very important as some people do not want their opinions or views to be published without their consent. As a result, confidentiality can improve your results as it would reduce bias. An easy solution is to conduct surveys anonymously or have participants sign a confidentially agreement. Your research may be compromised if your audience finds out about ethical issues, furthermore your research could be questioned as being reliable or not.

READING RESPONSE: LAMOTT’S “SFDS”

1) Have you ever been told before that it’s okay to writbadly in order to write well. What else would you like permission to do with/in your writing?e poorly? In her advice, Lamott gives you as a writer permission to write 

I have never been told to write a poor first draft. This would most probably improve my writing to an extent as my thoughts could flow, as stated by the author. However, I would probably not take advantage of this as I am more of a person who thrives under pressure and is more used to writing a well crafted essay in one go. I would personally like permission to first write a draft without any complex sentence structure and vocabulary. I feel writing a draft that is as simple as possible will help to go forward for my final draft.

2) What common misconceptions about professional and/or talented writers does Lamott dispel?

Lamott dispels the notion that all accomplished writers do not turn their work into gold in the first try. Instead that they are quite similar to human beings like us and make mistakes in their first drafts. This was quite interesting to me as I thought with so much practice, an accomplished writer can whip up a piece in jiffy. However, it feels nice that they write shitty first drafts as well.

3) Where does your writing usually come from? Asked differently, how do you tend to come up with ideas? Think back on two or three memorable writing projects. How did you produce ideas and writing for them?

To be honest, my writing comes from pressure. I feel that the best of my writing comes when there is a deadline near by. My brain just starts functionally exceptionally well when I have a deadline. This results in no distractions and full focus on the task. Otherwise I get distracted very easily if there is no pressure to perform. I come up with my ideas from observations from my own life and knowledge acquired from secondary sources. One piece of writing that I am very proud of is an essay I had to do for Economics. This was like a mini doctoral thesis and I chose to write about price discrimination when getting a haircut. This idea came up to me as I felt a bit odd that different people get charged different prices. Another memorable project was when I had to write a philosophical essay on is all knowledge useful. This kept me in a slump for a long time, unless I started to think personally from my own life. Once I got a couple of ideas my writing just flowed.

Response: GRANT-DAVIE’S “RHETORICAL SITUATIONS AND THEIR CONSTITUENTS”

1) Rhetoric is one of those big, confusing abstract words–like freedom,  happiness, and love–for which, if you asked 100 people what it means, you might get 100 different definitions. Try to come up with your own definition of a rhetorical situation.

Davie states that a rhetorical situation is one “where speaker or writer sees a need to change reality and sees that change may be effected through rhetorical discourses” I personally feel that a rhetorical situation is more like a utopia scenario. As a result the author tries to change a problem in the world to more of a “rhetorical situation”.

2) What are Grant-Davie’s four constituents, or parts, in any given rhetorical situation? Briefly describe each one. Then consider if he’s forgetting any important constituents. Would you add any more elements to a rhetorical situation?

The four parts are as followed:

Exigence: This is the matter and the motivation of the discourse.

In other words this is what the problem is about and the purpose of writing or speaking for the author. This is very important as if the exigence is not good, then it will be hard to get your point across to the audience.

Rhetor: This is the person responsible for the discourse and its authorial voice.

I feel that a good rhetor should use the appropriate diction and voice in order to get his or her point across. For example if you want to persuade people then you should have an authoritative voice as the audience will perceive that you are very knowledgable about this topic due to confidence in tone.

Audience: These are people that rhetors negotiate to achieve the rhetorical objectives by using discourse.

Audience could be present or not present. A group of people could be an audience as well. There can be multiple audiences like primary, secondary, tertiary. It can also be imaginary.

Constraints: These can be either positive or negative and thus are factors that  may affect the achievement of the rhetorical objectives.

Constraints can be persons, objects/media, events. Certain events can cause a topic to might be inappropriate at the time. People can be a constraint as well if they don’t have any prior knowledge to the subject that the rhetor is writing or talking about.

I feel that tone is an element in rhetorical situations, as it could help carry the rhetors point across the audience with more emotion.

3) How can analyzing a rhetorical situation help you, as a writer, invent?

I feel that it helps you understand the current situation and as a result write an article that really grabs the attention of the audience and help them persuade them to your opinion.

This Is Water Response

2)     DFW states “learning how to think” as the end-all be-all of a liberal arts education. Why are you enrolled in this university? What’s the Holy Grail for you and how does university fit into that picture?

College is a place where one really gets to discover oneself. The majority of us are familiar with the quote “Sometimes you need to get lost to find yourself.” When I was applying to colleges I was extremely lost. While most of my peers were comparing school rankings based on their majors, I was still in the process in deciding what I wanted to do. When researching Purdue University I came across their Exploratory Studies program for their undeclared students. This was a program that no other college was offering and thus grabbed my attention. Unlike most undeclared programs this did not advertise that it will help you select a major but the unique aspect of this program is that it helps you find yourself and then assists you in pickling a major based on your personality and etc. Honestly at first I thought this was all some mystical voodoo nonsense of finding yourself. However, after talking to an advisor I changed my mind and was open to try it their way. As a result this is why I chose Purdue. The “Holy Grail” for me is to not find the right major, or find the highest earning job. Instead, it is to be happy in life. I feel this can be accomplished by finding a job that I love to do, instead of a high paying job that I hate but turns my life into a dull routine as DFW describes in his speech. As a result, Purdue fits perfectly as their program will help me discover who I am and then assist me in picking a major that I will be delighted with. I feel college is more than just an education but a journey that one gets to realize who they really are.