Mafia

A game that relates to the class activity and witch hunts, is Mafia. Mafia is an accusatory group game in which an imaginary town is being attacked by the mafia. The game consists of two mafia personnel, a cop , a nurse, a narrator and citizens. One important element of the game is that no one knows your identity except the narrator. Basically at the beginning of every round everyone except the narrator closes their eyes. The narrator then wakes the mafia and they select one person to kill. Then the mafia go to sleep. The cop then awakes and selects one person to investigates and goes back to sleep. Next, the nurse is wakes up and chooses one person to save( hopefully the victim of the mafia), and goes back to sleep. Finally, everyone open their eyes. The narrator then announces who is dead, if the cop was investigating the right person, and if the nurse saved the the right person. Everybody( except the narrator) speculates about the identity of the mafia and votes on a person who to send to jail. The person with the most votes go to jail and is out of the game. The game continues until the mafia are put into jail or the cop arrest them.
The game reminded me of how, like in the witch hunts and McCarthy trials, that all that is needed to convict someone is an accusation. This accusation may or may not be backed up by legitimate proof. Also in the game your "enemy" has no identifying features;they look just like you. The final similarity, is that to find the "enemy" you have to ruin innocent peoples lives.
What other real life examples witch hunt concept?
Ashley Hill

December 16

Today was our first official day of the class witch hunt. The rules that we established yesterday were actually implemented for the first time. Herr Lazarow told us that our job is to keep a journal of observations we make about our classmates, keeping track off who is or isn't following the rules. The goal is too be able to provide some evidence for the accusations we will have to make about who we think the witch is and why.

After that, we watched a short excerpt from a movie that was about the McCarthy accusations and the numerous investigations that took place. Most notably, the McCarthy's accusations against the US army, where McCarthy accused the army of protecting certain officials who were members of a Communist spy ring. These hearings were broadcast on live television and deeply impacted public opinion.

We then began discussion on the topic of McCarthyism. We used one of McCarthy's speeches and the movie we just watched as references. One particular point of discussion was how McCarthy continued to ask questions to those who chose to take their 5th amendment right (nothing you say can help to incriminate yourself). This meant he repeatedly questioned people who refused and could no longer answer questions in order to make them seem like they had something to hide. The main idea is that if they were innocent and weren't Communist, then why wouldn't they just give an answer?

We summarized this by ultimately concluding that you don't need any evidence to make the accusation, the accusation is enough by itself. Suspicion was enough to declare someone a Communist and once the claim was made the damage was already done.

- Mike Bass

December 15

Today in English class Herr Lazarow told us about the social experiment that he is conducting on our class. We, the figurative lab rats, are participants in a mock witch hunt. There is one student who is confidentially a witch and we must discover this individual. To do this we are assigned a series of rules that we must follow. They are:
1.We must discuss Penn State football in conversation
2.We must not place water bottles on our desk
3.We must wear mismatched socks
4.We cannot discuss Harry Potter
5.We must wear college/MHS gear
6.We cannot wear green
7.We must use Pencils
8.We must correct grammar errors
9.We must carry one book outside our backpack + an additional (unassigned) reading book
10.We must participate more in all classes
11.We must make direct eye contact
12.We cannot use filler in conversation (e.g. uhh, uhm, like, basically, you know, etc.)
13.We must address our fellows in the German Frau/Herr with the last name
14.The backpack must be placed to the left of the desk.
15.We must wear flair.

We are also to carry a journal detailing any abnormal behavior on the students part, and developing a theory on the identity of the witch. Over the weekend we will be assigned an essay on who we believe is the witch.

Today we were also treated to a picture of the student in Africa who needs $500 to stay in college.

- Alexander Altaras

December 11

In the beginning of class, Mr. Lazarow talked about the community puzzle fundraiser the Interact club is doing to raise enough money to send a man to college (The Catholic University of Ghana) for another semester. Each puzzle piece is $1 and they can be purchased from Mr. Lazarow or any of the interact officers.

We then started talking about the concept of witch hunts and the other various witch hunts, besides Salem, that have occured in the past and are happening at the moment. These examples include:
-McCarthyism: during the 1950s. This involved the hunt of communists, especially in Hollywood (The Hollywood Blacklist). Arthur Miller was acquainted with many of the people whose names appeared on the Hollywood Blacklist and witnessed the ruin a hunt like this can do to someone's life. Both in Hollywood and Washington D.C. It started with McCarthy looking for people within the state department who showed communism sympathies. All of the hunts demonstrate the fact that people will do a lot, and even go to extremes, because of fear.
-French Revolution: worse than McCarthyism and much more similar to Salem, mass slaughter to those who were suspected of committing counter-revolutionary activities.
-Post 9/11 Terror Hunt: predjudices against people from the middle east or those of middle east descent. Due to their appearance, they were and are still, at times, accused of being terrorists. They are much more likely to be pulled out of a security line at an airport and checked more thoroughly.
-Japanese Internment: during WWII. People of Japanese desecent living in America were containded because they may have had Japanese sympathies.
-Kuwaiti Genocide
-Sexual orientation: during the Clinton years, accusation of homosexuality led to people being shunned or pushed to the outside

Genocides, including the Cambodian Genocide, Rwandan Genocide, and Nazi Germany, as well as the Great Purge, are considered to be racial cleansings and not really witch hunts.

Our homework was to read Joe McCarthy's speech.
We were also asked to make a list of 10 rules of what it means to be a part of this society. I wasn't really clear on this assignment so if someone could explain it better than I did, it would be appreciated.

-Julie S.

December 9

Today in class we finished talking about Bradstreet's poem about her grandchild. In the second stanza it talks about nature but Bradstreet means that people expect death when someone or something is old but not when someone or something in new and young. But everything is decided by God and if it is God's will for someone to die young than people have to be ok with it. She also comes to a realization that the world doesn't follow logic or reason all the time. 

Next we talked about the poem she wrote about her husband. Some people said this poem surprised them because when you think of Puritans you don't think of them being in love with their husbands or wives. This may be because marriages were some what arranged back then or because the Puritans were such strict and severe people. We also discussed if this poem talked about God or Puritan values enough. Since Bradstreet talks about loving her husband more than worldly things I think that the Puritans values are shown. And at the end she also says that they will hopefully be together again, meaning in Heaven. 

And at the end of class we began to talk about the Crucible. We said that the characters are easy to relate to. We also discussed how Miller is writing about a story taking place in the 1650s but that the story was actually written in the 1950s. Since the book is written after the the time period that it occurs in it's natural for Miller to make some deviations from history. This story is supposed to teach the readers something. Something about the witch hunts but also about unfair persecution. This concept of witch hunt begins with fears and prejudices. The puritans were fearing and waiting for the enemy (Native Americans) outside, but when it didn't come they had to find something inside to blame. Some might also say that these people were not witches at all but were just infected by a disease. The sanitation in the Puritan towns was little to be desired. This may have caused many people to become delirious or as the witch hunters called it, possessed. 

--Callie

December 8

The discussion in class was based around more of Anne Bradstreet's poetry. In her Prologue, Bradstreet continues to state her concurrence with the inferiority expected from a women of the time, describing that "Men have precedency," yet she urges others not to deny that women have skill. She also asks to be recognized for what she does, by being rewarded with practical items, thyme and parsley.

In "Verses upon the Burning of our House, July 18th, 1666," Bradstreet goes on somewhat of a rollercoaster, from describing her desire for fire, to accepting that this is the way it is, to mourning over what she has lost, to saying that her "hope and treasure lies above." The poem is a constant battle between the Intellectual and the Emotional which concludes with the ideas of hope and faith.

We also started to discuss "In Memory of My Dear Granchild Elizabeth Bradstreet, Who Deceased August, 1665, Being a Year and a Half Old;" that her content with such a child was too much so, perhaps implying that her contentment had moved her focus away from God.

Please mention anything I missed.

-Michael Q

Thursday, December 4th

On this delightful thursday 5/6 english session we began the class with an ending - an ending to the vocabulary review. We shared our thoughts about Latin and Yiddish phrases. It turns out, many words from the Jewish language have migrated into our english tounge for all to benefit. Following the vocab, gears were shifted - shifted, to Anne Bradstreet.
The topic of Anne Bradstreet brings up the topic of women in Puritan society - women, who were seen as corruptable. She was a diamond in the rough, a needle in the haystack of male writers.
On first glance, Anne Bradstreet is seen as a personable and emotional writer. Upon further examination, Bradstreet reveals elements of the academia in her poems.
Right away, Bradstreet shows a seeming disdain for herself and her writing skills in her prologue. This brought up the question as to whether Bradstreet was truely humble, or if she was faking it for effect (possibly to appeal to her male authors, who would have been more comfortable with a more humble female writer). When Bradstreet referenced Calliope, it became evident she was more than just a humble housewife scribling nice words in her spare time.
Bradstreet was educated, arguably just as much so as her readers.
In her paraphrase of Aeniad (sp?) she shows that the plight of the Trojans is like to the plight of the Puritans; they are the inheritors of Troy. In a further act of humility, she states she will not sully the works of the great writers who had previously wrote about such escapades.
Our discussion of Bradstreet will pick up on monday, though it is certain she is an academic and layered writer who brings more to the table than that which meets the eye.

December 2

Today in class, we spent the period talking about the poem "Upon a Wasp Chilled With Cold" by Edward Taylor. Mr. Lazarow told us that this was the most complicated Edward Taylor poem that he had given us. In the beginning of the poem, the man finds the wasp on a window sill and it is chilled with cold (much like the title tells us). Then he takes the wasp and puts it into the sunlight and the wasp then goes back to its normal life. Mr. Lazarow also reminded us that we should not translate meanings of things in puritan literature from one piece to the next. So if the wasp meant something in a previous poem, it's not the same thing in this one. Also this poem presents the fact that man is to wasp as god is to man. Throughout the course of the poem Taylor repeats the phrase "as if" to make many similes throughout the entirety of the poem. This poem was supposed to teach those who read it that humans are not as great as we think we are.

The most important thing the wasp does in the story is stretch its "legs" up to the sun which resembles a human praying to god. This action shows the reader that the wasp has found god. The transition from the first to the second stanza in the poem goes from the story of the wasp to the reflection. Or the wasp offering his prayer to the sun to Taylor praying to god. The wasp is the thing to learn and the thing to teach us. The main idea of this poem was to show us that there are lessons to be learned in all things.

We concluded the class period by talking a bit about Anne Bradstreet and discussing how her poems are much more emotionally involved than those of Taylor.

-Joe M

December 1

Today in class we finished up talking about "Meditation Six". Taylor says that human souls are God's treasures. He also says that people cannot see the clarity of their own soul, and that this is why they have God. He says that God is the spectacles that allow him to see the clarity of his own soul. Taylor also compares his soul being plate to his soul being gilded. He doesn't want his soul to be gilded because that would mean it wasn't fully gold, only covered in gold. Instead, he wants his soul to be plate, meaning gold all the way through. We also identified the metaphysical conceit to be "Am I thy gold?". This makes the reader go back and think about what money has to do with God and ones soul.

Next we talked about "Upon a Spider Catching a Fly". This poem talks about a spider eating a fly and a wasp. The fly is eaten quickly but the spider lets the wasp calm down before it's eaten. Both the fly and the wasp have the same fate, death. This represents the Puritan belief that everyone is doomed and no one can escape from sin. Humans are sinful by nature and will eventually fall into temptation and sin (the web). At the end of the poem Taylor describes a Nightingaile being kept safe in a cage. At first this may sound like the opposite of Heaven. Heaven isn't a cage (being trapped) but rather being free. However, Taylor says that the cage acts as protection from sin. One is imprisoned by God but kept safe from sin.

Hopefully I didn't miss anything, but please comment if I did.
--Callie

Christmas Cheer vs. Commercialism!!!

Tonight is Saturday evening and we got together with some friends to spend quality time. So, we watched Elf and A Charlie Brown Christmas to brush up on our English analysis over pizza (and to be awesome like a nerdfighter). We noted as we watched that anti-Christmas-commercialism is a common theme in both films.

Okay here are some examples: in Elf, Santa's sleigh runs on Christmas cheer and the single carolling voice of Walter Hobbs, Buddy's naughty list father, made the difference between whether the sleigh would rise above Manhattan or be attacked by the Central Park rangers. Also, Buddy was so innocent and uncorrupted by the evils of the unchecked, commercialistic society (cough, cough-- Puritanism), that he was naïve to the uncaring ways of the world outside of his sheltered, Utopian-style North Pole. The North Pole was not commercialistic. They made toys because they wanted people to be happy, whereas, the "North Pole" in Gimbels was just about "getting through the holidays" and was solely named so as a marketing technique. In the end of the movie, one can hear the virtual audience cheering as Walter Hobbs chooses to find Buddy, and therefore the Christmas spirit inside of himself, even if it resulted in the loss of his job, instead of staying at work on Christmas Eve (and ignoring what was important to his son).

Now, there are parallels to Charlie Brown. Charlie doesn't understand what he's missing when it comes to Christmas-- why isn't he happy? In the end he realizes that he was the one who understood the meaning of Christmas all along, while everyone else experienced Christmas only on the commercial level, which left Charlie Brown feeling empty. In the end of Charlie Brown, he feels true happiness when he sees that his tree is decorated by friends feeling true Christmas spirit.

We could keep talking, but then what would be left for you all to ponder and comment on? GOODBYE!

~Kelsey and Olivia

P.S. Merchants of Cool ties in as well-- in what ways do you all see connections?

Monday Nov 24 Minutes

Oops, I forgot to post the minutes on Monday.

On Monday, we continued our discussion on William Bradford.  Our discussion led us to the topic of why Puritans preachers seen to favor the "Wrath of God" sermons.   The reasons we came up with were as followed: (1) Puritans believe that all humans are innately evil and sinful. 

(2) If all humans are sinful then their sin can be used to establish common ground. 

(3)  Finally, it is easy to point out the fault in others.   Another topic in our dicussion was  how the strict "rules" of puritanism were implemented.  Most of these strict "rules" were taught by parents to their children although the pulpit was often used to reinforce these "rules".  We ended our discussion talking about the high standards of Puritans may have led to their ultimate demise.  

 

 - Ashley H 

11/26 Minutes

Today in class we started our discussion on the poetry of Edward Taylor. Edward Taylor was a man who was very well educated which led him to write scholarly poetry. In comparison with the poetry of Anne Bradstreet, Taylor's is harder to identify with because he was part of what is known was the metaphysical school. Poets who write metaphysical poetry use something called a conceit. A conceit is the use of a fanciful metaphor that is used to shock the audience. Once the audience is schocked or disturbed, it causes them to reread and re-evaluate what they just read and what it means. Conceits are used to jolt the audience out of their sence of complacency which in Puritan poetry made them become more aware of their sins and made them try to be like the way that God planned for them to be.

An example of a poet who used the concept of a conceit was the Anglican preacher John Donne. In one of his poems (http://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/donne/sonnet14.php - Batter My Heart) he discusses that a human soul is like a town taken over by Satan. He takes things that would usually be good and makes them bad. In the end the point that he wants to make is that in order to be pure you have to be raped by God. He of course doesn't mean to literally be raped by God but figuratively in order to become a better person. This is an example of a conceit because once someone reads that, automatically they are shocked and must reread what the poet said and think more deeply about it.

Lastly we talked about the first poem by Edward Taylor in our packet called "Meditation Six." The first thing we noted about this poem is that Taylor is talking about money when the poem is supposed to be about God. Taylor wanted to say that our souls are God's treasures (even the ones that go to hell for they are the property of God and he may do with them what he pleases). But in the poem Taylor is not sure of the nature of his soul or what kind of treasure he is.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
-Melissa

Violence in Video Games and on Television

It was mentioned briefly in class on monday about the effects of violence in video games and on TV, especially on young people. Many have the belief that violence in video games promotes kids going out and doing violent things. Some link school shootings to video games, saying that they caused the shooters to want to live out their fantasies in real life. I personally think that there is nothing to it. If video game violence really caused school shootings, then they would happen every day, not just couple of times a year. If anything, video games allow kids to live out their dark fantasies without ever having to harm anyone, even preventing violence. Of course a parent walking into a room and seeing his/her teenager throw a person out of a car and run them over (in Grand Theft Auto) can be shocking. But would that teen actually commit such an act in real life?

Do you have any other views?

November 21, 2008 Minutes

Today we began discussion with an important disclaimer about the MHS Blood Drive that is coming up. In order to participate you must be 17 years of age or older and at least 110 pounds. The Northeast region of the country always has a shortage on available blood so please help out and donate.

Next we began our discussion about John Winthrop's "A Model of Christian Charitie" which was a sermon delivered aboard the ship the Arbella. In order to augment our understanding of this sermon we evaluated the work as a persuasive argument. Our class deemed that the sermon did attempt to state arguments and back these claims up with facts, even if these facts were taken from a faith based source, the Bible. Which led us to ponder can a logical argument prove itself through faith based or religious facts.

A good persuasive text can use 3 tactics to back up the argument:

Logos- the logic of an argument
Pathos- the emotion of an argument
Ethos- the reputation of the arguer

"A Model of Christian Charitie" has logos because it states claims and backs up these claims with facts and passages from the Bible that support these claims. It also has Ethos because it speaks of the love in the community and tries to emotionally appeal to the audience. Finally while the sermon does not use Ethos in its text, it relies upon the reputation of John Winthrop externally as a respected member of the Puritan community.

Scientific History and Literary History

When we discussed Bradford today, we discussed whether or not his work was a true history. A point that I wanted to raise in class was that there should be a division of two types of history. Scientific, which aims for objectivity and minimal bias much like an average textbook, and literary which emphasizes the story part of history . I would classify Bradford in the latter category. Bradford shares more in common with Homer than with any contemporary historian. Furthermore, I think that "History of Plymouth Plantation" should be approached like "The Iliad." It is a story, a story rooted in history, yet still primarily a story. More concerned with telling a riveting story, than with telling an accurate story. I also think that the bias in "History of Plymouth Plantation" is intentional, Bradford is biased because he thinks his bias is "true." Bradford believed he is on the side of the divine creator and ruler of the universe, and to approach everything as if the Puritans are 100% unquestionably right leads to obvious, unabashed, bias. Furthermore, as Mr. Lazarow mentioned, the Puritans lived nearly masochistic lives in regard to entertainment, so for them to be a little dramatic (even arguably melodramatic) in the areas where they could be is no surprise. So what is "History of Plymouth Plantation?"I think it is an intentionally biased book that was treated as if a scientific document (although Puritans would be unfamiliar with science in any way we understand it), with some entertainment as a by product.
-Alexander Altaras

November 20, 2008 minutes

Today in class, we finished our discussion about William Bradford and his writing styles. In the beginning of class, Laz posed the question, "What is the purpose of Bradford's document?" and "Is it primarily historical?" One opinion was that the document was not solely historical because it is hostile in nature; pointing fingers and focusing on an image of the oppressed having to stand for what they believe in to be accepted. The work does not serve only to inform, but also as a means by which Bradford can persuade a reader into thinking that the Puritan way was the best, etc.
From this, the question arose whether this work can serve as a history or not. THe writing goes with the times in that there was not yet a standard of writing, so if Bradford was intending this to serve as a history, which is likely because the Puritans were into history and disagreed with fiction, then he was basically making up his own format or basing his format off of that of another individual who made their format. It definitely serves historical purposes, and may in one way or another a history, but then we must decide if we accept it as a history.
Thus, discussion turned to the attempt at understanding what elements of a work qualify it was a history. We discussed the necessity of a thrid party to serve almost as a mediator in composing the events without the use of bias or emotion. In the end, however, we mostly agreed that a third party is only useful with the aid of recollections and thoughts of those involved, who can contribute the necessary emotions and "inside information" that presents a much clearer picture and broader understanding.
At the end of class, we talked about the legitimacy of textbooks and delved into the comparisons between an elementary text book and a high school level textbook. The elementary books seem to only have one view point. It seems as if contexts are simplified in order to be easy understood by children, but is this debilitating their possible abilities and self-fueled ideas of the future? Children maybe do not get enough credit for their thinking abilities. They seem to be mislead at a young age as if theat is somehow better for them. Also, textbooks seem to leave out a lot of mistakes that America has made in the past, ie. the true events of Columbus's time. Lastly, we tried to decide if the aim of always being politically correct obstructed views, but we did not quite finish this conversation. Any thoughts?
-Jen

November 19, 2008 minutes

Today in class, our symantics tests were passed back. We also received graded printouts for the first quarter. Mr. Lazarow claimed that he was upset by the amount of blog participation that had happened during the first quarter. This especially relates to the fact that we have stopped doing our minutes. I decided that I would start off the minutes again and then we can just go around the room. Hopefully this time we will be able to keep order better so that we don't forget about the minutes.

We also discussed the first reading in our Readings in Purtianism packet. This is the reading by William Bradford, called "History of Plymouth Plantation." We discussed the fact that William Bradford used symantic devices in his writing. These included propaganda, maps and territories, varied connotations for the same word, and others.

We also discussed the Mayflower Compact. It was the beginning of a plan to create rules, but wasn't very detailed in describing any specific ones. It also showed the respect that the Puritans had for King James and being British citizens, despite the persecution they had suffered.

Another topic discussed was the Puritan belief of predestination. The Puritans chose to not deal with this topic. They believed that whatever you did with your life is what God has destined to happen.

The only homework was to continue reading in the Puritan packet. We will be going on to the John Withrop readings tomorrow.

--Alexis

American pride vs. Moorestown pride

Branching off of Mike's topic, I think a lot of people take advantage of living in America. They don't realize the opportunities they are given simply by being American. Now that American pride and Moorestown pride have both been discussed on the blog, I was wondering which you have more of. I think I have more pride in being from Moorestown than I do for America, probably because I don't know how hard my great-great grandparents had to work to become American citizens, when I do know how hard my parents have to work to live in Moorestown and provide everything they do.

Also, since I have traveled to other countries (Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK) I can compare them to America. I went to Holland on a People to People trip this past summer and whenever we had free time, everyone wanted to go to McDonald's. I don't like McDonald's but apparently that's "un-American" of me. I realized that every time we went in it was mostly tourists eating there. In Italy I don't even remember seeing a Mcdonald's. That was the one thing that really stood out for me, because I noticed there were virtually no obese Italians walking the streets of Rome. These people eat real food, and then they have McDonald's around for the tourists who refuse to actually eat the food of the country they are visiting.

-Sammi

Being American

We talked briefly today in class about what it meant to be an American during the time of the Puritans and the ideas that went along with it.

Back then it seemed Americans themselves believed that they were in some sort of promised land of opportunity and that they were a superior and privledged people.

These ideas have lingered on with us for centuries becoming deeply rooted into our history and society, but I was wondering if these beliefs had begun to fade in any way; mainly due to our current situation and recent events.

We may or may not be the greatest nation in the world, but do we still believe we are?

-Mike Bass

Presidential Election

Seeing as the blog is pretty quiet right now we might as well start a new topic. If you were 18 right now and eligible to vote in this tight election who would you vote for and why?

I would vote for John McCain because I don't think Obama is experienced enough yet to be president. I think McCain is prepared to reform our current policies that clearly aren't working and work with both the Republican and Democratic parties to get work done.

No matter who wins it is nice to see larger numbers of Americans voting, because the result of the election should really represent what the majority wants, not the 55% or so that usually vote.

Education

Today in class we talked about education, and whether high school should be general or focused on what you want to do with your future. I meant to say the following during class but I didnt have time. I was talking to a boy who was visiting the U.S. from Germany. He had graduated from a high school similar to ours, but what he did afterwards was different from what most of us plan on doing. The students that graduated from that high school do not go straight to college but they do apprenticeships. They take a year to work in the real world and see what they might like to do with their lives. I think this is a great idea because if you apprentice at a job that you love then you know that the four years you spend at college will be directing you towards a job that you will enjoy. I think this approach would work better than the American way, because many American students waste time during their college years before deciding on a major or lose credits when they realize they should switch majors. Worse, they may feel trapped in a particular career that they find they don't like after they've wasted the time and money on four years of college.

--Callie

Affective Communication Reading

I have been meaning to blog about one of the topics brought up in our reading the other day. Under the title "What Literature is For" two conclusions are drawn: affective elements are of the utmost importance in all literary writing and the second conclusion is when we say that a given piece of writing is true we do not mean "scientifically true."

The reading then goes on to discuss the meaning of the word "true." I thought about this and think that there can never be a standard truth because everyone comes from a different perspective and therefore would accept and dismiss different symbols. If we cannot agree on a standard set of symbols then there is no way to even make a statement.

Since symbols come from outside of us, we have no direct connection with language. This point is argued in the movie dark star when a bomb needs to be reasoned with to stop from detonating. Here is the clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29pPZQ77cmI&feature=related

-Kelsey W.

This Generation's Amorphous Language

It would seem that the evolutionary language we call english is changing... as always. The current generation, however, is pumping steroids into this process. Many ideals such as youth rebellion, secrecy, necessity, and speed are now being wrapped around communication among youths. A simple analysis of todays communication and language reveals a lot of change in a rather short amount of time.

One of the most broad, and obvious, changes is the sudden rise in words such as LOL and BRB. These new symbols are brought about by not only a need for them but also a social acceptance of their use and the social cohesion that comes with it. Today information exchange is light speed and accessible from virtually anywhere. Because of new, fast methods of communication such as texting and instant messaging require quick responses, phrases that would take a long time to type or even say are being replaced by abbreviations and are essentially becoming 1 short word. The same is true for words and shorter phonetic spellings. Words such as you and your are becoming u and ur. Text combinations of symbols are also developing much different meaning than they would have if you were to say them out. For example the statement I <3 chocolate would translate to "I love chocalate" if one were to see it in text but if one were to say it out, "I less than three chocolate" one would probably get a lot of strange looks. Because the new rapid exchange of information is so tied in to this generation, this generation has modified the language in extreme ways. Now instead of "Hello, who are you with today?", one would say "Hi, who r u w/ 2day?"

Another major shift in communication arrives out of rebellion, secrecy and a necessity for both. This new skew on the english language is a little less broad in its social effect but has definately influenced it as a whole. The name for this new sub-dialect is 1337. If you pronounced that one three three seven than you probably don't know what it is. 1337 is actually pronounced "Leet". It is a form of writing english words in as many numbers and symbols as possible so that the numbers and symbols resemble the letters that they are replacing. 1337 originally was used on online bulletin boards in the eighties but didn't really hit the mainstream until recently. Then as well as now the purpose was to evade text filters and administrators online. This way people could communicate secretly with an very easy to learn language. Like english, 1337 is also dynamically changing but at a much faster rate. The difference you may find between 1337 one year and 1337 a year later may be equivalent to the difference found in the english spoken at one time and the english spoken 10-20 years later. Within 20 years the term went from Elite to Eleet to 31337 to 1337. Leetspeak such as 0\/\//\/, refering to the domination of something, has changed to []D\/\//\/ or pwn. This particular shift actually came about by mistakingly hitting the 'p' key on the keyboard instead of the 'o' key. This shift reflect the chaotic morphology of 1337. 1337 has developed its own grammatical morphology such as adding the suffix -xor and introduced new words such as n00b to society. The new abreviations such as LOL and rly discussed above are considered products of 1337.
15|\|'7 17 (R4Z'/ |-|0\/\/ d1PhPh3R3|\|7L'/ 0|\|3 (4|\| 5'//\/\B0L1Z3 7|-|3 3|\|9L15|-| L4|\|9U493?!1!!1!1!
Translates to:
isn't it crazy how differently one can symbolize the english language?!

Pride

Today the topic of pride in Moorestown came up at the end of class and we didn't get much time to discuss it. Personally, I feel that once Money Magazine declared Moorestown the "Number One Town in America," pride skyrocketed. Everyone was proud to be from the best town in America. But since then things have changed and I think we are now about 80th on the list. I feel that people are less proud because of what has happened in our school such as incidents with drugs and other things on our school's record and also we feel less proud because of how other people stereotype our school. Jen brought up the point that if you go somewhere and say you're from Moorestown you most likely receive a dirty look or some other sign of disapproval. People generally view kids from Moorestown as rich and snobby which is not true for the entire population of Moorestown High Schoool. So, the question being asked is, are we proud to live in Moorestown?

Another thing I found interesting was that we really have no one symbol that unifies us as a whole and we focus mostly on competition. I had never thought of that before and when Laz pointed that out today I realized that its true. But is that a good or a bad thing?

-Melissa

Rituals

I had never really thought about rituals in that way before and I was wondering if anyone had any input on today's class. I realized at my cross country meet today that our ritual (a team cheer on the start line) had no real significance. The words in the cheer had been altered over the years and the original story behind the cheer had no meaning to anyone still left on the team but, even so, we still say it before every race. I think that even though we don't understand the cheer because it is a tradition it brings about feeling of team pride and we feel like we shouldn't change it.

-Kelsey

If any of you want to read more into this...

I really recommend Steven Pinker's books, primarily The Stuff of Thought which I coincidentally started reading a few weeks ago. Pinker is very well respected in his field, and has written extensively on linguistics. Semantics, what we are essentially studying, is a subdivision of linguistics. I find that reading more into general linguistics aids in understanding semantics. In case you're worried about difficulty in reading Stuff of Thought, Pinker writes very accessibly, so the grasping of his ideas isn't blocked by any complicated jargon.

The Toulmin method in tonight's debate

The vice presidential debate is currently underway on all of the major news networks, and the most obvious connection to class topics I could see right away was the way in which the candidates debated - sometimes according to the Toulmin method, often times not. I'm not going to say who was right or wrong or inject my opinion of policy, but I think it's pretty clear the two types of arguing, so far, are pretty different. For those who are watching/have watched the debate, what do you think of each candidates style and techniques? Who do you see as more effective in convincing the American public? Do you see warrants, backings, rebuttals, or any other elements besides a claim and support in their arguments? I generally see Palin as a more emotional arguer, while Biden has so far employed the use of facts and statistics (correct facts, I presume). Your thoughts?

-Colin

There's No Escaping the Influece

After watching the video, "The Merchants of Cool" in class, we talked about the people who would like to think that they are not influenced by advertising, current trends, or the latest fashions. The fact is, advertising these days is so ubiquitous, no one can escape its power entirely. Those who say they are not affected or belive they are not naive enough to give in to these big greedy corporations do not realize how much they really are impacted.

The Devil Wears Prada is a movie, based on the book, about a young aspiring journalist in New York City who knows nothing about the fashion industry, but gets a job as the assistant to Miranda Priestly, the ruthless editor of a major fashion magazine. This clip, in particular, is an example of what we have talked about over the past couple of days: the idea that major corporations and brands, determine how we act, what we wear, and who we are, and no matter how hard we try to ignore them no one is immune. When the main character, Andy, laughs over how much thought is being put into assembling an outfit for a photoshoot, the editor, Miranda, explains to her that even though she may be trying to show the world that she "takes herself to seriously to care about what she puts on her back" by wearing a "lumpy blue sweater" to work, that sweater was chosen for her by the people in that room.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/13046/the-devil-wears-prada-cerulean-sweater

Julie S.

I thought our discussion on symbolism today was very interesting, but I had a question and was wondering what everyone thinks.

If practically every thing can be interpreted as a symbol (or bears a symbolic meaning), and our own perceptions of each vary dramatically, then is Hayakawa implying - or can we infer - that there is no absolute 'truth' or 'reality'?
And if so, then what do we call the things in which we believe or live?


Julie W

What tastes of yours aren't predominantly influenced by the massive advertising machine?

I recall this question being asked in class and thought it would be best to adapt online. More time may allow for some more answers. I personally would say that most my film tastes are out of touch with what the advertising machine advocates. I rarely see new films, and only if it receives good reviews. Really most films that I see are classics. Films such as those by Ingmar Bergman, Federico Fellini, (Mr. Lazarow's favorite) Akira Kurasawa, Truffaut, Chaplin, Tati, etc. Talking with other kids, I find that most know their Hitchcock and Coppola but haven't the slightest idea who the mentioned filmmakers are. Filmmakers that are just as important, and influential. I suppose a film like The Seventh Seal would be considered uncool and boring by a media. I suspect this is because the greatest profits wouldn't arise from challenging, meditative films. The fact that these films are even out on DVD is because a small group of enthusiasts buy them at expensive prices ($30-$40 for a Criterion disc).

So what tastes of yours, do you feel aren't predominantly influenced by the massive advertising machine?

Today's Movie

I was just wondering what everyone thought of "The Merchants of Cool." In my opinion, the documentary put our generation in a bad light and presented our behavior in a very exaggerated fashion. I understand that there are people who only care about there appearance and who want to be, as the movie put it, a "midriff" by wearing only a third of an outfit- but I think that we deserve a little credit since a large majority of teenagers do not act, or even think, in such a way. Perhaps, we have just become blind to our culture though, the movie was based in the nineties so maybe what was outrageous then has just become a part of our everyday lives. Basically, I thought that the movie was full of generalizations and stereotypes about "kids these days." 

I thought that it was an interesting point that as soon as "cool" is found the trend setters move on to something new. I also thought it was interesting that there are studies on what is cool for just our demographic, although what is cool in one place might not be somewhere else. Also, as an interviewer, how would you be able to know which teenagers are in that top percent of people who can determine what is the new fashion? Anyway, I would like to know what everyone else thought of the movie- maybe I just live in a bubble and just haven't realized just how much the media and marketers been shaped by our culture.

-Kelsey 

Relating to the Toulmin Model

Part 1: Loosely Comparing the Toulmin model to a math proof.

The idea came to me when I was reading about symbolism. This idea is to compare each part of the model to that of a basic mathematical proof. I was surprised to see how well it fit. However, as I thought about it more, I realized that they both have relatively the same basic objective.

The standard proof is very simple. It is given X prove Y using a,b, and c assuming a,b, and c are true. One would then fill in a series of postulates and theories that the mathematic community has for the time deemed true to come to a conclusion that they must also for the time deem true.

This is the model I came up with:

Given: (Warrant)
Prove: (Claim)
Theories: Grounds and Backing
Postulates: Further Warrants
Assumptions: Qualifier
Stating exceptions due to mathematic impossibility: Rebuttal

Now to explain how each one relates. The prove is somewhat obvious, the claim in the model must be proven and the claim in this proof must be... proven. OK, so thats over with. Now for the less obvious relations.

The given in the proof has to be the warrant. The given is something true that you have to base the entire proof around. Without that common ground on which to set the literal and figurative foundation on, your argument or chance at proving the claim will be blown away or collapse onto itself. Since everything spoken is essentially and argument, something agreed upon to be true is definitely a powerful tool.

This said, the warrant//given itself is not enough to get to the actual claim//proof. In the math proof, one needs to employ a series of theorems backed by postulates to logically show that the claim the proof is making has to be considered true. In the model, the theorems are similar to the grounds. They are ideas, facts, support, and data that aid in proving a claim. Of course , just as theorems are all based off of postulates, grounds are usually claims in themselves and need to be based off of their own warrants.

Fitting the Qualifier into this giant simile was not easy. In math there isn't usually a gray area, there is either true or false. There are, however, assumptions made not always supported by the given information. The occasional assumptions used in proofs are the closest match to the Qualifier in the Toulmin model. Like the assumptions, the Qualifier allows for some cushioning from someone pulling out a "well in this extreme and virtually irrelevant example its false so there goes your argument".

Of course what kind of mathematician would I be without mentioning impossibilities such as division by zero. These special cases where one preforms a completely impossible operation call for an exception in math. As opposed to the rebuttal, simply saying, "it's true except when this happens" is a much easier way to get past obstacles in the way of proving your claim. The rebuttal basically does the same thing but in a way much more convincing to most people one may be arguing with.

Well that basically raps up the comparisons. I will of course keep updated on this post and would love to make some changes/improvements in the future.


Part II: The importance and identification of the Warrant.

The Warrant. It even sounds authoritative. Warrant... Well, this sixth of the argument seems to be a challenge. According to the design of the Toulmin Model, the Warrant is never really said aloud, changes with each listener or reader, and, like the other parts of the model, is near impossible to win without. So, why is this piece so important and how does one impliment it into one's arguments?

The Warrant itself is a cornerstone to the argument. If your argument was a house, this is a cement basement keeping it from sinking into the mud. Guess what happens if you sent a die hard evolutionist to try to convince an equally biased evangelical creationist that evolution did in fact shape life on earth. Come on, guess. If you guessed that they would spend the entire time simply yelling opposing views, not acknowledging each others' opinions and/or getting nowhere then you are probably right. One of the big problems in that situation is that they lack common ground. They need a foundation to agree upon so that one may build a tower of argument onto it eventually reaching the high set goal of proving one's point. To put it bluntly: They need something to agree upon. The warrant is this something.

Well by now your may thinking, "Hey, John, how in the world would one find such a warrant?". I assume, however, that you already know seeing as you are in the exact same class as I am and have already learned this from our teacher. (Teachers tend to be a lot more qualified than me at teaching as well.) In which case this is simply to serve as a friendly, maybe more confusing reminder. The easiest way to find a warrant would be to simply chat with a potential audience or opponent until you agree to agree on something. That something should become your warrant. Another more difficult tactic one may employ would be to get an understanding of who it is you may be trying to convince. In this case, the more information you have about the person and their views, the better your chances at finding a good warrant are. For example if you are arguing with feminist than a good warrant would be "men and women should be treated/respected/seen/acknowledged/etc as equals in every way". I am assuming that for most pro-equality people some qualifiers wouldn't exactly work very well in that warrant but it is a warrant none the less. In my opinion, one of the most difficult but effective ways of producing a potent warrant is to actually work of an opponent's rebuttals. Because a rebuttal is a claim in itself, it too should be based pretty solidly on a warrant. If you can figure out what your opponent accepts as basic truth than that is a potentially great warrant.

Example: You are arguing that you should stay in Iraq. Your opponent rebuts and claim that too many soldiers are being killed there. If you can figure out that your opponent values life extremely highly from that than you not only have a counter argument but also a possible warrant to arm yourself with. A statement you could include based on that warrant may be "The current occupation in Iraq is one of the few things preventing full on civil war and a large body count."

The warrant is obviously and important part to one's argument and finding a warrant may be the difference between losing an argument and convincing someone that you are correct. As long as there is a warrant, you can win because your opponent has already accepted something you say or imply as true.

Part III: My interpertation of the Toulmin Model.

Well I see this model as a variety of things. When Mr. Lazarow taught us the model, he gave many great examples of how it would work in an essay and why it works much better than other methods in an essay. I sort of ignored the whole essay part and stuck to the model itself. This model is a platform for arguing. When I talk about the model, I am speaking about it as if it is a syntax in which to form an argument of any from rather than just in an essay or other publication. This is why I compared it to a math proof. I wanted to demonstrate not only that it fit together with other forms of arguments one may have already learned, but that it is applicable to vitually anything.

The more often I ponder the form of the model and the parts necassary to complete it, the more I see the strategy behind it. It sets a goal or point in the form of a claim that it needs to reach. The Toulmin model will take the opponent of the argument, whether it be a reader, listener, or actual designated opponent, and form the required negotiation to reach the goal. Rebuttals, qualifiers, and reservations need to be points given to your opponent so that you may get them to accept the grounds leading up to your point. As long as your warrant and grounds are enough to get to the point, it shouldn't matter what you have given to your opponent because the opponent will agree with the claim in the end. The Toulmin model takes the diplomatic middle ground and runs with it to both get a greater number of people to possibly agree and to make it easier to deal with opposition.

The more diplomatic approach of the Toulmin model compares much differently to other debate techniques. One technique that works towards the polar opposite of the Toulmin model is the skeptic approach to a pro argument. The skeptical approach can vary depending on the person employing it but it is somewhat constant in its basic principles. This approach is based on the believe that because the burden of proof lies with the affirmative, the negative usually has an easier time sowing doubt into the affirmitive than trying to build a case of one's own on why the negative is better. The skeptics understand that they do not need to win they just need the affirmitive to lose. Because there is no real claim to be achieved and no goal to build up but rather an opposing one to strip down, a skeptical strategy would likely be to turn each ground and backing into a claim and force the affirmative to provide further grounds and warrants for each. This would continue until either the debate ends and the skeptic couldn't prevent the claim from being proven or the affirmative runs out of grounds and warrants and is unable to prove the claim. There seems to be a pretty decent contrast between the Toulmin Model and other forms of argument making each unique and powerful tools in arguing.


This post is a little long and may have a decent amount of typos in it. Please feel free to post comments on the typos so that I may fix them as soon as possible.

Reaction to "Symbols" excerpt

So I thought the excerpt we read tonight was really interesting. You never really do think about language just being a symbol, do you? Also how basically everything you do or have is symbolic of something else. I liked how they explained not understanding the symbolic process makes you its victim, because that really makes a lot of sense. If you don't understand the process and that way of thinking then you can't possibly understand why you do the things you do. For instance when people our age shop at stores like Abercrombie and Hollister not necessarily because they really like the clothes but because those clothes symbolize a certain taste and that more mainstream status which can be seen as the way to be accepted by their peers. I just thought the whole thing was really interesting and sorry for posting so late.

~Olivia

Applying the Toulmin Model to Literature

I thought applying the Toulmin Model to a source of literature would serve as a useful and relevant practice for the quiz on Tuesday. I'm sure all of you have at least heard of the spectacular work of literary genius from one of the greatest writers in the western canon, a German writer so great he makes Thomas Mann look like a literary midget, of course Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis (Die Verwandlung in German). If you haven't read it (it's very short) I've added information below.
Now the story behind the claim for the Toulmin model is this:
Vladimir Nabokov, a great writer in his own right, and an accomplished entomologist, has claimed that that creature that Gregor transforms into is a beetle with wings (that he is unaware of). This opinion runs contrary to other beliefs that Gregor was transformed into a cockroach or other such beings. The book leaves it open to interpretation

Claim: In the Metamorphosis Gregor Samsa is/isn't transformed into a beetle.
Grounds:
Warrant:
Backing:
Qualification:
Reservation:
Rebuttal:

Information:
Nabokov's lecture on the subject-
Next question: what insect? Commentators say cockroach, which of course does not make sense. A cockroach is an insect that is flat in shape with large legs, and Gregor is anything but flat: he is convex on both sides, belly and back, and his legs are small. He approaches a cockroach in only one respect: his coloration is brown. That is all. Apart from this he has a tremendous convex belly divided into segments and a hard rounded back suggestive of wing cases. In beetles these cases conceal flimsy little wings that can be expanded and then may carry the beetle for miles and miles in a blundering flight. Curiously enough, Gregor the beetle never found out that he had wings under the hard covering of his back. (This is a very nice observation on my part to be treasured all your lives. Some Gregors, some Joes and Janes, do not know that they have wings.) Further, he has strong mandibles. He uses these organs to turn the key in a lock while standing erect on his hind legs, on his third pair of legs (a strong little pair), and this gives us the length of his body, which is about three feet long. In the course of the story he gets gradually accustomed to using his new appendages—his feet, his feelers. This brown, convex, dog-sized beetle is very broad.
Nabokov's imagining of Gregor's insect form:

Spark Notes

-Alexander Altaras

9/18 minutes

Today in class we further discussed the prewriting technique of the Toulmin Sentence. We reviewed the answer to the sentence we were supposed to write for homework:

Because there is a high rate of serious injury in accidents when seatbelts are not worn, therefore people should typically wear seatbelts, since serious injury should be avoided, because injury is costly, painful, and dangerous. However seatbelts shouldn't be worn in certain cases when they are dangerous like on small children. Even though ther is a high rate of serious injury when they are worn, there is an even greater risk when they aren't worn.

We went over the fact that there always must be a counter argument that follows the rebuttal. Otherwise, the rebuttal may be questioned and turn into its own claim. We also went over a few other examples when all of the information was given to us including the claim, grounds, warrant, backing, etc... Tonight for homework though, we have to write three Toulmin sentences when only the claim is given:

1. Claim: Students who work hard in school do better in college.
2. Claim: Faux news programs (e.g. "The Daily Show") are a (great/negative) addition to television.
3. Claim: The US should (get out of/stay in) Iraq.

Make sure in the Toulmin Sentence that you include the claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, reservation, rebuttal, and counterargument. The other homework assignment is still the vocabulary exercises, which will be due on Monday. We will also go over them on Monday.

--Alexis

Here is an example toulmin sentence

Because my participation grade needs a boost,
it is highly encouraged that I post something on
the blog since it would lead to a higher grade,
unless I were to post something mindless and
irrelevent. Some may say that my participation
grade is already a hundred, but that would just
be a rumor.

-Kelsey

For homework today we had to write three Toulim sentences, one about faux news such as the Daily show. Since I have never seen the show before, I watched a clip on you tube. I found it hilarious when it made fun of politicians and the stupid things politicians do, for example , the John Edward's scandal. Though, some things they say are not good taste. The clip made me think about how much freedom we as americans have, in that we can openly criticize our leaders. But do we reserve the right to mock people? Some people believe that it is disrespectful to call our nations leaders, such as the President an idiot. Does comedy television shows go to far? Has freedom of speech become the freedom of harassment?



Ashley Hill

9/17 Minutes

We do admit error
-Unlike other forms of writing, academic arguments often include discussions of possible objections and counterarguments to the position being advanced.
-Academic arguments typically take place in communities where competing or divergent positions exist.
-To engage members of an academic community in argument, writers must be aware of those members’ pre-existing beliefs and opinions, because it’s upon that basis that the writer will strive to build their claims and defend them.
-Dealing with counterarguments and objections is a key point of the building, refining, and interpreting and analyzing of arguments.
1.demonstrates the author is aware of opposing views. Writer is likely to seem fair and be more persuasive.
2.shows the writer is thinking about responses of readers, anticipating objections the reader may have. This can inoculate the reader against counterarguments.
3.when a writer contrasts their opinion with opposing arguments or alternative hypotheses, the writer clarififies the position for which they are arguing.

Dealing with the Devil
Tactic 1: strategic concession
Tactic 2: refutation
Tactic 3: demonstration of irrelevance

-any rebuttal is an argument in itself and thus, may include its own claim, grounds, warrant, backing qualifier – and rebuttal.
-A writer presenting an argument can seek both possible rebuttals, rebuttals to rebuttals and so on.

The Toulmin Sentence: a pre-writing organizer
-NOT A SENTENCE IN YOUR ESSAY
-Because (grounds), therefore, or so (qualifier) (claim), since (warrant), because, or on account of (backing), unless (reservation)

Superstition and Luck

During our studies of the Toulmin model of argumentation today we progressed to learn about the causation warrant. One of the main things to remember about using this type of warrant was to make sure that the relationship between the events was not simply a correlation, but a cause-and-effect relationship. Furthermore, we discussed the Chaunticleer fallacy which stems from a fable about a rooster believing the sun came up only because he crowed every morning.

While almost every person agrees with the theories that the sun doesn’t rise because of the rooster and the Chaunticleer fallacy in general, there are two common contradictions to this principle: superstition and luck. One of the most common superstitions is after someone says an event that you wish never to happen; you quickly knock on wood to prevent that malicious event. Even though it is quite obvious to even the most unintelligent of humans that knocking on a piece of a tree would have no impact whatsoever on future events, people still knock. In fact, in a survey seen here by Dr. Richard Wiseman 86% of people in the United Kingdom say they believe in knocking on wood to ward off malicious future events.

Luck defined as the force that seems to operate for good or ill in a person's life, as in shaping circumstances, events, or opportunities is another seeming groundless belief contrived by the imaginative mind. One common and catchy saying, “See a penny, pick it up, and all day long you’ll have good luck,” clearly states that picking up a penny is going to in some way aid you during the next 24 hours. This is not based on any facts, studies, or experiments and is not in any way provable. Despite this when most people see a penny on the ground they pick it up, is it really because they want to be 1 cent richer? I don’t think so.

Even though there is clear, reasonable, and strong evidence to prove that superstition and luck are lunacy and idiocracy, do you think it is possible that humans are really that unintelligent, do you figure that sometimes people simply like to have fun and feel like a kid again, or do you believe that humans are able to overlook the evidence simply to ease their own consciences and subscribe to the forces of superstition and luck?

Tyler H.

9/16 Minutes

Argument via sign/clue
- notion that certain types of evidence are sympotomatic of some wider principle or outcome

Example:
-Where there's smoke, there's fire.
- Students with high SAT scores will do well in college.

Causal Argument
- "X" is the result of, or is affected by the factor "y"- the most complex forms of warrant

Example:
Claim: Needle exchange programs should be abolished.
Grounds: They only cause people to use drugs.
Warrant: More people will engage in risky behavior because you've made it safer.

-Don't mix causation with correlation
-Just because two events have a relationship doesn't necessarily dictate that the relationship is causal.

Example: The growing population of storks as well as the simultaneous population growth of babies does not mean that babies come from storks. The two just happen to occur at the same time but are not directly related.
- If one thing follows another, the first thing must have caused the second.
Example: Baby: "I kicked and got milk, I'll kick again and get more." The baby thinks that by kicking he is getting milk, when in truth, he will get milk when it is time for him to be fed. Kicking has nothing to do with the situation.

Argument from Authority (ETHOS)

- Does person/text "x" constitute an authoritative source on the issue in question?
- What political, idealogical, or economic interests do they have?
- Will a significant number of authorites agree?

Argument from Principle

-Locating a principle that is widely regarded as valid and showing that a situation exists in which this principle apploes
-Evaluation:
~Is it widely accepted?
~Does it apply to the situation?
~Are there commonly agree on exceptions?
~Are there rival principles?
~Are the consequences of the principle desirable?

Second Triad

-Backing
-Qualifier
-Rebuttal

Backing

-Provides additional justification for the warrant especially if the warrant is viewed as questionable

Example:
Claim: You should use a hearing aid.
Grounds: You've been having trouble hearing and over 70% of people over 65 have difficulty hearing
Warrant: Many hearing aid users sau it helps them to hear better
Backing: Hearing aids are conveniently available

The Qualifier

-Arguments are not expected to demonstrate certainties! They can only establish probabilities.
-Claims are qualified to meet objections of an audience
- States how sure the arguer is about its correctness
- Specifies the arguer's self-imposed limits to the claim, warrant, and backing by establishing conditionality.

Examples:
Sometimes
Maybe
Might
Many
Few
Probably
Possibly
Most
Usually
Always
Virtually
-Qualifiers can strengthen or undermind your argument

Example:
Claim: Hearing aids help people hear better.
Claim + Qualifier- Hearing aids help most people hear better

Qualifier Variant

-Reservation-offers the audience recognition of the greater possibility that the claim is incorrect-without saying so.

Example:
Claim: Hearing aids do no harm to ears.
Claim + Reservation: Unless there is no contrary evidence, hearing aids do no harm to ears.

The Rebuttal

-The acknowledges exceptions or limitations to the argument, and admits to those cirumstances or situations where the argument would not hold.
-Answers the question "What are the other possible views on this issue?"

We do not admit error
- Actually we do.
- Academic arguments often include counterarguments to the position being advanced.

-Melissa H.

More in-depth information concerning our discussion

Much like Hippocrates' belief of medicine, that one must understand the cause of a disease to combat its symptoms, I find that reading more into the reasoning behind logical thinking makes understanding it easier. I also think knowing the logical fallacies helps significantly. The reason I linked to wikipedia articles for a simple superficial overview, sacrificing that for reliability .

For instance the example provided today for opinions:

"-Claim: It looks like it's going to rain.
-Grounds: The Accu-Weather report said it would rain.

The report is from a credible and authoritative information source - although the reporter has only provided the listener with their claim not the grounds."

Accepting something as truth because the person who said it is an authority on the subject is called an appeal to authority. Which knowing is a fallacious argument, I feel, is important. Something important I don't recall being stressed is that, for practical reasons, the fallacy is one we essentially must live with. I'll use being sick as an example. Say someone falls sick, would it be better to go to a doctor , or take 8 years of medical school for relief? The latter is more reliable, however it is not at all feasible. Going to a doctor wouldn't be as reliable, but greatly more practical.

We later discussed how a fact must not be 100% true to argue it. Mr. Lazarow stated that will discuss this later , so I won't discuss this much, but I suppose I should link to Karl Popper and falsifiability. (Superficially) because our ability to gather information is limited by (again) practical reasons, we cannot demand 100% certainty. This introduces falsifiability into the mix.

When a false analogy is used to prove a point it is a non sequitiur. For instance: (taken from here)

Nuclear disarmament is like driving a car, both involve a risk.

to

Because of this, if you are willing to drive a car you should be willing to have nuclear disarmament.

This is an extraordinarily bad analogy. The two share a very distant, superficial, relationship (both carry a risk). The non sequitiur then comes to the conclusion that because both share something superficially in common, they equate each other. The non sequitiur does not take into account, however, the fact that one can have a standard for risk, that the person may feel that something is too risky. The risk gap between nuclear disarmament and car crash is great.

If you wish to look more into logical fallacies I recommend this video, which provides some real examples (somewhat making easier). This is also a very superficial list of the "top 20 fallacies."
-Alexander Altaras

9/15 Minutes

Credibility:
Example: It looks like it's going to rain
Grounds: Accu-weather said it would (reasonably reliable source)

-Case examples function much like straight facts do-- but not only do they help clarify points of discussion, they add persuasion and make the idea more memorable.
-Hypothetic examples can only demonstrate probabilities
1. "This one time, at band camp, I was.."
- personal example
- can fail to connect with audience
2. "Lets say you were..."
- useful if audience can place themselves in the situation
3. "During band camp last year.."
- less personal, more factual

"True" Facts?
-facts aren't always true
-all evidence is based on perception/assumption
example: 9 planets --> 8 planets and a dwarf planet
-facts change

-Grounds must stand strongly, grounds might be challenged so strongly that they become claims themselves--which would require the arguer to come up with MORE grounds for support-- deeper info and further argument.

-acceptance = won an argument
-dismissal = no way to win (wont even be argued)
-challenge = fight is on

THE WARRANT: The warrant is the inferential leap that creates a mental connection between the claim and the grounds -- thus establishing the claims legitimacy.
- Chains of reasoning
-unstated assumptions
- presuppositions
-general principles
-widely held values
-commonly accepted beliefs
-appeals to human motives

"Where is the author coming from?"
"What is causing the author to think this way?"

-Warrant links support to the claim by enabling the audience to accept/justify particular evidence as proof
-Warrants are implicit (unstated)
-The audience supplies the warrant
-Warrants establish links between the author and the audience; shared warrants result in successfully established common grounds

-Warrants reveal unspoken beliefs and values of the author, they invite the audience to examine its own beliefs and compare them.

6 Main Argumentative Strategies: (GASCAD)
1. Generalization
2. Analogy
3. Sign
4. Causality
5. Authority
6. Principle

Generalizations:
- common form of reasoning
- what is true of a well chosen sample is likely to hold for a larger group/ population
Example:
Claim: That dog is friendly.
Grounds: It's a Golden Retriever
Warrant: Most/All Golden Retrievers are friendly -- Generalization

Analogy:
- Extrapolation from one situation or even based on the nature and outcome of a similar event
-found in law: "case based"
-Are there sufficient, typical, accurate, relevant similarities between 2 contexts?
"Life is like a box of chocolates"

False Analogy:
"I can do this well, so I can do that well..."


-Sammi Drury

9/11 Minutes

Hey guys, we didn't get to assign who was doing the class minutes for Friday, but in case anyone was absent, or just for the record, this is what we covered in class :

The Claim
- This is essentially the statement being argued - the assertion that the arguer would like to make
- Even though this is the part from which the writer starts to formulate the argument, it is actually the conclusion of the argument (since it's what the audience should believe in the end)
- Everything in the argument relates back to the claim (therefore if it doesn't, then it doesn't belong)
- It answers the question, "What is the author trying to prove?" "What is the bottom line?"

Variety (of claims that the Toulmin Model identifies)
1. Claims of Fact - focuses on empirically verifiable phenomena (based on evidence from the past)
2. Claims of Judgement/Values - involve opinions, attitudes, subjective evaluations (the present)
3. Claims of Policy - advocates courses of action to undertake (in the future)
- Each claim is equal in value but different in application
Example: 'It looks like it's going to rain' (Fact)
Explanation: Because we have a certain amount of past experiences (because when dark clouds were present, most of the time it rained), it's a fact because it can be empirically verifiable. If, however, I had said the statement even though the sky above me is perfectly clear and sunny, then it is no longer a claim of fact because someone else could very easily disagree with me and prove me wrong
- Most of the times, our claims are challenged, and this is when the grounds come in

The Grounds
- The basis of persuasion, the evidence/reasons/opinions/examples/facts gathered to bolster a claim
- It answers the question 'What additional information can the author offer?'
- The three types of argumentative supports are:
1. Facts - vivid, real, identifiable, and verifiable information of a more or less objective nature
2. Opinions - interpretations/reasoning (yours or that of other expert's) of relevant factual information
3. Examples - for the purpose of clarification and illustraion of facts and opinions
- Most importantly, argumentative support should be explicitly stated - not implied

Facts
- Various forms include:
1. Detailed reports of specific events ('I was there')
2. Statistics
3. Experimental results
4. Physical evidence
Example:
Claim - 'Needle exchange programs should be abolished'
Grounds - 'They only cause more people to use drugs'
Facts - (I forget the exact example Mr. Lazarow used in class..) 'Statistics have shown that there has been a 40% increase in the number of people who relied on drugs since the needle exchange programs had been enforced'

Opinions
- Statements involving opinion have an important role in argumentation
- While we've almost always been told that our own opinions are unecessary and less effective than facts when presented in an argument, the thing is, opinions can be just as persuasive when used in the right way
- Opinions cannot exist without facts from which they stem
- Opinions are a result of the interpretation of facts
- The majority of claims involve an expression of interpretation, rather than one of pure facts. Without interpretation, it is merely a meaningless factual statement
Example: 'Lady Macbeth uses the word 'blood' 27 times.'
Note: The question, 'But why?' arises, and therefore an interpretation/explanation is needed.
- One might ask, 'Whose opinions should we trust?' Renowned authorities? Credentialed experts? Family and friends? The thing is, no one source can really outweigh the rest. Depends on the situation, different opinions will be more valuable than others - the key is to know which to use.

-Julie W

Examples of the practical critical thinking advocated by the Toulmin Model

It appears to me that reading or listening to skeptical texts or podcasts would be very helpful for English essays. These are built on logical thinking, and that is precisely what any good essay should accomplish, regardless of the material being discussed. Whether that be Shakespeare, Kafka or the supposed medical effects of homeopathy. I would imagine that the thinking being applied to scientific claims, would not be different from the thinking being applied to claims regarding a piece of literature (the repeated use of the word blood in Macbeth by lady Macbeth was used as an example in class). It is because of this, that I think adapting the style of thinking in these podcasts would be very useful for writing essays in English.

When we were discussing the Toulmin Model of Argumentation today, some brief examples of the Toulmin reasoning process applied to certain claims were brought up. I was immediately reminded of this podcast that I listen to (also in print form), Skeptoid. The individual essays mainly focus on the more imaginative variety of claims (i.e. the paranormal, alternative medicine, etc.) The grounds are always based on the empirically proven facts. The creator also offers his own interpretation of the facts. For the most part, these are actions advocated by the Toulmin Model of Argumentation. These episodes are essentially larger, in-depth examples. I find that they're relatively entertaining and short (approx. 10 minutes) so they won't significantly take up your time.

Another useful podcast on critical thinking is the LSAT Logic For Everyday Life from Princeton Review. For those who don't know, the LSAT is the Law School Admission Test. Again, these are more elaborate examples of critical thinking.


-Alexander Altaras

Hey Guys 

Today in class we started the presentation about The Toulmin Model of Argument 

The Notes we got so far were: 

Why will it matter? 

* Because we've been working on a basic rhetorical model, especially when dealing with the thesis statement. 

* The thesis is essential to the success of an essay. 

*Becoming a better writer isn't about plugging in the correct bit. It's about understanding why the mechanisms of an essay work the way they do. 

The Toulmin Model is a complicated process - The thesis becomes more elaborate then the basic thesis you've become used to. It's going to be difficult, yet rewarding. 

*It works because it is constructed in response to the REALITY of argument. It defines ABSOLUTES in favor of QUALIFIERS. 

* Lets first agree that all verbal communication is persuasive to some degree, therefore everything uttered is intended to get the listener to believe as the speaker believes. 

* Stephen Toulmin was a Brittish Philosopher/Logician. He became frustrated with the inability of traditional logic to explain the process of real, everyday arguments. 

The Toulmin Model says that good, realistic arguments typically consist of six parts. 

* Claim 

*Grounds

*Warrants

*Backing

*Qualifiers

*Rebuttals 

-Alex Ryan 

Welcome, English IIIH scholars of MHS Class of 2010! It's a great pleasure to greet you as, and a special pleasure to welcome you to your home on the web--your class blogsite.

Ever since we first began using online bulletin boards as a way to converse about literature and writing (all the way back in the early '90's, and please don't feel the need to comment about how long ago that was, or how old you were then), it was always my intent to do the same in my classroom. Admittedly, it took a little longer than I thought, but here we are.

I have put this space together for the benefit of your academic pursuit--to expand your ability to converse about the texts we will be discussing. This space is essentially yours to post relevant--and presumably intelligent--comments and questions regarding our readings.

Please note the following rules:

1. ONLY students currently enrolled in my English IIIH may post comments here. This is not a discussion board intended for the world.

2. anyone who posts must do so with their REAL first name. Any posts found to be made using names other than real (for example, posting using another student's name) will be dealt with according to school disciplinary policy.

3. all discussion will proceed in respectful, scholarly manner.

4. to ensure that #3 is obeyed, I will personally monitor all discussions on this blog. It's not that I don't trust teenagers to behave in responsible ways. . .oh, wait--yes, it is. I don't. Don't take it personally.

5. Do not expect me to comment on every posting, even if a question has been directly asked of me by one of you. I am much more interested to see whether your fellow scholars are capable of suggesting viable answers and explanations. I reserve the right to comment when and if I deem it necessary. Frequently, I will allow a discussion thread to continue unabated, in order to bring that thread into class for further investigation.

6. From time to time, if the mood strikes me, I may make a comment or pose a question, or refer you to some additional reading I've discovered. Just because I've done that does not make you obligated to respond. . .at least, not yet.

7. Just in case you haven't been told this yet--or you have, but forgot--please remember: this course is designed in every respect as the equivalent to the traditional Rhetoric/Composition class required of all college freshmen. That's right--you're taking a college-level class, two years ahead of time. Reconcile yourself to the gravity of that reality right now, and be prepared to handle the work that will reasonably emerge for you this year. Conduct yourself with that level of academic responsibility in mind.

8. Oh--and, yes, the blog will be a required element of your grade each marking period, so make it a part of your daily online ritual. Check it frequently, and post or comment consistently. The concept of "participation" is now no longer restricted to the classroom walls!

That's all I can think of at the moment, but I also reserve the right to change/adjust/modify/ invent as we go along. Because I can, that's why.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts, and seeing you all in in class each day.

MR. LAZ