Logical Fallacies

Sometimes we find that we make claims that sound logical but still aren't necessarily true. 

For example, it may seem logical to say that President Obama's political agenda is worthless because he is dumb.

This example is called ad hominem (to the man); it means that someone is attacking someone on a personal level (we might call it a "low blow") instead of attacking the ideas or political agendas themselves.

Review
In class, we've discussed tautology, or circular reasoning.  This is the kind of reasoning that parents resort to with their demanding toddlers: "I said you can't have the cookie because you can't have the cookie!"

We've also discussed straw men, the practice of attacking an opinion in order to make your opinion look better, even though no one would fairly adhere to the opinion anyway.  It's always a good idea to represent opposing view points, but we need to represent them fairly.

Learn More
Follow this link to a handout compiled by the writing center at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (Go heels!), you'll find more information and examples. 

Powerpoint Presentations

Rhetoric, the art of persuasion, can be visual as well as textual.  Since the powerful rise of advertising and the advent of Web 2.0 technology, we cannot afford to ignore visual styles of rhetoric in our writing classes.

Understanding visual rhetoric will help you in work places where you may be asked to present information in the format of a slide show (as in a meeting) or poster presentation (as at a convention).  Since, as consumers and citizens, we confront visual rhetoric constantly--on billboards, signs, ads, magazine covers, commercials, TV programs, web sites, and more--understanding visual rhetoric should help us make informed, critical choices in the world.

We've already used semiotic analysis to understand the visual rhetoric of those awesome Old Spice ads.  (And btw, have you noticed that Dove appears to have adopted a similar marketing strategy?)

So let's turn to making our own visual rhetoric with Powerpoint (on PC) or Keynote (on Mac).

Class is Canceled

Dear ENGWR 100,

I am sorry to say that class has been canceled tonight.  I had a number of activities planned for us, on which I don't want us to miss out, so we shall have an online class in lieu of our regular meeting.  For this week, I'm going to convert them to items I can post on the blog.

Please check back here for notes and activities related to this week's reading about happiness, to constructing power point slides and presentations, to editing for wordy-ness, to recognizing logical fallacies, to beginning research projects, and to using comparison and contrast writing strategies.  Homework will be assigned.

As always please, write me with any questions or help you may need.

Best wishes,

Sara Anderson 

Summary of Aristotle: The aim of Man

Basically Aristotle explains the definitions of Good, Statecraft and the study of Ethics. Where the definition of Good is where all things are to be aimed for example health. Then comes the definition of Statecraft is where is the rate of infinity the desire to have it all. Finally comes the definition of Study of Ethics which talks about the pure excellence of justice which involves the disagreements and agreements of uncertainity and certainity. Arittole also talks about Happiness and where a certain point can be overlooked and how arguments can be led from first principles. Plato did infact question this and asked this alot. First principles came about in a variety of ways: by induction, direct perception, and habituation. The question then leads to where the sources of Happiness come from but a result of virtue of learning or some kind of training. Because the virtue of learning and the some kind of training is rewarded by a blessing that is generally shared but with the exception of the virtue being stunted. Happiness is built on no secure foundation almost like a Chameleon. But why is Happiness a Chameleon?

Summary of Robert Wright's:Christian Soldiers

Wright's article explains about a religious tension between Christians and Muslims.The tension between the two has cause killings amongst each other in Nigeria. Whereas, in Malaysia, Muslims are trying to ban Christians from using the word "Allah" for God.Some Christian missionaries are using a technique called the CAMEL method (Chosen Angels Miracles Eternal Life) to bond with Muslims, and show them that Allah of the Koran and the God of the Bible is the same God.Wright points out that Christians are intentionally calling themselves "muslim" which is misleading.Why? Because, it is not true to the Koran believing Muslims. This play in words is misleading, and is causing great tension.Wright's go to consultant Ekiza Griswold, states and confirms that, assertive Christians increase tension in Nigeria by proselytizing.Wright uses Ergun Cane as an example, who is Christian and president of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, who is in favor of assertive proselytizing, but is offended to hear that Muslims and Christians might worship the same God. Caner states in a recent podcast, "There's nothing that the two gods-the god of the Koran and the god of the scripture-have in common. Nothing." (pg 3. Para.3). Wright acknowledges both sides of the Muslim and Christian beliefs on God. Do you believe 'Allah' of the Koran and the God of the Bible are one in the same, different, or just a play on words?

"Reich: Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer."

Reich introduces to us the three boats that sail within the American economy. There is a boat that contains routine producers, a boat that contains in-person servers, and the "vessel" containing symbolic analysts. There was a time when everyone was on the same boat but because the "American corporation sold its goods and services all over the world, the purchasing power of Americans workers became far less relevant to its economic survival". The boat that is in more danger of sinking is the boat that carries routine producers. Reich analyzes that the reason this boat is sinking is because American companies are constructing factories in developing nations. They are hiring the citizens that reside in the developing nations and are paying them only a fraction of what they would pay Americans. Companies are replacing human employees with robot employees because they are more efficient. The boat containing in-person servers is also sinking but at a slower rate than the boat containing routine producers. According to Reich, the reason for this is because " In-person servers are sheltered from the direct effects of global competition." That doesn't mean that In-person servers are sheltered from other dangers. As production workers are unable to find jobs, they make an attempt to board the ship that is carrying In-person servers. Immigration, high school graduates, and labor saving machinery also pose a threat to In-person servers. Reich explains that "The vessel containing Americas symbolic analysts is rising" because of the demand the world has created for them. Symbolic analysts make large sums of money because they sell their knowledge to those who want to make a fortune "by moving large amounts of money." Symbolic analysts are not dealing with low or middle class customers. Their customers consist of the elite. Reich has made us realize that the American economy no longer depends on the American people. When America occupied only one boat, everyone was doing well. Executives could not lower the wages of low-level-production workers too much because if they did there would be "insufficient purchasing power in the economy."

Personally I think that the economy downfall has a lot to do with the inventions of labor saving machinery. Machinery are not consumers and they are taking away someone's employment. What do you think is the cause of a deteriorating economy? Why do you think the link between top executives and the American worker faded?

Summary of "The Communist Manifesto"

In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx writes of the Communism that was "haunting Europe." Marx explains his theory of the struggles of the class and economic concerns are what drive history. After the discovery of America opened new ground for the Bourgeoisie, they established the world market. And during these times of production classes were defined and the "freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian" were no longer able to live peacefullly. These fights agaisnt class would always end in revolution and the higher class takes over. And in order for the lower class hard working Proletarians to overcome their positions a revolution must occur. "The dangerous class, the social scum that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of old society....be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution." And this is what Marx argues drives history, the cival war that rages between classes, and the rise and fall of each. Communism is inevitable. Do any of you feel this is happening now in a more modern way?