As I was writing my previous blog entry, a thought-provoking idea jumped into my head... I noticed that the response that was "voted" number one to the yahoo question someone had posted about whether or not they should debark their dog was submitted by someone who was sourced as a "Rescuer, vet tech, groomer, and show exhibitor of Shetland sheepdogs for 20 years" (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080718192951AAJ21lV). Clearly, this person has knowledge surrounding the topic of dogs and he argument can be trusted more than someone who responds to the question with little to no background. At least that is the way it appears since her response was voted as the "best answer" by other voters.
This goes back to what Crowley discusses in my argumentative writing textbook, and what I have talked about in previous blog entries: establishing credentials for yourself as a writer (improving your ethos), or using evidence from someone who is considered an expert on a particular subject will greatly strengthen an argument.
So I was curious if this was true, and decided to do a very small survey in which I looked at different questions posted on yahoo to determine if the answer that was chosen as the "best answer" was in most cases submitted by an "expert" on the particular subject.
Here is what I found:
The first question that came up was a boy asking if his sister might have an eating disorder (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhZZzlYfm6PmC7CiqPsUpaEjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20061105201248AAEjrpf). The "best answer" was chosen because "Whoever wrote this seems to know a lot about this subject." Although he is not sourced as a doctor, the writer appears to be an expert on the subject, or at least sounds as though he has a wealth of knowledge about eating disorders.
Although the trend seems apparent, I will give one more example, which was a question posted asking how to stop global warming (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap5sGvWyir39YTPHPg0dAnYjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20080913172021AAKjgR6). The answer that was chosen as the best was one that was not sourced as an environmentalist or scientist, however, but in this person's "sources," he provided a link that takes us to a news web page, explaining ways to slow down global warming.
Although these are only a few examples, I think it is clear that Crowley is right in mentioning the importance of having credible sources in an argument. The argument is clearly more persuasive that way.
Monday, November 24, 2008
The Arrangement of an Argument
In continuing my discussion about the importance of arranging an argument in order to make that argument more clear and persuasive, I was thinking of an instance recently where I have seen a good example of this. I couldn't think of any off the top of my head, but it came to me pretty quickly after I started doing research for another psychology class of mine.
For another class, I was assigned to research the pros and cons associated with cosmetic surgery on dogs as sort of a fun end of the semester debate project. While I was searching for information, a story appeared in my search that was posted by a man on yahoo telling of his dog barks excessively and asking whether or not he should have his dog "debarked," which is a surgery removing part of the vocal cords to soften but not completely eliminate the dog's ability to bark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debarking). Of course, many people responded to the post with varying opinions, but as I read the responses, I noticed that a few of the arguments people made were better than others.
The yahoo posting and the responses can be found at: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080718192951AAJ21lV.
The argument that I found to be the most persuasive was posted by a person who, ironically, organized their argument in such a way that it was easy and clear to follow. (hmm...this is exactly what Crowley mentions in my argumentative writing textbook as being important to think about when organizing an argument). This person actually numbered the main points within their argument, separating three different subcategories that all help prove his argument that a bark collar should be used before debarking a dog. Each of his categories is also expanded upon, not only by giving his own opinion, but by backing up his own thoughts with stories of failures of debarking surgeries, for example. At the end of his argument, he summarizes his points and even gives a link that we can visit to learn more about the debarking debate.
Although this response was short, and it would be far more difficult to organize and arrange an entire paper, this person's argument was clearly well thought out and easy to read. His points were also good, making it more persuasive than most of the arguments posted as responses to this man's story of his barking dog. The only thing missing from this person's argument was an introduction, which I do not think was even needed because the subject matter was clear as well as relevant to all who were reading the responses of what to do with a barking dog.
For another class, I was assigned to research the pros and cons associated with cosmetic surgery on dogs as sort of a fun end of the semester debate project. While I was searching for information, a story appeared in my search that was posted by a man on yahoo telling of his dog barks excessively and asking whether or not he should have his dog "debarked," which is a surgery removing part of the vocal cords to soften but not completely eliminate the dog's ability to bark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debarking). Of course, many people responded to the post with varying opinions, but as I read the responses, I noticed that a few of the arguments people made were better than others.
The yahoo posting and the responses can be found at: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080718192951AAJ21lV.
The argument that I found to be the most persuasive was posted by a person who, ironically, organized their argument in such a way that it was easy and clear to follow. (hmm...this is exactly what Crowley mentions in my argumentative writing textbook as being important to think about when organizing an argument). This person actually numbered the main points within their argument, separating three different subcategories that all help prove his argument that a bark collar should be used before debarking a dog. Each of his categories is also expanded upon, not only by giving his own opinion, but by backing up his own thoughts with stories of failures of debarking surgeries, for example. At the end of his argument, he summarizes his points and even gives a link that we can visit to learn more about the debarking debate.
Although this response was short, and it would be far more difficult to organize and arrange an entire paper, this person's argument was clearly well thought out and easy to read. His points were also good, making it more persuasive than most of the arguments posted as responses to this man's story of his barking dog. The only thing missing from this person's argument was an introduction, which I do not think was even needed because the subject matter was clear as well as relevant to all who were reading the responses of what to do with a barking dog.
Grabbing the audience's attention
I was reading my argumentative writing textbook again this week and the chapter I was reading was about the arrangement of rhetorical writing; the way you organize and put your arguments together. I think this is should be a very important focus of argumentative papers because a variety of things can affect how well a paper comes together or how persuasive it actually is. One of the most important things, in my mind, is the introduction of a paper.
As my textbook states, “It is necessary to explain to an audience why they should pay attention to a discourse if the issue taken up in the discourse is ambiguous, mean, or obscure” (Crowley, 300). In many of the papers I have written for assignments in school, the topics of the papers have often seemed unimportant, or having very little meaning, at least pertaining to anyone outside of my classroom. Inside of the classroom, the topics of these papers makes sense to only the audience within the class, but as I have learned this year in my argumentative writing class, it is important to keep in mind a broader audience, defining all terms and explaining any discourses taken within the paper. In this case, it is important to have something in your introduction that grabs the attention of a wider audience, one larger than the audience confined only to the classroom.
To do this, one option would be to prevent kairos. As I have mentioned in a previous blog entry, kairos provides relevance or reason for discussing something or raising an argument. This is what I often try to do in my own writing. I think it is very effective to provide kairos in an introduction of an argumentative writing paper because it makes an audience attentive to the subject that will be discussed throughout the paper. To do this, I usually provide my audience with a story that is relevant to the argument I will be making. Stories, or anecdotes provide excellent kairos for discussing topics because I feel that the audience can relate to stories and if they are presented right of the bat in an introduction of a paper, the audience will be more attentive and take a deeper interest in the paper.
As my textbook states, “It is necessary to explain to an audience why they should pay attention to a discourse if the issue taken up in the discourse is ambiguous, mean, or obscure” (Crowley, 300). In many of the papers I have written for assignments in school, the topics of the papers have often seemed unimportant, or having very little meaning, at least pertaining to anyone outside of my classroom. Inside of the classroom, the topics of these papers makes sense to only the audience within the class, but as I have learned this year in my argumentative writing class, it is important to keep in mind a broader audience, defining all terms and explaining any discourses taken within the paper. In this case, it is important to have something in your introduction that grabs the attention of a wider audience, one larger than the audience confined only to the classroom.
To do this, one option would be to prevent kairos. As I have mentioned in a previous blog entry, kairos provides relevance or reason for discussing something or raising an argument. This is what I often try to do in my own writing. I think it is very effective to provide kairos in an introduction of an argumentative writing paper because it makes an audience attentive to the subject that will be discussed throughout the paper. To do this, I usually provide my audience with a story that is relevant to the argument I will be making. Stories, or anecdotes provide excellent kairos for discussing topics because I feel that the audience can relate to stories and if they are presented right of the bat in an introduction of a paper, the audience will be more attentive and take a deeper interest in the paper.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Leadership in sports
As I mentioned in one of my very first blog entries, I am posting on this blog for my argumentative writing class. For our final paper in the semester, we have been asked to write about what defines a leader in the 21st Century. If you're thinking, "wow, that would be difficult to define in just one paper," you are definitely right. Defining what makes a good leader is an extremely difficult task, but I have decided to narrow my focus down and define what it means to be a good leader in sports.
I am on the Women's swim team at the University of Michigan, and I have a strong interest in sports, specifically swimming of course. I think it is important to look into the leadership within sports because many people play, watch, or take some sort of interest in sports. But the importance of leadership in sports? Think about it, without leadership within, sports teams would have a difficult time succeeding. But what makes a good leader? This is what I am trying to uncover in my final paper for class, but for this blog entry, I thought it would be a good idea to give an example of someone who I believe displays good leadership by naming the characteristics she possesses. (Of course this will only be a brief summary of what it means to be a good leader in sports in the 21st Century, but I think it's enough to get the ball rolling and get you thinking about how truly important a leader's role is).
As I said before, I am a member of the Women's Swim Team at U of M, and I frequently visit our "MGoBlue" website page that presents articles, gives stats, and displays the roster and pictures. A few weeks ago, something was written about Margaret Kelly, another swimmer on my team. The article can be found at: http://www.mgoblue.com/swimming-diving-w/article.aspx?id=153548 and states:
Junior Margaret Kelly (Ann Arbor, Mich./Pioneer) has continued to improve on last season's breakout campaign. So far, Kelly has finished in the top two in six of the eight races that she has competed in this season. Kelly has picked up a team-leading four individual wins this season in the pool and has never finished lower than fourth. The Ann Arbor native holds the top time in six different individual events for the Wolverines this season.
The article's heading reads, "Kelly Leading the Way." Although it is true, Margaret is indeed scoring numerous points for our team, I believe she is leading the way in more ways than that. Margaret displays excellent team leadership. There is no write-up about this, so you will have to trust me, when I explain through personal experience, the qualities Margaret possesses. The main reason I think Margaret is a good leader is through the characteristics she demonstrates within the way that she leads by example. Although she is not that vocal of a leader, she conducts herself in a way that allows others on the team to look up to her. She is an extremely hard-worker; giving her all every second she is in the pool (yes, the whole 2 hour morning practice and 2 hour evening practice). She also controls her emotions well, allowing others only to see her positive attitude, which does not bring anyone down, but rather lifts up those around her.
These are just a few characteristics Margaret displays in her leadership in swimming, and I guess the point I am trying to make is that it is important to contribute leadership to the team, not only points. By contributing leadership, you inspire those around you, not only yourself, and the team has a better chance of success. In relating this to the readings I have done for my argumentative writing class, it is clear that Margaret does not demonstrate the type of leadership Machiavelli, a diplomat in the 16th Century, described. He believed a leader should have complete power (Machiavelli, 46). Margaret clearly does not have complete power over others, as she strives only to set a good example while completing her goals and the team's goals. In fact, she takes more of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a philosopher in the 18th Century approach to leadership. He believed no man should have authority over others (Rousseau, 60). Margaret has no authority, no power over her teammates, but specifically leads in ways that do not involve manipulation or ways that make her seem overbearing.
I am on the Women's swim team at the University of Michigan, and I have a strong interest in sports, specifically swimming of course. I think it is important to look into the leadership within sports because many people play, watch, or take some sort of interest in sports. But the importance of leadership in sports? Think about it, without leadership within, sports teams would have a difficult time succeeding. But what makes a good leader? This is what I am trying to uncover in my final paper for class, but for this blog entry, I thought it would be a good idea to give an example of someone who I believe displays good leadership by naming the characteristics she possesses. (Of course this will only be a brief summary of what it means to be a good leader in sports in the 21st Century, but I think it's enough to get the ball rolling and get you thinking about how truly important a leader's role is).
As I said before, I am a member of the Women's Swim Team at U of M, and I frequently visit our "MGoBlue" website page that presents articles, gives stats, and displays the roster and pictures. A few weeks ago, something was written about Margaret Kelly, another swimmer on my team. The article can be found at: http://www.mgoblue.com/swimming-diving-w/article.aspx?id=153548 and states:
Junior Margaret Kelly (Ann Arbor, Mich./Pioneer) has continued to improve on last season's breakout campaign. So far, Kelly has finished in the top two in six of the eight races that she has competed in this season. Kelly has picked up a team-leading four individual wins this season in the pool and has never finished lower than fourth. The Ann Arbor native holds the top time in six different individual events for the Wolverines this season.
The article's heading reads, "Kelly Leading the Way." Although it is true, Margaret is indeed scoring numerous points for our team, I believe she is leading the way in more ways than that. Margaret displays excellent team leadership. There is no write-up about this, so you will have to trust me, when I explain through personal experience, the qualities Margaret possesses. The main reason I think Margaret is a good leader is through the characteristics she demonstrates within the way that she leads by example. Although she is not that vocal of a leader, she conducts herself in a way that allows others on the team to look up to her. She is an extremely hard-worker; giving her all every second she is in the pool (yes, the whole 2 hour morning practice and 2 hour evening practice). She also controls her emotions well, allowing others only to see her positive attitude, which does not bring anyone down, but rather lifts up those around her.
These are just a few characteristics Margaret displays in her leadership in swimming, and I guess the point I am trying to make is that it is important to contribute leadership to the team, not only points. By contributing leadership, you inspire those around you, not only yourself, and the team has a better chance of success. In relating this to the readings I have done for my argumentative writing class, it is clear that Margaret does not demonstrate the type of leadership Machiavelli, a diplomat in the 16th Century, described. He believed a leader should have complete power (Machiavelli, 46). Margaret clearly does not have complete power over others, as she strives only to set a good example while completing her goals and the team's goals. In fact, she takes more of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a philosopher in the 18th Century approach to leadership. He believed no man should have authority over others (Rousseau, 60). Margaret has no authority, no power over her teammates, but specifically leads in ways that do not involve manipulation or ways that make her seem overbearing.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
University of Michigan is a "Tree Campus"
I didn't know what I wanted to write about this week in my blog entries, but I was looking at the Ann Arbor News online, and came across an editorial that sparked my attention. It was titled, Editorial: U-M is a natural for "Tree Campus" honor and can be found at this website: http://www.mlive.com/annarbornews/opinion/index.ssf/2008/11/um_is_a_natural_for_tree_campu.html. Growing up in Ann Arbor, and now going to college at the University of Michigan, I was always aware that this city had a lot of pride for the numberous trees it contained. I had no idea, however, what a "tree campus" even was. In reading this editorial, I learned that "The Arbor Day Foundation has introduced a new program for colleges called Tree Campus USA." The University of Michigan has met the requirments for becoming a "Tree Campus" and was awarded such standing last Thursday, November 13.
This recognizes U of M's contribution and awareness of the importance of trees in developed settings. "This recognition helps to highlight the interaction of the city and the campus into a broader urban forest." The author of the editorial makes the argument that since the Tree Campus program is open to any two or four year accredited university, the University of Michigan serves as a good model for other universities to adopt the program.
Although this is a good argument, I think it could be much stronger if it was supported with more evidence that adopting the "Tree Campus" program is important for our environment. It is stated within the editorial that "trees absorb carbon dioxide and generate oxygen; they help protect soil and water; they provide wildlife habitat and food; they offer a connection to the natural world; and so on." This information is not cited, however, as coming from a credible source (no extrinsic proof). If it were, the argument that trees serve as great importance to our environment would be stronger and also more persuasive.
I am in an environment class right now that discusses ecological issues occuring in the world today, and we have actually learned a lot about urbanization and deforestation. I have learned about numerous issues that come from urban sprawl and deforestation, one of them being that with less and less trees, we are releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Of course, the editorial states that trees absorb CO2, but goes into no detail about how this actually effects us when trees are not in abundance. From what I learned in class, when a tree is cut down, carbon dioxide is then not only not absorbed by where that tree used to be, but more CO2 is released into the atmosphere from what was once being stored in the tree that was cut down.
Many people might know this, but they might now know the effects increased CO2 in our atmosphere has on the environment. It leads to global warming, which in turn changes weather patterns, precipitation levels, sea levels, and much more, as I learned in my environment class. Stating some of these effects in the editorial would help make a stronger argument that more universities need to be conscious of trees.
When I read about "Tree Campuses," I thought that it was a great program that should certainly be adopted at more universities than just U of M. I think this is a very good idea that deserves more attention, because it brings us one step closer to making more people environmentally conscious.
This recognizes U of M's contribution and awareness of the importance of trees in developed settings. "This recognition helps to highlight the interaction of the city and the campus into a broader urban forest." The author of the editorial makes the argument that since the Tree Campus program is open to any two or four year accredited university, the University of Michigan serves as a good model for other universities to adopt the program.
Although this is a good argument, I think it could be much stronger if it was supported with more evidence that adopting the "Tree Campus" program is important for our environment. It is stated within the editorial that "trees absorb carbon dioxide and generate oxygen; they help protect soil and water; they provide wildlife habitat and food; they offer a connection to the natural world; and so on." This information is not cited, however, as coming from a credible source (no extrinsic proof). If it were, the argument that trees serve as great importance to our environment would be stronger and also more persuasive.
I am in an environment class right now that discusses ecological issues occuring in the world today, and we have actually learned a lot about urbanization and deforestation. I have learned about numerous issues that come from urban sprawl and deforestation, one of them being that with less and less trees, we are releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Of course, the editorial states that trees absorb CO2, but goes into no detail about how this actually effects us when trees are not in abundance. From what I learned in class, when a tree is cut down, carbon dioxide is then not only not absorbed by where that tree used to be, but more CO2 is released into the atmosphere from what was once being stored in the tree that was cut down.
Many people might know this, but they might now know the effects increased CO2 in our atmosphere has on the environment. It leads to global warming, which in turn changes weather patterns, precipitation levels, sea levels, and much more, as I learned in my environment class. Stating some of these effects in the editorial would help make a stronger argument that more universities need to be conscious of trees.
When I read about "Tree Campuses," I thought that it was a great program that should certainly be adopted at more universities than just U of M. I think this is a very good idea that deserves more attention, because it brings us one step closer to making more people environmentally conscious.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Who do I believe?
I was reading for my argumentative writing class again today, when I noticed something similar that Aristotle mentions in "The Aim of Man." He states, "A man judges and is called a good judge of the things about which he knows. If he has been educated in a particular subject he is a good judge of that subject" (Aristotle pg. 653 from A World of Ideas). The reason this struck my attention was because it was exactly what I wrote about in my blog entry yesterday. People often quote experts on a subject when writing papers on that subject. It provides "extrinsic proof" that allows a writer to better establish their ethos, or character. This is effective because a person who is an "expert" on a subject is thought of to be highly educated on a particular topic and as Aristotle mentions, "a good judge of that subject."
As I was thinking about this, I thought about a particular time in my life that provided me with proof that what many accomplished writers were stating about extrinsic proofs was indeed true. It was not difficult to come up with numerous occasions where this could be applied to my own life, but I will limit this blog entry to one example: I am a part of the swim team for the University of Michigan, and a few weeks ago after one morning practice, we had a team meeting. My coach decided it would be beneficial for all of us to hear about recovery, so she took the liberty of looking up statistics, facts, and information on the internet to share with us and prove to us that we needed to sleep to aid in our recovery process. It was never shared with us where this information was coming from, and knowing the background my coach has as a German major, I was not compelled to accept everything she was teaching us. On the contrary, I am also in a Neurobiology of Sleep class right now where we had a lecture on the restoration and recovery that occurs in sleep. A doctor specializing in sleep came in to present this information, and was indeed given an introduction of his accomplishments and studies, etc. before he began to lecture. Everything he said that day, I believed without questioning.
So now I get to my point; in the same week, I had almost all of the same information given to me about certain processes of sleep, but it was far easier to accept the information that was presented by an expert on the subject. This is just an simple example I came up with of how providing extrinsic proof can help build a better argument.
As I was thinking about this, I thought about a particular time in my life that provided me with proof that what many accomplished writers were stating about extrinsic proofs was indeed true. It was not difficult to come up with numerous occasions where this could be applied to my own life, but I will limit this blog entry to one example: I am a part of the swim team for the University of Michigan, and a few weeks ago after one morning practice, we had a team meeting. My coach decided it would be beneficial for all of us to hear about recovery, so she took the liberty of looking up statistics, facts, and information on the internet to share with us and prove to us that we needed to sleep to aid in our recovery process. It was never shared with us where this information was coming from, and knowing the background my coach has as a German major, I was not compelled to accept everything she was teaching us. On the contrary, I am also in a Neurobiology of Sleep class right now where we had a lecture on the restoration and recovery that occurs in sleep. A doctor specializing in sleep came in to present this information, and was indeed given an introduction of his accomplishments and studies, etc. before he began to lecture. Everything he said that day, I believed without questioning.
So now I get to my point; in the same week, I had almost all of the same information given to me about certain processes of sleep, but it was far easier to accept the information that was presented by an expert on the subject. This is just an simple example I came up with of how providing extrinsic proof can help build a better argument.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Listen to the higher authority
This week in my argumentative writing textbook, I was reading about something called "extrinsic proofs." An extrinsic proof is a piece of evidence that already exists; it does not need to be invented by a rhetor to help persuade someone, but needs to be decided on by a rhetor how to use the proof in their argument. Extrinsic proofs are things such as data, testimonies, and facts, for example (Crowley, 267). They are used frequently in any type of argument and I think they are extremely effective.
When reading about them, I immediately thought of the numerous papers I have had to write for assignments in school. In almost every scholarly paper I have written, I have been forced to provide my audience with evidence that helps promote my argument. Often times this means quoting someone of high authority on the subject my paper is about or providing primary sources such as interviews. Although not everything you read is true just because it has been written down, it helps to "try to cite an authority whenever we make a point that might be misunderstood or contested by an audience" (Crowley, 274). If someone of higher authority agrees with my argument, quoting that person helps promote my own authority as a writer. As Crowley states in my argumentative writing textbook, "to quote from sources also suggests that we have read rhetorical authorities carefully, which reinforces our ethos" (272). If a writer's ethos (character) is reinforced, then the audience is bound to trust what he or she is writing, closing the distance between the author and the reader (a good rhetorical strategy I talked about in a previous blog entry).
Hopefully by now you've all caught on to what I was trying to accomplish in the previous paragraph. If you haven't, I referred to Sharon Crowley numerous times to establish my own ethos. Had I not done this, majority of my readers would not have known whether or not to believe what I was saying. By quoting Sharon Crowley, the author of my argumentative writing textbook, my argument was made stronger that providing evidence from someone of higher authority helps our own ethos as a writer. Since Crowley is the author of an argumentative writing textbook, it can be assumed that she is an authority surrounding the topic of rhetoric, and by quoting her, my argument is made stronger because it agrees with what I was trying to say.
When reading about them, I immediately thought of the numerous papers I have had to write for assignments in school. In almost every scholarly paper I have written, I have been forced to provide my audience with evidence that helps promote my argument. Often times this means quoting someone of high authority on the subject my paper is about or providing primary sources such as interviews. Although not everything you read is true just because it has been written down, it helps to "try to cite an authority whenever we make a point that might be misunderstood or contested by an audience" (Crowley, 274). If someone of higher authority agrees with my argument, quoting that person helps promote my own authority as a writer. As Crowley states in my argumentative writing textbook, "to quote from sources also suggests that we have read rhetorical authorities carefully, which reinforces our ethos" (272). If a writer's ethos (character) is reinforced, then the audience is bound to trust what he or she is writing, closing the distance between the author and the reader (a good rhetorical strategy I talked about in a previous blog entry).
Hopefully by now you've all caught on to what I was trying to accomplish in the previous paragraph. If you haven't, I referred to Sharon Crowley numerous times to establish my own ethos. Had I not done this, majority of my readers would not have known whether or not to believe what I was saying. By quoting Sharon Crowley, the author of my argumentative writing textbook, my argument was made stronger that providing evidence from someone of higher authority helps our own ethos as a writer. Since Crowley is the author of an argumentative writing textbook, it can be assumed that she is an authority surrounding the topic of rhetoric, and by quoting her, my argument is made stronger because it agrees with what I was trying to say.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)