ARGUMENT VERSA AGREEMENT

      What is Rogerian argument?  An argument is just that, or is it?  When you write a paper trying to stress or argue your own point of view you may run into a  lot of different views and opinions.

     Rogerian  is a conflict solving technique based on finding a common ground instead of an  opposing debate. A way to solving complicated problems and to negotiate differences.  Common goals are identified and opposing views are described as objectively as possible in an effort to establish common ground and reach agreement.

     No two points of view are alike. Although they may have the same ideas and opinions there are always individual views as every person is individual. Our DNA is different and therefore so are our thoughts and ideas.  Indeed aren't we thankful for this for we have those individuals that has had ideas that has enhanced our world.

      So as you read papers and documents and arguments that may or may not agree, each point of view gives ideas and warrants research or consideration. Therefore the Rogerian method-seeking a mutually satisfactory solution.

INFORMATIVE SELF-REVIEW

     Upon doing my self-review check list I found I may have 'missed a few things'. It seems sometimes pointless to do these but then I found that I am using it as an outline, a checklist of sorts.

     When reading my draft I realised that I made notes of revisements that I wanted to make and then when going back over my checklist/review I caught myself saying whoa.."Did I leave this out?" So as a guideline, checklist, outline if you will it made me do a double take which is exactly what I think Mr Sentell was wanting us to do.

     As I read everyone's blogs, I see the most interesting subjects that my 'fellow students' have chosen as the choices are of a wide range. 

    So check your review, 'checklist' and enjoy this assignment.

SUGAR IS POISON

     I am writing my informative paper on the danger, and additions of sugar. I am still hung up on this.

     One paragraph is, Have you ever considered glucose and fructose in the same content with ethanol, or ethyl alcohol and the effect of them on our bodies? Ethanol is a toxin that affects the acute nervous system and is a chronic hepatoxin and it must be processed completely by the liver.  After consuming an alcoholic drink 10% gets broken down by the stomach and intestine and 10% is metabolized by the brain and other organs. The remaining 80% then goes to the liver where it must be broken down. But when you come to fructose 100% of it goes to the liver to be processed. So when you compare the metabolism of 150 calories in a soda to 150 in a beer  (12 oz can each) about 90 calories reach the liver in either case. This concludes that fructose causes most of the same toxic affects as alcohol because they both come from sugar fermentation.

     This being said its a scary thought when we really think about and consider the damages that we unknowingly cause our bodies. I am one who is addicted to diet coke and this paper has caused me a great deal of alarm and consideration.

     Its something we all could look into and consider regarding our health.

 

APPEARANCE, FOR WHOM?

     How does the appearance of our writing afftect the reader, you ask? Well I'm going to go back to the beginning of our course and use the term 'audience'. Who is the writing for? The neatness is a given I believe as we write but the order or form I feel really coverts back to the audience.

     If I were asked to write and explain say 'my afternoon at the park' the writng and form would differ greatly if I were writing it to my Grandmother than if I were writing it for my instructor. I would probably use more simple, everyday words and more in the form of a letter if it were to my Grandmother but would use more definite defining words and a 'form' such as MLA if for my instructor.

      As we read the CRAP reading, it reminds us to use the skills that we have been taught thus far and to cut the 'clutter' from your document. Messy, unkempt and nonsensical words can greatly confuse your reader and not hold their attention. Make your writing plain, remember less is more and don't confuse the reader jumping from one topic to another.

     Make sure you use the content, structure, and 'tone' that is meant for the audience in which it was intended.

THE TURNING POINT

     The article I've chosen for this assignment is called the 'The Turning Point', published in the October/November issue of AARP magazine by Bob Schieffer. As a 26 year old newspaper reporter he covered the killing of a president and 50 years later, as a veteran TV newsman he reflects on how the assassination of John F. Kennedy changed America forever.

     In summarization of this article he points out the different ways in which America changed. It changed the way we would look at our presidents in ways of thinking that they and the presidency itself was larger than life. That our presidents were invincible, and then suddenly in the prime of his life he was shot down by a madman. He points out to us why he, they, are as vulnerable as the rest of us.  He further points out that at the time we didn't know if this was a conspiracy or even the first shot to World War III. The first question undoubtedly in everyone's mind was, "Why did this happen?" "Who did it?"  and mostly "Why?"   Furthermore another big change he points out is the dramatic turning point for journalism. For the first time in the history of the country, the entire nation focused on one story and watched it unfold live on television.  Up until that weekend, the majority of Americans got their news from print. From that weekend on, television became the place where most Americans got their news.

     Bob Schieffer further states his rhetoric views in a theory that the most successful politicians are the ones who master the dominant communication medium of their time.  The founders were all great writers, they got their news about government from the written word. Roosevelt was the first to grasp radio and Kennedy was the first one to truly take advantage of the power of television.

     I feel like Schieffer did a very good job in summarising the main points of the turning points in history to future. He also analyzed the pathos of this writing when he stated in the beginning of the article that he was the first to speak with Oswald's mother. He actually picked her up and took her to the police station to see her son only hours after his arrest. So he saw the grief and distraught not only from a wounded nation but from an individual, a mother, who was also stricken and in disbelief for her son.

     I liked the writing and liked the way he used the comparsions he used in thinking of the Kennedy administration. He states, Remember how the movie The Wizard of Oz starts out in black-and-white, and then Dorothy opens her door into this vibrant Technicolor? Think of the Kennedy administration doing the same for the country.

October/November 2013 aarp.org/magazine

IS THERE A SOLUTION ?

     In today's world social media now puts 'competition' on display in a way that is much more visible than it ever was.  That kind of transparency is sometimes good but what about the bad information

that's widely dispersed and the people that may be hurt because of it? This is in thanks to the instantaneous nature of new media. The one thing that is easier to do online and even through social media than it is on-air or in print is to look at the reports and acknowledge them more appropriately and discern the true and actual facts.

 

     The media and other social institutions  are well known to provide a definition or label of events that seldom portray the whole and truthful story.  Gossip serves as the 'center of our lives'.  It is sadly the most often form of discourse, valid or not. Social institutions like the media, convey images and myths that typically serve to define reality. To know whether facts are true or fictional is a great challenge in today's society.

 

 

 

     It a fact well known that politicians sometime damage their own images by trying to tarnish others. How could this be solved? What could be the solution? One solution might be is to say it could be, or may be, or I think, or facts show this could be possible...but is this realistic? I don't think so. In the fast moving pace of media flying it seems a pretty straightforward way to misinformation but very unlikely to happen. Can you imagine a website saying, "We know you are hearing these things elsewhere. Here's what you should really know about it."  Is it as simple as that? Really?





KRUZE/KENNEL OF TRUTHS

     Fact or Fiction? As I read the document by Kruze, I observed that the fine line between facts and fabrication has been repeated as far back as politics itself. In today's world with all of our media and technology the 'words' come so fast to the public that the time to verify facts and or the justification of them is no longer an option. What is said or implied is immediately consumed and set in a person's mind or point of view.

     As politicians try to make their appeal for office they succumb to the low tactics of attack and belittling their opponents in every way they can to the point of legal but not so much that it isn't within the fine line of dishonesty. The lack of respect and morals overtake their scheer desire of
                                           winning to the degree that in winning they sometimes lose the respect
                                           of the people in which they so wanted the trust. The stories and lies and
                                           fabrications have grown so large due to the media technology we now
                                           have that a person who truly wants to know about their future political
                                           candidates would have to due extensive research on their own to clarify
                                           that the results were indeed accurate.  As quoted in a speech by President
                                           Lincoln in 1856 "The ballot is stronger than the bullet".

                                                As that quote represents and past and present elections show, political
                                          candidates would rather have their name 'drug through the mud' and win
                                         than to be a clean and moral loser. 
                                           

NEW TECHNOLOGICAL EVOLUTIONS,,

       What is technology? It is the art or skill of evolving technical devices that for, the most part, enhance our ways of life. Does it change us? Yes it changes us as a society in whole.

 

     As so many of you have pointed out in your blogs the advantages of spellcheck, texting, researching, shopping and dating online that has changes all of our lives . Everyday machines that are controlling and do control more and more aspects of our lives everyday. Mine and yours. It has literally transformed our way of thinking, writing, socializing as well as banking, shopping and online education,

 

     Process has speeded up and compressed our daily lives. Emotionally, finaancially, and socially. Food wise and time wise. I findit to hard to beleive that in all these blogs there no mention to the medical technology and the new researchs and cures that are found everyday due to the new technology of the present and future society. 

 

 The technology of ordering food has simplified our lives as we can now place orders and even pay for it online and have it delivered all from the comfort of our homes.

 

     There are new technoligical discoverys everyday, and for some of you very young students there is a percentage of you that will work in careers that have not even been invented yet. After all think about the last 30 years and who know what changes and jobs the 'next 30 years' will bring.