Peer Responses: project 1 rough draft

Ashley Currie

In your paper you talk about the chapters in the book that tell you what is a ‘good’ argument and what is a ‘bad’ argument. I like that you put that in there because it tells your readers what you are using to make judgments on the article. You tell the readers about the chapters but not a lot about the article that you are writing about. It would help your readers for if you were to write a quick summery of the article, to give the readers an idea of what the subject of your writing is going to be about and then diverge off from that throughout your paper as you did. In your writing you quoted the author and you also talked about how the author fell into fallacies to prove a point. Expanding on what type of fallacy the author used like “Red herring” or “slippery slope” fallacies. By talking about what the fallacy is and how the author is using it will strengthen your argument.


Shelby Jackson

I really enjoyed reading through your paper. You talked about the chapters in the book that you are basing your judgment on and you are quoting a lot of lines from the article which helps to strengthen your paper. In your paper you talk about the evidence the author used to make a good argument, but what I would like to see is you going in depth and explaining why the evidence makes a good argument in the article. What compelling arguments did the author make that makes use of rhetoric and what types of rhetorical devices could you talk about to make your paper stronger? Overall you wrote a very strong paper and you managed to have a very elegant  way of writing but not to state your opinion or carry over any bias. You were able to write a quick summarization of the article and inform your readers on the topic you are covering.

Argument freedom of speech

Laura Tatone
English 102
1/26/13
Freedom of Expression rough draft
In the United States, freedom of speech is used by the masses to spread information and express opinions and ideas on subjects that can have a wide impact on the audience receiving their messages. Communication among the people is important, but in some cases that communication could be going too far. There is an article called "Protecting Freedom of Expression at Harvard" written by Derek Bok where two Harvard students had hung confederate flags on campus. This display of freedom of speech had offended some students who had associated the flags with the act of slavery and had triggered another student to hang up a flag with a swastika out of retaliation. When someone puts something on display, in this case flags, they are trying to send out a message to those that see it. When that message could be seen as being harmful or inconsiderate, people tend to try to get those messages shut down or removed. In many cases people wonder how far is too far when dealing with freedom of speech. Derek's argues that some people might find the message offensive, but that doesn't necessarily warrant its removal.
In his argument, Derek talks about how the Confederate flag and the swastika brought out debate and disagreement within the University. The flags themselves draw out very powerful emotions, such as slavery for the Confederacy flag and the Nazi party for the Swastika flag. By talking about these flags Derek tries to make an emotional appeal to his audience with them. The flags obviously have a large amount of heavy negative symbolism behind them, but he talks about how the messages from the students could have been misinterpreted. He bases his article on the subjects of the flags because the image of the flags strikes up emotions in people. These emotions help draw his audience into reading the rest of his article.
Derek argues in his article that the right of freedom of speech is important and to censor some freedom of speech because it is offensive is uncalled for. He does state that he believes that there could have been a better way for the students to get their message across then the display that they chose to showcase their message. He states that the students were insensitive with their display, and that those offending by the display outweighed whatever gratification the students had by hanging up the flags. By talking about how he was dissatisfied with the way the students presented their displays of freedom of speech he is sympathizing   with the part of his audience that views the students’ behavior as wrong and helps him obtain some credibility in that he can see the flaws in their actions.
He goes on in his article to how in a Supreme Court case, the use of both of these types of flags to express freedom of speech falls under the protection of the First Amendment. The students had the right to hang the flags, but the how they chose to display their message was unwise and distasteful. This referral of the Supreme Court case helps him to show his readers the reasoning and logic behind how the students were within their rights to express their messages to the public. Nearing the end of his article he talks about how it would be beneficial to educate the students on how there actions affect those around them. He believes that the students would respond better to reasoning and understanding then to ridicule and disagreement by their school and peers.
Protecting Freedom of Expression is important in the United States. In this article Derek Bok argued on how freedom of speech at Harvard is important, but in the right context. There are right and wrong ways to express messages to the public. In this case at Harvard the students were well within their right to express their opinions, but the way they went about using their right to free speech was distasteful. Derek uses the argument styles of ethos, pathos, and logos to increase the argument that freedom of expression is important in his article.

Old work: Ethos, Pathos, Logos

For my English 101 course, one of our assignments was to analysis a news paper article. The article that I chose to analysis was called “The Science of Siblings” written by Jeffery Kluger. When writing about the article I talked about what the article’s purpose was, the audience in which article was aiming at, and what studies were used in the article to make their points valid.
In my article I stuck with primarily Ethos to get my point across to my readers. When talking about the studies the article used to draw their points, I used the names and work places of people that took part in the studies. I talked about these people to show that the article I was analyzing was credible and that the studies where tested  by professionals that the reader could trust in.
In my article I also used a small amount of Logos while talking about why someone would want to read about the articles and the studies talking about in it. By using simple logic I was able to guess what the target audience of the article was and why they would want to read the article.
While I used Ethos and Logos in my analysis of this article I did not use Pathos in my assignment. Pathos is meant to draw on the feelings of a person and while writing my analysis I did not do that. I stuck mainly with things within the original article that could make my assignment credible and logical.

Not Just Thinking: Running

In the second Article of ‘Not Just Words’ there is a picture of a man running along a very long road. Underneath the picture there is a caption saying “QUALITY. The race for quality has no finish line. So technically, it’s more like a death march.”
The overall point of this message is that quality is a concept that can not be reached. To be perfect is an illusion, and to try chasing after it will only set yourself up for failure. Quality in a thing might be ideal, but it is not practical.
This message’s audience is people that are constantly struggling to reach an ideal that will only hurt them in the long run. Yes, it is important to do as much as you can to achieve what you want, but there comes a point where it is impractical to strive for any higher.
The words tell the reader the message that is trying to be put out there, but the image accompanying the words, hits home the full meaning behind what is being said. The person seeing the man running with no finish line in sight and they feel how much chasing after high ideals can lead to death. Whether it be motivation to make something of high quality or knowing when an ability for making something of high quality is at the finest is going to reach.
This poster would be an example of an appeal to logic. Logically you  wouldn’t run a race  that will lead you down a path of destruction, and by appealing that thought to a way of thinking, you wouldn’t want to set yourself up for that following quality either.

Not Just Words: Flag

In the first article of ‘Not Just Words’ we are presented with a picture of the United States flag. Upon closer inspection of the flag the stars are swapped out with famous logos of companies and corporations found within the United States.
When someone looks at the American flag or thinks about the United States in general, they often will associate the US with hard working people, free will, and good intentions.  When looking at the flag and then seeing the companies implanted in the flag, it conveys those feelings to the companies.
By using this association of emotions on the flag it is using a rhetoric strategy of sending a message through a person’s feelings. This strategy is a message by Pathos or emotional appeal.
Another way that same setup could be looked at is by giving those companies a sense of credibility, or in other words Ethos. Since these logos are also from famous high ranking companies, it could also be seen that America is made up of successful corporations. By putting the companies on the flag, it is trying to imply to it’s audience that America supports those companies and that as an American, you should support them too.
This image doesn’t do much in the form of Logos, which is logical appeal, but that doesn’t mean that it is any less symbolic.
If I were to give this image a caption, I would give it something along the lines of “ Hard work keeps this country running.”