Blog Posting # 6

I think the discussion today about the differences between print and web was really interesting; especially when we broke the web into two different categories, 1.0 and 2.0. I think print and philosophers go hand in hand. People are a lot more reluctant to publish something in a book, and it’s a lot harder to find someone to publish your work, if you are writing about non sense. With the internet and rhetoric era people are just trying to persuade one another that they have knowledge they might or in most cases might not have. I made the argument in class that sites such as Wikipedia are probably pretty safe because people wouldn’t waste their time writing about something unless they were passionate and knowledgeable on the subject. However, as the day went on and I continued to think about that, I take my statement back. I think there are enough bored, ignorant people out there that would just put information on open forum sites because they have the power too. They are trying to convince themselves as much as they are trying to convince others that they know what they are talking about. I have come to find that people argue, just to argue, regardless of if there is a point… It is examples like these that make the internet less credible and dangerous for children. I am glad we have started switching to the 2.0 version of the web because I think it gives a lot of intelligent people a way to speak out and share their intelligence. Sites such as wikipedia can be a good reference point as long as people remember to use a filter when reading the information. The responsibility of patrolling kids on the internet is in the hands of parents AND teachers. If a child is chatting online or looking at their myspace I think that is more geared toward the parents’ responsibility. But as far as teaching students how to find credible research sites, that is something teachers should show them.

Blog Posting #5

Honestly, I think Humanism is the most difficult concept we have discussed this far in this class. Especially when you try to determine whether or not humanism should be recognized as a religion. Humanism doesn’t seem all that different to me that the way a lot of people practice religion. If humanism ultimately means seeking out personal happiness and happiness for others, I think that is the way a lot of people view religion on the surface. I understand that the bible sometimes asks you to overcome difficulties and to take the “hard” path in order to avoid sin and this will not always make you happy but I see a lot of similarities, too. If you describe humanism simply it doesn’t seem that abstract—I mean isn’t everyone trying to obtain happiness and most people enjoy making others happy too. The part that confused me is I think this is more a way of life than a religion. But then it makes me question, isn’t religion a way of life? Composition allows humanists to get their ideas out into society and to further their thoughts. Without composition people could still verbalize their ideas, however as we have already learned nothing reaches as many people or survives history like written work. As far as choosing an artifact for our rhetorical analysis… I haven’t decided on one yet. I was hoping to read everyone’s’ blogs to get some ideas. There are a lot of things that I think are persuasive but I’m struggling to find one that interests me. I think this assignment could be a lot of fun if you choose an artifact you actually care about. I welcome any suggestions you aren’t using!

Blog Posting #4

I think understanding rhetoric affects every part of a persons life. It not only helps you understand yourself and why you do and say certain things, but it also helps you better decipher what others are trying to communicate to you. Before I was familiar with rhetoric communication, both emotionally and logically, was very one dimensional. I didn’t think much about the meaning behind what I say or more importantly what others were saying to me. I think rhetoric is more accepted within “formal” relationships, for example between you and a co-worker, or a boss, or a professor. You understand that going to work and school means people are using their language to teach and persuade you of something. What it has really changed for me is the communication between people I feel very comfortable with, like friends, family and/or a spouse. Its with these people that I thought I said what I really meant to say without any type of persuasion involved. It has really made me question what I am trying to get from certain relationships by the way I use language. Its important to understand rhetoric in order to successfully communicate with anyone, regardless of the relationship or situation.