Nisbet article

Nisbet and Mooney offer some advice when trying to convince the general public of the scientific stand on such controversial topics as stem cell research. They suggest that just using Logos is not enough to convince the public, “as research shows that people are rarely well enough informed or motivated to weigh competing ideas and arguments.” Instead they propose a technique they describe as “framing” where one focuses on “central ideas, defining a controversy to resonate with core values and assumptions.” This is supposed to simplify the issue for the audience, enabling a previously indifferent person to find value in the controversy. I feel that the audience for this article must be an educated one (maybe only scientists and those involved in the funding of certain studies), as the description of their tactics as “Orwellian” implies manipulation of the facts in order to control the public.

Personally, I find the last line disturbing. I agree that the general public may be ignorant of the technical aspects of scientific research, but to go so far as to suggest that scientists should go against their ethical code seems almost a step in the wrong direction. A scientist’s role has been to elucidate the public on the hidden secrets of the universe, not to skew the public’s perception of the natural world. If anything, there are public relations specialists qualified enough to manage the campaign of this distorted message, and scientists should maintain a separation from the propaganda and their work in order to maintain academic integrity.

Heinrich/Carson Readings

Carson's explosive imagery at the introduction of the text is an example of pathos - her words create vivid images in the mind, and as Heinrich said, sight is mostly pathos. She is trying to gain an emotional lead on her audience, making them imagine a time when things are as beautiful as she makes them. Carson then employs logos at the end of her argument, using Heinrich's tactic of making it look like your view is not opposite of theirs, as well as using "reverse words." Carson says that "it is not my intention that chemical insecticides must never be used." (p.22) Heinrich uses the example of a husband who says, "I'm not saying that dress makes you look fat - it just doesn't make you look skinny." Carson attempts to convince the reader that she is not opposed to the idea of insecticides being used. She knows her readers would not give her any credibility if she was because insecticides do a lot of good. She then goes on to say that "we have put poisonous and biologically potent chemicals ... into the hands of person largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials for harm," presenting no emotions, but hard facts. This tactic is known to make audiences question their actions without having a speaker actually tell them what they are doing is wrong. This approach is similarly taken in the well-known "truth" ads that simply present the facts and consequences of smoking without telling anyone that it's wrong to smoke.

Heinrichs and Carson Readings

I feel the start of the first chapter shows a deliberate use of pathos, as the audience at the time was led to believe that this situation could happen to anyone at anytime. This represented the heart of America; striking at America meant an attack on our pride. Logos is used throughout the argument, using knowledge of Strontium 90 and other types of pollution to persuade the reader that the author knows the subject matter well enough to formulate a reasonable opinion. A commonplace employed was the view that the public had about nuclear weapons. The audience at the time would have feared a nuclear attack from our enemies at the time; annihilation by these non-conventional weapons was a shared fear here in the United States. Something that I might point out was the Dust Bowl from the 30s. The desire to expand farms and produce more and more is part of what led to this national disaster. Surely the audience at the time would have been knowledgeable of this from school or their parents. This would make the statement on overproduction (which in the 30s led to depletion of suitable topsoil) reasonable and relevant to the audience at the time.

Heinrichs and Carson Readings

I guess I can see her using rhetorical strategies such as ethos, pathos and logos throughout the article, especially at the end of article when she talks about the use of chemical insecticides. She started her arguments by asking questions like “who would want to live in a world which is just not quite fatal?” and provided evidences by quoting other people’s studies; here she used the Connecticut entomologist Neely Turner’s work. Then, she used pathos to get an emotional response out of her audience by saying how “future generations” are not going to forgive our lack of prudent concern for the integrity of the nature world. Also, she employed some pathos in the first chapter by telling a story of “a town where all life seemed to live in harmony with its surroundings,” but then “everything in town started to change because of mysterious maladies and death.” He made up this story of a town that does not actually exist in order to bring up people’s emotion and concerns about the reality issue that this might be easily happening to our current society.

Heinrich and Carson Readings

This is really ironic that we are reading about Rachel Carson, being that I first learned of her book and her efforts to save the planet in my Advanced Placement Environmental Science class in high school. In my opinion Carson uses lots of argumentative techniques to get her point across about the use of pesticides and the pollution to the environment. One major use of pathos was when she talked about the writers of The Bill of Rights and how they could not have foreseen the problems of the current die of pollution and the destroying of our natural environment. A instance of ethos in this writing is that she understands that she wants to people to use less insecticides but that in some cases it must be used. As this writing relates to the Heinrich readings, Carson uses commonplaces to connect with the readers in addition to code-grooming, especially when she refers to WWII, chemicals, radiation, and Darwin. When she uses these commonplaces and codes she is making use of logos and ethos by establishing credibility and giving evidence that insecticides can be dangerous to humans.

Heinrichs and Carson Readings

Carson applies logos frequently to discuss the facts concerning the extent of the environmental problems caused by mankind. She incorporates irrefutable scientific information into her argument by explaining the studies performed by the British ecologist Charles Elton and entomologist Neely Turner. She then utilizes pathos to draw concern from the reader. Her claim that the writers of the Bill of Rights could not anticipate the problems facing the environment causes the reader to question the individual rights protected by the government and to evaluate the severity of the matter. She also focuses on the safety of the general public by arguing that most people are unaware of the many pollutants that they come in contact with without their consent. The use and development of pesticides was a common issue during the time period and Carson uses familiar terms to offer a commonplace for her arguments and to relate to her audience. DDT was probably the more controversial pesticide during the time period because it was used widely and uncontrollably. Her arguments evaluate the benefits and detrimental effects of technological developments on nature and cite the spread of diseases by unnatural causes as a source of her support.

Heinrichs and Carson Readings

We're going to look at Carson in terms of how she put her argument together. So, see if you can identify some of the rhetorical strategies that she's using by considering some the techniques that Heinrichs has explained. Where do you see here using ethos (or doing to things to establish her own credibility as well as the credibility of her argument), pathos (trying to get an emotional response out of her audience), or logos (logical or factual arguments). Where do you see her using commonplaces or codes, appealing to the values of her audience? Where do you see her using the context (this was written in 1962, most of her readers lived through WWII, the atomic bomb, space travel was beginning to seem possible, lots of technological and scientific advances in general)? Are there any major concepts that seem to theme her argument? Anything that you note about how these two chapters are put together is worth commenting about. It also might help you that the 2 chapters I gave you are the first two chapters in a book-length argument about pesticides, Silent Spring.

Heinrichs pp 38-78

I would certainly focus on the social aspect (things that every party goer does) with my best friend. This would differ with my mother, as I would reassure her of my responsible actions during the party. To establish decorum, I would mention to my friend that I participated in a ceremonial barrel ritual, bringing life to the party with my display of courage, as well as defending the honor of our tribe by ingesting large quantities of antiseptic. Virtue would come from my response to the inevitable question of my well-being the next day. I would say that the visions and vertigo were a rite of passage, and that I can now call myself a man. As for my mother, I would explain that during the night I chose to consume as little elixir as possible, for I needed to stay alert throughout the night. I would even talk about the ruse when I substituted the barley and hops cocktail with that of a purified form, free of any contaminants. I would then end with my explanation that I found the company to be a little boorish, and I would regretfully decline an RSVP invitation to another hooligan celebration.

Heinrichs pp 3-37

According to Heinrichs, "rhetoric is the art of influence, friendship, and eloquence, of ready wit and irrefutable logic." My ideas were a little different, as I took rhetoric as the bland style of arguing; I saw no art in it. In the offense category, I have to admit that it is all pretty new to me. I especially found interesting the part where Heinrichs writes about getting the audience to make a choice in the argument. This would be particularly useful in everyday dealings with friends. There are little debates ranging from what to eat to where to shop; someone is always complaining about being left out. Persuading them to make a choice about the situation will help prevent the bad vibes resulting from a less than desirable outcome for those particular individuals.

Michelle Okeke pg 79-133

I have a coworker who often employs what Heinrich calls "setting a backfire." She is a very manipulative person, and I have watched as she uses this tactic to gain the sympathy of our lead and make everyone laugh and forget the horrible mistake she just made. To show what I mean, let me offer an example. We work in the retail industry, and often she and I have to go help out with customer service stuff, like doing returns, or processing payments. There was one particular day when she did an incorrect return, and she made sure everyone knew. Not only that, she kept saying, "Oh my gosh, I'm so horrible, I should just go home, I am so horrible, I shouldn't even be allowed to do this anymore," COMPLETELY exaggerating something that was completely reversible. She OFTEN does this, and it drives me insane, because she ALWAYS gets away with it. Anyway, I think I actually may be more upset that I try to do it, and it doesn't quite work for me.

Michelle Okeke pg. 38-78

My mother has always been the type of woman who wants me to be honest with her. She's made some mistakes in her life, and she would rather I tell her about the mistakes that I've made than act as if I am flawless in college. As far as this party goes, I would probably tell her everything but the VERY JUICIEST details, and since this is me we're talking about, I wouldn't have been leaving out much. That way, my mom and I could laugh at the stupid stuff, and she could attempt to lecture me on the rest.

If I was telling my friends about this college party, I would most definitely make sure that they got the few, juicy details cleverly weaved into the mundane activities of the party, so as to hold and keep their attention.

Heinrich Reading

The media is constantly using pathos, the appeal of emotion. Many of the ideas people but into are sold on our constant rash of emotions. Consumers constantly buy products that they are made to believe that they need by the media. The government uses fear appeals to rally support for troops and wars and they use fear appeals to gain support for their political campaigns. The use of pathos is all around us, and I think it is really interesting how we know we are being manipulated via pathos appeal, yet we give into it all of the time.

Heinrichs Pg. 79-133

I know that this post is late however I can explain why...very long weekend.

I understand that it is ok to have disagreements this is apart of life, but when a whole group of people have a huge disagreement that could end relationships, it becomes a huge dilemma of who's right or wrong.

This past weekend was a great example of this when my boyfriend and group of best friends(we have all known each other since 7th grade) got into an argument because of me. Neither side could control their volume therefore their voices escalated and with that anger arisen because people didn't have self-control of their emotions. I felt really bad because I really didn't take a stance at the beginning of the argument which made me seem both nonchalant and uncaring towards my best friends' feelings when all I wanted to do was stay out of the cross fire. But what happens when you try to persuade to both sides that they are all wrong, their arguments are irrelevant, and only one side is persuaded and the other one not? I think that you may have lost some very close friends, or at least that what happened to me.

Heinrichs p79-133

Survival, an international organization, is a movement for the protection of the rights of tribal people. This pro-tribal peoples organization believes that public opinion, and eventually public action, are powerful in bringing about beneficial change for these people. While we consider progress and advancement to be good for humanity and society, this is not the case for tribal people whose lands are being taken away from them. The idea or belief that progress is good is commonplace for us but not so much for tribal peoples. The website provides information, consisting of facts, statistics, stories and examples, on how progress is harmful for these people. And the audiences’ emotions are appealed by images of young and innocent tribal children displayed all over the website. In this case, a combination of both pathos and logos are used to appeal to the public.

Nature- Muir, Thoreau, Abbey

I thought all essays were interesting and brought up good points about nature, but Abbey was my favorite writer. While thoreau's vision of nature itself was mostly positive, his essay was a bit hard to follow and jumped around too much and he was unfair with humans. He seemed a bit too extreme in his opinions, offering that nature was better than anything created by humans. While I agree for the most part, I think it's important to keep an open mind and appreciate human creations, after all we are part of nature. I enjoyed reading Muir's story because his message was very positive, but it was my least favorite due to the fact that he had a less realistic view of nature. Abbey on the other hand, was my favorite writer because he presented his story as a hopeful advocate of change during his years as a park ranger, until he saw the demise of the natural park as demanded by society's selfish request for 'adequate' parks -paved and 'civilized.' Also, though in start disagreement to my preferred state of mind, Abbey's negative opinion in the end was realistic and a product of what he had witnessed, a premise that I feel is important as an eye-opener for those who fail to consider the real threats to nature.

p. 77-133

Heinrich says that when you want to change someone's mood, you should tell a story. This makes perfect sense. For the past few days, I have been watching Dexter the TV series. I have watched probably 15 episodes in 3 days. I'm hooked. Anyways, Dexter has some issues. He doesn't want other people to know about his thoughts and what he does in his spare time. One of the detectives that works with him always seems to know something is wrong with Dexter. Dexter always has to change the subject to get this detective off his case. In one episode I watched today, Dexter was about to get caught by this detective. He stopped what he was doing, and when he was asked why his apartment looked so messy, he said that he had lost his remote. The detective didn't seem to believe him. He then went into a story about how he couldn't find it, and what was happening. This seemed to have him convinced. Dexter is very good at using pathos, logos, and ethos to deter any suspicion. He knows how to persuade people and how to convince them that he is just a normal guy. He uses these tactics very well.

Heinrich's pg 77-133

Throughout the three chapters Heinrich's goes over pathos and logos.

Pathos: making an emotional appeal
Logos: using a logical appeal

An emotional appeal seems to have more of an affect on an audience. The person making the argument might include tid-bits of anger, patriotism, and emulation.

Take for example, the growing culture of martyrdom. In the Middle East, there is a negative sentiment towards the United States that is fueled by the foreign policies' one sided tilt towards Israel. People have risen up to claim that it is an injustice and something must be done. By committing altruistic acts such as suicide attacks as a type of redemption that is for the greater good of the movement. The culture has been influenced by the feeling of despair and they tend to agree with extremists. Even though a lot of emotional appeal is used, they don't neglect to mention the "common place" that becomes the assumption of an ideal that generally becomes widely accepted. (Death to America, to the infidels)

Because America sides with Israel and neglects the needs of Arab countries, they need to make concession through the spread of fear and death. That is the accepted reality that can be seen in the Middle East.

The elements that make up ethos and logos can be seen in many campaigns that are used to spread fear through terror.

Heinrichs Pg/ 79-133

I absolutely hate flipping through the channels late at night, and coming across the commercials of the cats and dogs in animal shelters. The commercials show helpless animals in animal shelters with these sad looking face and music in the background that just makes your heart melt. These commercials use pathos to appeal to the emotions of its audience. They use the faces of innocent cats and dogs to get you to donate money to their organization to help these helpless animals. The commercials tell you that with just a certain amount everyday that you (the audience) can do a big difference in the lives of these precious creatures that do not have home. These commercials use pathos very seductively to gain your attention and the urge to want to donate and help.

Heinrichs pp 79-133

President Obama has chosen to employ significant amounts of logos to convince America that his healthcare plan would work. As Heinrich states on page 123, “the tools of logos let you apply facts, values and attitudes towards a particular problem.” (Heinrich, 123) President Obama employed this perfectly in a recent interview with ABC news saying that “The country has to reform its health care system or else not only are you going to continue to have people really going through a hard time, we’re also going see a continuing escalation of our budget problems that can’t get under control,” Obama told Moran, “I think America has to win it here.” (ABC news online) I think his statement here was very logical. He stated that if we do not act now on healthcare, then there will be negative consequences. Furthermore, he employed some pathos by appealing to audiences (American) that they are going through a hard time. He knows that Americans DO worry about themselves and their family during these hard economic times. And saying something like this not only shows the logic in his actions, but also it appeals to our values as well

Heinrichs Pg. 79-133

In past years we have seen "Feed the Children" commercials in which they show images of children who are malnourished. The organization shows children with extremely skinny bodies, no clean water to drink, and various other harsh conditions. They have appealed to the audiences emotional and sympathetic side thru the use of pathos. However in the end the commercials tactics change from pathos to logos. The organization presents various ways on how the audiences little donations can go a long way in improving the life of these children. Therefore "Feed the Children" have gone from appealing to emotion using pathos to reasoning thru the use of logos.

Heinrichs page 79-133

In the Truth cigarette commercials, an interviewer posing for a cigarette company presents a customer service scenario to a prospective employee. He pretends to be a customer who calls the company to complain about the negative side effects that he is experiencing from smoking the brand of cigarettes. The interviewee apologizes and struggles to respond to the situation. The commercial uses logos to discuss the proven side effects of cigarette smoking and applies pathos to incite anger and disgust from the audience. Pathos serves its purpose by using the individual's personal experience to influence someone's views about the cigarette company.

Heinrich's pp. 79-133

On June 11, President Obama was giving a press conference in a town hall in Wisconsin talking about the Economy. A young girl had missed class on her last day of school just to be able to see the president. As a result, Obama made sure that the young girl left with a note to excuse her from school. I thought that the president used facetious humor because he was making jokes about writing the little girl a note while the father of the girl thought Obama was joking. As a result, the President was cracking jokes, which made the whole audience laugh. The father of the little girl had asked a question regarding what is the time line they have set up working with employers to draw from more insurance or being able to get something for the uninsured now. Obama was able to distract the audience for a little while. By telling the joke the President was able to change the audience’s mood by also using logic. First, he was speaking in front of a large crowd and he was able persuade his audience by expressing more of his emotion at the end when he was answering the question.

Heinrichs pp79-133

I remember watching the debates during the presidential campaign. One of the more memorable events was during one of the first 2008 Democratic primary debates on MSNBC. Joe Biden was questioned about his knack for saying things that spark controversy and become fuel for his political opponents. Biden was asked if he could reassure voters that he would be able to control this particular aspect of his personality on an international level as the position of president would require. Rather than give a lengthy explanation, Biden used "wit" as Heinrichs describes. The situational humor allowed Biden to sway the audience his way, making the viewers forget that he hadn't really offered a reasonable response.

Biden's response to the question-- "yes."

Heinrichs pp 79-133

As you read through Heinrich's sections on pathos and logos, consider whether you've seen some of his tactics being used either in your personal experience or in things you've seen on TV, in the media, etc. Explain your example and use Heinrich's terminology to explain how the rhetorical strategy worked.

Nature: As Seen by 3 Authors

Muir, Thoreau and Abbey have a relatively different outlook on nature through their pieces of writing. I liked Muir's the best because I feel like his representation of nature was the best. It seemed as if he had a higher understanding of nature and portrays it as pure and positive. His purpose was to make people appreciate nature and all it has to offer, instead of viewing it as violent and destructive. The overall feeling I got from him was the sense that nature was the ultimate representation of God. On the other hand, Thoreau was argumentative and criticized alot throughout his piece. I got a negative feeling from his writing for the simple fact that he was accusing society of being over civilized and not connected with nature on any level. He did however portray nature as giving strength and providing stability. Last, Abbey was pretty simple to me because the message I got was to respect nature in it's current state, and no civilization should be added to it. Muir was my favorite because he took nature to a whole different level through his vivid descriptions and language choice. He honestly made me want to go admire tree's in the forest to get the same experiences in which he speaks of.

Heinrichs, pp 38-78

Considering that I haven’t been to a real college party, I wouldn’t have much trouble telling my mom about any party that I have been to. Assuming that I did, I would of course try showing her that I am the wonderful, nice kid that she raised. I would omit details like how many drinks I had, what drugs I tried, how many girls I hit on, how many guys I kissed (I thought they were girls with Adam’s apples), and how often I scored. I would probably stick to details such as how many wonderful, decent people I met there, how many new friends I made, what the place was like, and what we ate, and what board games we enjoyed before heading home at 9:45 pm to get a good night’s sleep.

To my friends, I would mention all the details that I omitted with mom. I would even think about making up some details (like how I drenched myself in alcohol, set myself on fire, only to find out the pool had no water in it, and then this girl took off her fire proof robe and wrapped it around me and saved my life, and told me how hot she thought it was) just to appeal to them a bit more, but I probably wouldn’t. They know when I’m lying (as if my mom doesn’t!).

Heinrich 38-78

According to Heinrichs, rhetoric is the art of persuasion: getting your audience to agree with you. If I had to tell the story of my first college party to my mom, the story would most definitely be watered down. I would try to make it as realistic as possible, so that my mother believed me, whoever I would leave out destructive details, like drunken madness, little clothing etc. Because my mom is conservative I would have to appeal to her views and try to tell a story that upheld them as much as possible in order to avoid conflict. On the other hand, if I were telling a story of the very same arty to my friends, I would go about it in a completely opposite way. I would would play to my friends interests and exaggerate the aspects of the party that I know they would take interest in. Catering your argument/story to your target is the most important aspect of rhetoric and I think within that lies the true beauty or rhetoric.

Roel Lopez- 2012 movie trailer

In this advertisement, nature is defined as an instrument by which the end of the world will arrive. The purpose of nature in this advertisement is to frighten the public; in doing so, the director hopes to spark interest (in the audience) for the movie. The scenes of destruction obviously help to create a sense of alarm for our very safety. These images were specifically chosen for their historical value; destruction of prized monuments is often seen as a bad omen. The advertisement's use of nature inevitably leads the viewer to the conclusion that nature may choose to end civilization at any time, and no amount of reason, weapons or defenses will deter nature in its goal.

Heinrichs: p.38-78

If I told my mother what happened at a party and then told the same story to my friends, my friends would probably think I was super lame. To make sure that my mother approved of me still after the end of my story, I would have to appeal to her ethical side. I would not be able to tell her about all the beer and booze. I would not be able to mention how the cops came. The things I would tell her would be what is right in her mind. I would have to convince her that I followed all the rules and that I was trustworthy. I wouldn't call it lying... but leaving out some of the details.

While I would tell my mother less of what really went on, I would probably expand my story and add a couple things into my story to my friends. I feel like people make up things when speaking to their friends. Or that they don't necessarily tell them what actually happened. They appeal to their friends emotional side. I would tell them about all the drama. Tell them about how the cops came and I got caught. I cried a bit and they let me go. My friends would be so proud.

You have to know what your audience wants to hear.

I actually remember my first college party and honestly the story I told my parents and my best friend where "night and day." When I told my parents that we had gone out, I simply said it was a get together with classmates and we did not stay out too long because we all had work the next day. I told them that I had been classy (seeing how my parents are very traditional and old fashion.) However when I told my best friend about the party, I said how six of us had bundled into a car, we drank way too much and ended up leaving the party at 3-4 in the morning. On top of it the party was a costume, and since I had drank too much to drive...I had my friend (dressed up as Dracula) drive us home...something my parents wouldn't have liked, seeing he was not on the insurance. The night went on to get even better, however the next morning I simply called home...told my parents I was safe and that we had an eventful night. I told them we responsible and I never did tell them that it was a costume party because they would have wanted to see pictures and how do I explain girls dressed in lingerie (note: a friend and myself were NOT in lingerie) and men in pimp outfits.

Therefore with my parents I speak to them as though I know and respect their concerns, however I am capable of being responsible on my own. On the other hand with my best friend...we just talk about the night and laugh at all the funny things that happened.

If I was to tell me mom about my first college party I would definately not tell me mom about the drinking part especially since I was not 21 yet! I would give my mom one specific details about the party like who was there that she might have known and just how much fun I had. It would be completely different if I was to tell my best friend from high school. The story would include who I saw, who made out, and who was wearing what. Come on all the girls do it!

In order to establish myself as decorous to my mom I would tell her how I made new friends and just brad to her about how much college is fun and it should be a great experience for me. To brag to my friend I would tell her how many cute boys went to the party and I would try to convince her to come to my school so we both could share some of the same fun experiences.

To should myself as virutous to my mom I would tell her how I was a rsponsible young college student and did not drink since I was not age legal enough to do so. I would also tell her that I honored her by going home at a decent hour. To show myself virtous to my friend I would tell her that I also was responsible and held close to my values and did not act like a crazy party going freshman!

Heinrichs pp 38-77

I would definitely tell the story differently, depending on who I am talking to. If I had to tell the story of college party to my mom, I would probably tell her only things that she would not be worrying about. For example, I would tell her that I was just there only for an hour with a bunch of high school friends that she knows who they are. Also, I would tell her that the party was more like “hanging out” thing and came home early. But if I had to tell the story to my best friend, I will tell him everything that happened at the party. I would tell him who showed up, how crazy the party was and how drunk I was at the party. Also, I would try to remember any stories from the party that my best friend would think that is funny and interesting. I think the reason I would tell the story differently is that audience's expectations are different here. My mom probably would expect me being a good student and to behave so i need to tell her what time I got home and who I was with rather than telling her such things that my best friend expects to hear from me like what he has missed out from the party and how crazy the party was.

Heinrichs, pp 3-37

I think according to Heinrichs, rhetoric is the art of persuasion: getting your audience to agree with you. It’s the art of manipulating others in a way that is most agreeable to them, and by achieving the required results, to oneself too. My understanding of rhetoric was that it is writing a good enough article to impress others with your writing skills! I guess I was halfway there, but I had never thought of it as the art of persuasion.

Given that I almost never argue and tend to follow “my way or the highway”, I have never considered any tactics in the book. I just find it immoral to manipulate others’ emotions for personal gains (perhaps I have been doing it without noticing it; I will try to notice from now on). As of now, I cannot imagine myself getting involved in this “art”, but then I rarely am able to persuade others to do anything. I have been relying on helping others out when they need it, and hoping to get help in return when I need it (selfish, or just untactful?).

As of now, I cannot think of a situation where I would be brave enough to use some of these tactics, I tend to rely on compassion, and generally let others have their way. Though I might as well try using some when going out next time with friends for a meal, it takes us a good one hour to decide where to eat!

Heinrich's pg 38-78

Whenever I engage in a conversation with my parents, I talk to them extremely different than I speak to my high school best friends for the simple fact that my parents are old-fashioned and emphasize respect so much. So if I had to tell my mother about my first college party I would explain how I took forever trying to decide what to wear and ended up dressing casually and felt out of place when I got there because all of the other women were all dressed up and I was wearing jeans. I would also be very sure to tell her how I didn’t drink any alcohol and I watched other people get drunk to the point where they were throwing up all over the place. When my mom asked what time I got home I would say, “I left around 2:00 and made it home safely soon after”. Last, I would brag about how I was dancing and everyone was talking about how I can dance really well the next day.
On the other hand, my best friend Tiffany would get a completely different version of what happened at my first college. I would start by telling her how I wasn’t exactly sure what to wear so I dressed sexy casual with a dressy top, skinny jeans, and heels, and I feel like I stood out because a lot of the other women looked alike. I would then go on to tell her how I didn’t drink any alcohol but I did take a jell-o shot and I watched the people make it to make sure they didn’t put anything in it! Last, I would give my best friend a detailed description of all the guys that I danced with and how some of them asked if they could “come back to my place”. Tiffany and I would then laugh together when I tell her how I shut them all down and left the party alone and made it back to my dorm about 3:00am because I went to eat at Waffle House with a few of my teammates.

Heinrichs pp 38-77

Pretend you had to tell the story of your first college party to mother (or grandmother, or aunt), and then to your best friend from high school. How would you tell it differently to those two audience? (Note: this doesn't work if your mother is your best friend. In that case, pick some authority-figure) How would you establish yourself as decorous and virtuous for those two different audiences? In other words, how would you show that you match your audience's expectations (decorum) and their values (virtues)? Consider Heinrich's examples and try to apply them to these two audiences.

Michelle Okeke Heinrich pg. 3-37

Heinrich states in the preface that rhetoric is "the three-thousand-year-old art of persuasion." I am a huge fan of this subject, because I happen to have a hard time separating a fight from an argument. I know there is a lot that I need to learn and this might be that book that graduates me from a girl to a woman. :o) There were some familiar tactics in the Offense section, I've just never put them in the way that he did. For example, the part on controlling the tense, and the difference between blame, value, and choice was something that I have been practicing for years now with my family, but never really knew what I was doing! One point that was highlighted in my mind as well as in the text is never debate the undebatable. That consists of morals, or fact, things that can't be argued. I tend to do that sometimes, but I see now why that has been ineffective.

Michelle Okeke --- Lipton Tea Commercial

In this particular commercial, the element of nature that is spotlighted is the tea leaf. It's defined as being more than just a healthy alternative for a drink. They contrast the growth of a tea leaf with the sharp, clever moves of a break dancer, the graceful dive of a swimmer, and the energy of a crowd of young, vibrant party goers, to name a few. Lipton may be trying to break through the idea that tea is just a beverage enjoyed by the old, stuffy, and rich upper class, while also highligting nutritious benefits of such a natural beverage, such as the antioxidants. The choice to spotlight the sped-up growing process of tea leaves was smart, based on the fact that Lipton wants people to see that tea can do more than just be good for you. Apparently it's also a lot of fun.

In the Dawn commercial the duck covered in oil represents the effects of mankind on endangering wildlife. Everyone knows what nature is,however in this short clip we see how fragile wildlife is and why its becoming endangered. While endorsing a cause, Dawns main priority is to sale the product, however they have now managed to link their product as protecting nature as a whole. In choosing small animals such as the duck, Dawn has appealed not only to those saving nature and its inhabitants but also a child's innocent nature. As water washes the oil off the duck we understand how Dawn is suggesting that is product too can help wash away the the struggles of nature and its inhabitants endure

Heinrich pp.3-37

According to Heinrichs, what is rhetoric? Is his understanding of it different or similar to your own ideas about what it is? As you begin to get into the “Offense” section, can you find any offensive argumentative tactics that you’ve never considered before? Are any of them familiar? Can you think of any situations in which they might be useful?


According to Heinrich, rhetoric "is the art of influence, friendship, and eloquence, of ready wit and irrefutable logic "(p.4). He also mentions that it is very powerful tool to use in arguments. His understanding is similar to my own ideas about what rhetoric because I believe that it plays a very important role in our society. Rhetoric plays a role in influencing and persuading others. I have learned from Heinrich that there is a difference between arguments and fights. Arguments are more effective if done skillfully, you can get what you desire.

From the "Offense" section, I found that I have not used the "Control the Tense" argumentative tactic, I can find my self considering to use the future tense, which allows choice for my audience and this allows me to control the issue. I feel that this will be helpful for me to use instead of focusing on using the past tense, which blames the other person. This tool tactic will allow me to move forward and fixing the issue.

Nature in Advertisment

This is a commercial designed by Toyota, to advertise and promote their Toyota Prius. In this commercial you are able to see nature throughout the entire video. Their main focus on the commercial is our environment, suggesting to the viewer that this car has many benefits. For instance it talks about lowering our emission and keeping our air clean for our future.

Stacey- Ann Smith ~ Nature Valley Granola Bar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBiFEOTcas8

Nature is defined as organic through the natural setting of the background and the description of the granola bar. The purpose of the commercial is to portray that the nature valley granola bar is 100% natural, whole grains, and is delicious, which appeals to viewers who will want to purchase the product. I believe the person who created this commercial chose this particular setting as a representation of a natural place to go along with their motto “the energy bar nature intended”. It works with the overall goal for the commercial because it shows viewers that even though their product is considered an energy bar it is not only all natural, but delicious as well.

Heinrichs refers to rhetoric as "the art of influence, friendship, and eloquence...irrefutable logic....most powerful....argument." We both define argument differently in that I once that it was merely winning over another person rather than actually having them agree with your argument. Overall I do believe that our definitions of rhetoric are fairly similar in that it is an art of persuading an audience.

The tactics Heinrichs discusses are not new, in fact I have used seduction and manipulation to get what I desire. I have often lost many arguments because as Heinrichs states I used the past tense, in that rather attempting to have my audience agree with me, I started targeting them and blaming them for doing something wrong.

I work with people on a daily basis and in the past I worked as a resident assistant at the University in which I had to choose my arguments wisely when dealing with resident confrontations are co-worker confrontations. I do feel like the most beneficial tactic Heinrichs expressed was the idea of choosing which speaking tense to argue with because this has the power of manipulating your audience into agreeing with you. Until now I never had really considered how past/present/future tense can change the argument atmosphere.

This car commercial uses nature as a way to prove a point. Nature is defined in it as an unstoppable force. The main purpose of the commercial is to say that their brand of cars is better than other brands of cars because theirs can withstand terrible weather. They showed the treacherous conditions of snow storms and awful wind to create the image that their cars are able to dominate weather and mother nature. They can get through the toughest of times. You can count on Mercedes-Benz. They are reliable.

Nature in Advertisements

Prius used nature in their commercial in the creative way of having people be the objects in nature. In doing this they emphasized the idea that their product brings together people and nature in a harmonious way that benefits each. A major selling point of the prius is its green capabilities, and in this instance it's using solar energy to create cool air instead of using up valuable resources. By starting with a desert setting and a powerful sun it then transitions into what their product does: create a cooler atmosphere for the owners of the car while at the same time protecting the environment, promoting harnmony between man, nature, and machine.

GE Jet Engine

This is a GE ad for a jet engine. The ad features a crane in the wild which gets clearance from an invisible control tower to take off, continues its flight over breathtaking views of the forest with a river flowing through it.

GE is attempting to promote itself as a green conscious company, while advertising for its new,more efficient jet engine. Not only does the new jet engine helps save fuel, but that in turn results in fewer emissions to the environment.

The ad has a comedic element to it, which, for some reason, reminds me of "a laughing jury is never a hanging jury". I guess a funny ad circulates more, and thus gathers a larger audience.

Nature in Advertisements: ADM Ethanol

ADM specializes in processing and manufacturing agricultural products and biofuels for the world. The commercial explains the viability of ethanol extracted from corn in a world that is dominated by fuel. With a rise in popularity in the green movement, the company demonstrates the potential of using nature as a solution to the world's energy crisis and depleting resources. Nature has always been around us as a source of food and energy. As long as we depend on it, it is able to help solve all of our problems.

Nature in Advertisement: 2010 Toyota Prius Commercial

Toyota officially launched the marketing campaign for the 2010 Toyota Prius in May and produced this ad to inform the consumers about what it would be happening to the environment, such as flowers and trees in this ad when you decide to ride the Hybrid car. Because of the fact that Hybrid car is all about trying to save the environment, I believe that using the images of nature in the Hybrid Auto Company’s advertisement would be the perfect and this Toyota Prius Hybrid car commercial is no exception. Nature is in harmony with the car and flowers seem to grow because the hybrid car is passing by them- these images of nature in this ad help the consumers to understand what the Hybrid car does to the environment.

Nature in Advertisements: SunChips Commercial

SunChips, a popular multigrain chip brand, produced this 2008 ad to inform the audience that they have switched to using solar energy at their California plant to produce their chips. Nature, in this case the sun, is depicted as a force that we can sense, worship, and even use to grow things in. In this ad, SunChips claims that in addition to these, they can capture the sun’s power and use the solar energy to produce chips. With their innovative method, people are now able to taste the sun.

Nature Advertisment: Volkswagen Golf

This is a new ad produced in 2009 to promote the brand new Volkswagen Golf. Nature is used as evidence to portray that this car can be used to enjoy the everyday as the title says. The ad is shown with the car in many different seasons, atmospheres, and times of the day. These transitions show that the car is versatile and can be used for individuals who want to enjoy life with whatever obstacles of nature, whether it is snow or rain may come upon them.

Heinrichs Blog

Heinrichs defines rhetoric as the foundation and structure of "argument without anger". According to him, this rhetoric is present in nearly all interactions and is a powerful aspect of the social world.

In the section on Offense, Heinrichs describes the detailed tactics involved in winning an argument. One tactic is to approach an interaction with a focus of getting your way. This requires you to be proactive and have your goal defined prior to engaging in conversation. The three part plan to persuading people is another tactic: stimulate emotions, change the opinion, and inspire action. This is familiar because I have witnessed many effective top leaders at work embody these skills. It is unfamiliar in the sense that I do not utilize this tactic in my own daily life.

These offensive strategies would be particularly useful in management because leaders are trying to quickly translate ideas into action. It is also useful in sales positions in which you are attempting to convince another person to purchase your product.

Nature in Advertisements: 7up Commercial

This ad was produced by 7up in the 1960's for the purpose of selling their carbonated beverage product. Nature is used to represent an active, modern lifestyle because 7up wants to claim that active, modern people drink their product. Skiing down snow-covered slopes and waterskiing across crisp, clear lakes helps to promote this idea. The sun is used to further convey the image of thirst. 7up is attempting to send the message that active people get thirsty, and when they are thirsty, 7up will be their beverage of choice.

Heinrichs pp 3-37

According to Heinrichs, what is rhetoric? Is his understanding of it different or similar to your own ideas about what it is? As you begin to get into the “Offense” section, can you find any offensive argumentative tactics that you’ve never considered before? Are any of them familiar? Can you think of any situations in which they might be useful?

Nature in Advertisements

How is nature defined in your image or video? What is its purpose in the text? How does it contribute to the overall argument of the text? Why do you think the creators of this text decided to use this particular image of nature--how does it work with their overall goal for the print advertisement or commercial?