http://chaoticinfinities.blogspot.in/2014/09/introduction.html#comment-form
http://vijayashoka.blogspot.in/2014/09/paragraph-1-home.html
http://manishakoppala.blogspot.in/2014/09/home-is-you.html#comment-form
After reading these posts, I was a little surprised of some of the writing and grammar skills presented. I hope that I was able to provide adequate feedback, but I don't know if what I said will be helpful to them. One thing I did notice in the style is that a lot of the students used a lot of descriptive writing. Most of them were really good at describing Home, but establishing a thesis was more difficult.
Friday, September 26, 2014
Friday, September 19, 2014
4: Philosophy Statement Approach
Describe your "philosophy statement" approach to the first assignment. Which rhetors are you thinking of using, and why?
After the discussions in class and reading Dr. Rice's philosophy statement, I think that I will focus just on communication in the workplace. Although I want to teach some day, I don't think I have enough experience or insight to make a teaching philosophy at this point.
As Dr. Rice put it, we should focus on our beliefs or core values for this assignment. When I think of communicating in the workplace, to me it is most effective when these three things are considered and acted upon: diversity, intercultural awareness, and usability.
Although diversity and intercultural awareness can be similar, I think that they are separate and powerful factors in communication. Being aware of cultural differences and similarities is important in order to connect with other audiences. To the know the values, beliefs, and traditions of another society may be the key to landing the big contract or successfully advertising your company's new product line. Having a diverse group around you is also imperative. If everyone thought the same and had the same background, innovation would be hindered. Having people question one another keeps everyone on their toes and alert. It's when the best ideas develop. Lastly, I chose usability because I think that too many times important members of the team are left out because the information is not communicated in a successful, usable manner. Usability needs to be considered in the growing use of technology. Almost every part of the world we can now be reached, but is it being reached successfully? This is a short synopsis of why I chose these three values. What are your thoughts?
As far as rhetors go, I definitely relate to Aristotle. Appealing to the audience using pathos, logos, and ethos I think is essential in communication, with the audience being the most vital part of the communication. I also agree with Quintilian with his instruct, move, and charm methods. Also in his thinking that an effective orator has quality in his speaking and the emphasis he puts on education. I know my values and the rhetors I'd like to use, I am just trying to figure out how to tie everything together.
After the discussions in class and reading Dr. Rice's philosophy statement, I think that I will focus just on communication in the workplace. Although I want to teach some day, I don't think I have enough experience or insight to make a teaching philosophy at this point.
As Dr. Rice put it, we should focus on our beliefs or core values for this assignment. When I think of communicating in the workplace, to me it is most effective when these three things are considered and acted upon: diversity, intercultural awareness, and usability.
Although diversity and intercultural awareness can be similar, I think that they are separate and powerful factors in communication. Being aware of cultural differences and similarities is important in order to connect with other audiences. To the know the values, beliefs, and traditions of another society may be the key to landing the big contract or successfully advertising your company's new product line. Having a diverse group around you is also imperative. If everyone thought the same and had the same background, innovation would be hindered. Having people question one another keeps everyone on their toes and alert. It's when the best ideas develop. Lastly, I chose usability because I think that too many times important members of the team are left out because the information is not communicated in a successful, usable manner. Usability needs to be considered in the growing use of technology. Almost every part of the world we can now be reached, but is it being reached successfully? This is a short synopsis of why I chose these three values. What are your thoughts?
As far as rhetors go, I definitely relate to Aristotle. Appealing to the audience using pathos, logos, and ethos I think is essential in communication, with the audience being the most vital part of the communication. I also agree with Quintilian with his instruct, move, and charm methods. Also in his thinking that an effective orator has quality in his speaking and the emphasis he puts on education. I know my values and the rhetors I'd like to use, I am just trying to figure out how to tie everything together.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
3: Rhetoric in 9/11
What Rhetoric do you remember being employed during and in the aftermath of 9/11?
Well on September 11, 2001 I was sitting in my fifth grade classroom. All of a sudden one of the teachers came running in with tears streaming down her face and she said the Twin Towers have been hit. My teacher gets up in a panic and lines us all up to head down to the library to watch the TV.
At this point there wasn't much discussion or even talking for that matter. The adults were in shock and us kids were confused with what was going on. Once we reached the library all I remember is seeing live footage of the aftermath, the flames and panicking people, and the replay of the airplane hitting the towers.
On the bus ride home everyone was quite again. We were all listening to the radio. I still wasn't sure of what had happened. When I got home, my mom sat me down and explained to me what was going on. After that I began to worry, because my dad was on the east coast for his job. Thankfully he was safe.
During this time, there wasn't any persuasion going on. The people were already persuaded. We had an enemy, a War on Terrorism, that united the entire country. The days following I remember seeing people pray and gather together to support one another. I heard about all of the heroes on TV and the supportive speeches being made about our fallen citizens.
As far as rhetoric goes, a lot of symbols were used in the process of communicating to the citizens: TV footage of aftermath, replays of the crash, interviews with family members of the fallen, images of the American flag. Some speeches were persuasive in nature when it came to discussing the action the U.S. was prepared to take. When addressing this pathos was used significantly. The audience was extremely important in this case because it was not only U.S. citizens, but the entire world, even the ones who attacked us.
As far as introductions, I liked Borchers' introduction best. It was the easiest for me to follow, especially since I do not have a strong background in Rhetoric. It gave good breaking points to stop and think about the points made or to take a rest. I don't have a long attention span, so I need this. I started reading Herrick's introduction before the class started, but stopped after the book was changed. I really liked the introduction as far as I read. It was intriguing and Herrick really grabbed my attention.
Well on September 11, 2001 I was sitting in my fifth grade classroom. All of a sudden one of the teachers came running in with tears streaming down her face and she said the Twin Towers have been hit. My teacher gets up in a panic and lines us all up to head down to the library to watch the TV.
At this point there wasn't much discussion or even talking for that matter. The adults were in shock and us kids were confused with what was going on. Once we reached the library all I remember is seeing live footage of the aftermath, the flames and panicking people, and the replay of the airplane hitting the towers.
On the bus ride home everyone was quite again. We were all listening to the radio. I still wasn't sure of what had happened. When I got home, my mom sat me down and explained to me what was going on. After that I began to worry, because my dad was on the east coast for his job. Thankfully he was safe.
During this time, there wasn't any persuasion going on. The people were already persuaded. We had an enemy, a War on Terrorism, that united the entire country. The days following I remember seeing people pray and gather together to support one another. I heard about all of the heroes on TV and the supportive speeches being made about our fallen citizens.
As far as rhetoric goes, a lot of symbols were used in the process of communicating to the citizens: TV footage of aftermath, replays of the crash, interviews with family members of the fallen, images of the American flag. Some speeches were persuasive in nature when it came to discussing the action the U.S. was prepared to take. When addressing this pathos was used significantly. The audience was extremely important in this case because it was not only U.S. citizens, but the entire world, even the ones who attacked us.
As far as introductions, I liked Borchers' introduction best. It was the easiest for me to follow, especially since I do not have a strong background in Rhetoric. It gave good breaking points to stop and think about the points made or to take a rest. I don't have a long attention span, so I need this. I started reading Herrick's introduction before the class started, but stopped after the book was changed. I really liked the introduction as far as I read. It was intriguing and Herrick really grabbed my attention.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
2: Characteristics of Rhetoric and Cultural Differences
What are the most important characteristics of rhetoric, and what have you learned about non-western rhetoric which is new to you?
The characteristics of rhetoric, as described in chapter 1, include: symbols, audience, probable truth, invention and analysis.
Interestingly enough the symbols we use within communicating rhetorically play a huge impact in the way our message is received by our audience. These symbols are mostly non-verbal indicators that help the audience connect to the speaker and help paint a picture in their mind of what is being discussed. Symbols may include letters, images or even gestures. Careful consideration must be taken into account when using symbols, because when used we are allowing the audience to put their own meaning behind what they are seeing or hearing. Sometimes their interpretation may be different than what is intended because of their experience and knowledge about the symbol. Careful audience analysis and knowledge assumptions must be made in order to choose the correct symbol usage for your audience. Variations may be needed in the explanation of the symbols depending on the knowledge level of the audience.
Audience in a rhetorical situation is very important. Our use of rhetoric is to accomplish something and that cannot be done without the people. We commonly use rhetoric to inform and persuade. In order to accomplish this, we must be familiar with our audience and study how to be successful with different kinds of audiences. Our main issue is to capture the attention of our audience, so they will listen to what we have to say. This may be a difficult journey depending on the type and size of audience. To inform or persuade an audience, it is important that they become active listeners and eventually even participate in the discussion so they have the information to make their own decisions.
In our culture we determine what is probably true based on what we here from our community and research ourselves. As a society, we are presented with some facts and based on those facts we make an informed decision about our view point of the truth. It is difficult to report the whole truth, because anything that cannot be proven is scrutinized to some subjectivity. Today we are able to question authority and ask our own questions, which makes finding out what we accept as the truth a little bit easier.
Invention and analysis of rhetoric refer to the effect of communication in our everyday lives. Rhetoric today influences our decisions, our values, and our lifestyle. There are so many different mediums for communication that we are continually being influenced without even knowing it. It is important to analyze communication and see how much media is inventing ourselves compared to us consciously making life decisions based on our own needs and wants without outside influences.
The thing I found most interesting in non-western rhetoric is that all three cultures we discussed look to a higher being or spiritual power to guide them through their communication. It seems in western rhetoric we follow the democratic way of thinking and use the separation of church and state almost as a guideline. No where in our studies has it said that we look for something spiritual to guide us. We are relying on our own knowledge and skills. There may be some rhetorical situations where we include spiritual guidance, especially in the church, but it doesn't seem to dominate our communication structure.
The characteristics of rhetoric, as described in chapter 1, include: symbols, audience, probable truth, invention and analysis.
Interestingly enough the symbols we use within communicating rhetorically play a huge impact in the way our message is received by our audience. These symbols are mostly non-verbal indicators that help the audience connect to the speaker and help paint a picture in their mind of what is being discussed. Symbols may include letters, images or even gestures. Careful consideration must be taken into account when using symbols, because when used we are allowing the audience to put their own meaning behind what they are seeing or hearing. Sometimes their interpretation may be different than what is intended because of their experience and knowledge about the symbol. Careful audience analysis and knowledge assumptions must be made in order to choose the correct symbol usage for your audience. Variations may be needed in the explanation of the symbols depending on the knowledge level of the audience.
Audience in a rhetorical situation is very important. Our use of rhetoric is to accomplish something and that cannot be done without the people. We commonly use rhetoric to inform and persuade. In order to accomplish this, we must be familiar with our audience and study how to be successful with different kinds of audiences. Our main issue is to capture the attention of our audience, so they will listen to what we have to say. This may be a difficult journey depending on the type and size of audience. To inform or persuade an audience, it is important that they become active listeners and eventually even participate in the discussion so they have the information to make their own decisions.
In our culture we determine what is probably true based on what we here from our community and research ourselves. As a society, we are presented with some facts and based on those facts we make an informed decision about our view point of the truth. It is difficult to report the whole truth, because anything that cannot be proven is scrutinized to some subjectivity. Today we are able to question authority and ask our own questions, which makes finding out what we accept as the truth a little bit easier.
Invention and analysis of rhetoric refer to the effect of communication in our everyday lives. Rhetoric today influences our decisions, our values, and our lifestyle. There are so many different mediums for communication that we are continually being influenced without even knowing it. It is important to analyze communication and see how much media is inventing ourselves compared to us consciously making life decisions based on our own needs and wants without outside influences.
The thing I found most interesting in non-western rhetoric is that all three cultures we discussed look to a higher being or spiritual power to guide them through their communication. It seems in western rhetoric we follow the democratic way of thinking and use the separation of church and state almost as a guideline. No where in our studies has it said that we look for something spiritual to guide us. We are relying on our own knowledge and skills. There may be some rhetorical situations where we include spiritual guidance, especially in the church, but it doesn't seem to dominate our communication structure.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)