Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

ENG 100 Week five.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "ENG 100 Week five."— Presentation transcript:

1 ENG 100 Week five

2 INDEPENDENT WORK: Reread, rethink and rewrite the text in bold on page 66 quoting material by Nancy Mairs, "On Being a Cripple."  taking on the voice of someone either "crippled" or not, who uses I much less frequently than Mairs does - perhaps not at all. OR Reread, rethink, and rewrite the text in bold on page quoting the material "Here Comes theGroom" from a personal, subjective viewpoint, taking on the voice (the character) of someone who is gay or has gay friends or family members and using the pronoun I if appropriate.

3 INDEPENDENT WORK Using your textbook, read Chapter Four, “Arguments Based on Facts and Reason: Logos,” pages Mark the text and/or take notes as you read. Complete Reading Response Journal. Once finished, complete #5 on page 94. Finish as homework, as necessary.

4 Now You See It . . . Reading/Discussion Schedule
Intro pg Discuss 09/06 Part 1 pg , Ch Discuss 09/11 Part 2 pg , Ch. 3-5 Discuss 09/21 Part 3 pg , Ch. 6-7 Discuss 10/01 Part 4 pg. 247 – 276, Ch. 8 Discuss 10/03 Conclusion pg Discuss 10/05

5 INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals
INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals? Remember, not all cases are clear-cut. Defend your answer. 1. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. 2. Drunk drivers are involved in more than 50 percent of traffic deaths. 3. DNA tests of skin found under the victim’s fingernails suggest that the defendant was responsible for the assault.

6 INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals
INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals? Remember, not all cases are clear-cut. Defend your answer. 1. Polls suggest that a slim majority of Americans favor a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. 2. A psychologist testified that teenage violence could not be blamed on video games. 3. An apple a day keeps the doctor away.

7 INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals
INDEPENDENT WORK: Are these hard evidence or rational appeals? Remember, not all cases are clear-cut. Defend your answer. 1. History proves that cutting tax rates increases government revenues because people work harder when they can keep more of what they earn. 2. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” 3. Air bags ought to be removed from vehicles because they can kill young children and small-frame adults.

8 syllogism logical argument involving three propositions: a formal deductive argument made up of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. "All birds have feathers, penguins are birds, therefore penguins have feathers." deductive reasoning: reasoning from the general to the specific example of deduction: an example of deductive reasoning

9 enthymeme A figure of reasoning in which one or more statements of a syllogism (a three-pronged deductive argument) is/are left out of the configuration; an abbreviated syllogism or truncated deductive argument in which one or more premises, or, the conclusion is/are omitted. There are various kinds of syllogisms and the formal treatment of them is rather technical. However, all syllogisms are similar in that they contain at least three statements -- two premises followed by a conclusion.

10 enthymeme Ex1: - All humans are mortal. (major premise)
- Michael is human. (minor premise) -Michael is mortal. (conclusion) The syllogism above would be rendered an enthymeme simply by maintaining that "Michael is mortal because he's human" (leaving out the major premise). Or put differently, "Since all humans are mortal, Michael is therefore mortal" (leaving out the minor premise).

11 enthymeme Statements may be strategically excluded in an enthymeme because they are too obvious or because revealing them might damage the force of the argument. Yet another reason to exclude a premise or conclusion is to let the audience infer it. The idea here is that audiences who have to draw out premises or conclusions for themselves are more likely to be persuaded by the overall argument.

12 enthymeme Ex2: - Those who study rhetoric speak eloquently. (major premise) - Susan studies rhetoric. (minor premise) -Susan speaks eloquently. (conclusion) The enthymeme here might do well to exclude the conclusion and let the audience infer it if the goal of the argument were to convince the audience that Susan speaks eloquently.

13 GROUP WORK Take a look at comedian Rita Rudner's fairly complicated enthymematic argument:  I was going to have cosmetic surgery until I noticed that the doctor's office was full of portraits of Picasso. Working with the other students in your row (front of row to back), analyze this enthymeme and answer the following questions: 1.  What information is left implicit?   2.  What inference or conclusion does Rudner ask us to draw from this enthymeme?   3.  What causes the humor in this statement?

14 INDEPENDENT WORK Using your textbook, read Chapter Seventeen, “Fallacies of Argument,” pages Mark the text and/or take notes as you read. Complete Reading Response Journal.

15 INDEPENDENT WORK Complete the exercise on page 519 of your textbook, answering all questions. Be prepared to discuss.

16 Mark the fallacies in your homework by writing the name over each example.
Ad Hominem Bandwagon Begging the Question Dogmatism Either/Or Equivocation False Authority Faulty Analogy Faulty Causality Hasty Generalization Non Sequitur Scare Tactic Sentimental Appeal Slippery Slope Strawman

17 LOGICAL FALLACIES Is it a fallacy? Which one?
What do you know about this slogan? “Leave no child behind.” (George Bush policy and slogan) Is it a fallacy? Which one? LEAVE NO CHILD BEHIND/ NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND - ". the Children's Defense Fund - an organization that actually cares about leaving no child behind - trademarked 'Leave No Child Behind' as its slogan back in In fact, the Children's Defense Fund had even put together legislation called 'Leave No Child Behind.' As a result, George Bush was forced to change the name of his education initiatives and his actual legislation, creatively, to 'No Child Left Behind.' When you look at the two proposed laws side by side, and realize how limited George Bush's vision is of what it takes to leave no child behind, you start to wish the guy would have ripped off a little more than the name." From "Had Enough? A Handbook for Fighting Back" by James Carville with Jeff Nussbaum (Simon & Schuster, New York, 2003) Page 152.

18 LOGICAL FALLACIES Is it a fallacy? Which one?
What do you know about this slogan? Is it a fallacy? Which one? “It’s the economy, stupid.” (sign on the wall at Bill Clinton’s campaign headquarters) "It's the economy, stupid" is a slight variation of the phrase "The economy, stupid" which James Carville had coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush. Carville's original phrase was meant for the internal audience of Clinton's campaign workers as one of the three messages to focus on, the other two messages being "Change vs. more of the same" and "Don't forget health care." Clinton's campaign had advantageously used the then-prevailing recession situation in the US as one of the campaign means to successfully unseat George H. W. Bush. In March 1991, days after the ground invasion of Iraq, 90% of polled Americans approved of President Bush's job performance.[1] Later the next year, Americans' opinions had turned sharply; 64% of polled Americans disapproved of Bush's job performance in August 1992.[1]

19 “Nixon’s the one.” (campaign slogan)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? “Nixon’s the one.” (campaign slogan) Is it a fallacy? Which one? ixon waged a prominent television advertising campaign, meeting with supporters in front of cameras.[107] He stressed that the crime rate was too high, and attacked what he perceived as a surrender by the Democrats of the United States' nuclear superiority.[108] Nixon promised "peace with honor" in the Vietnam War and proclaimed that "new leadership will end the war and win the peace in the Pacific".[109] He did not release specifics of how he hoped to end the war, resulting in media intimations that he must have a "secret plan".[109] His slogan of "Nixon's the One" proved to be effective.[107] It's no secret that in 1968, Richard Nixon revolutionized the way modern campaigns are run. Among those revolutionary ideas: lie to the public. Lie to them early. Lie to them often. Lie to them persistently. Who will end the war in Vietnam? Nixon's the One! He even mailed out records featuring a catchy song titled "Nixon's the One."

20 “Remember the Alamo.” (battle cry)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? Is it a fallacy? Which one? “Remember the Alamo.” (battle cry) The Battle of San Jacinto- April 21, 1836 Origin of the "Remember The Alamo" battle cry: The honor of coining the slogan belongs to William F. Young, who fought as a private in Lamar's cavalry corps; and in this way: As the Texans charged and the Mexicans fired their first and most effective volley, killing three Americans and wounding several, the undisciplined Texan force seemed to waver for a moment; and it was at this critical juncture that Private Young dashed forward, crying at the top of his voice, "Boys, come on! Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!"   At once the cry was taken up and spread from man to man until the whole force was crying  "Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!" and it certainly carried consternation to the ranks of the Mexicans, many of them throwing down their guns, and crying out, "Me no Alamo! Me no Goliad!"Young was severely wounded but continued to fight until the battle was over. The heroic man who coined and actually gave impetus to the slogan which no doubt went far toward winning the fight at San Jacinto, was one of the volunteers from South Carolina. He sleeps on Texas soil, his grave neglected. The state should honor and perpetuate his memory with a monument of lasting bronze]

21 “Make love, not war.” (antiwar slogan during the Vietnam War)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? “Make love, not war.” (antiwar slogan during the Vietnam War) Is it a fallacy? Which one? Make love not war is an anti-war slogan commonly associated with the American counterculture of the 1960s. It was used primarily by those who were opposed to the Vietnam War, but has been invoked in other anti-war contexts since.[1][2] The phrase's origins are unclear. Radical activists Penelope and Franklin Rosemont helped to popularize the phrase by printing thousands of "Make Love, Not War" buttons at the Solidarity Bookshop in Chicago, Illinois and distributing them at the Mother's Day Peace March in They were the first to print the slogan.[3] In April 1965, at a Vietnam demonstration in Eugene, Oregon, Diane Newell Meyer, then a senior at the University of Oregon, pinned a handwritten note on her sweater reading "Let's make love, not war", thus marking the beginning of the popularity of this phrase. A picture of Meyer wearing the slogan was printed in the Eugene Register-Guard and then a related article turned up in the New York Times on May 9, 1965.

22 “A chicken in every pot.” (campaign slogan)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? Is it a fallacy? Which one? “A chicken in every pot.” (campaign slogan) 1928 Presidential Campaign Slogans A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage – Herbert Hoover Claims that the everyone will be prosperous under a Hoover presidency

23 “No taxation without representation.” (American colonial slogan)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? “No taxation without representation.” (American colonial slogan) Is it a fallacy? Which one? "No taxation without representation" is a slogan originating during the 1750s and 1760s that summarized a primary grievance of the British colonists in the Thirteen Colonies, which was one of the major causes of the American Revolution. In short, many in those colonies believed that as they were not directly represented in the distant British Parliament, any laws it passed taxing the colonists (such as the Sugar Act and the Stamp Act) were illegal under the Bill of Rights 1689, and were a denial of their rights as Englishmen. However, during the time of the American Revolution, only one in twenty British citizens had representation in parliament, none of whom were part of the colonies. In recent times, it has been used by several other groups in several different countries over similar disputes, including currently in some parts of the United States (see below). The phrase captures a sentiment central to the cause of the English Civil War, as articulated by John Hampden who said “what an English King has no right to demand, an English subject has a right to refuse” in the Ship money case

24 “Loose lips sink ships.” (slogan from World War II)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? Is it a fallacy? Which one? “Loose lips sink ships.” (slogan from World War II) Loose lips sink ships is an American English idiom meaning "beware of unguarded talk". An American propaganda poster of WWII The phrase originated on propaganda posters during World War II.[1] The phrase was created by the War Advertising Council[2] and used on posters by the United States Office of War Information.[1] The posters were part of the general campaign of American propaganda during World War IIand were part of a campaign to advise servicemen and other citizens to avoid careless talk concerning secure information that might be of use to the enemy.[3] The British equivalentused variations on the phrase "Keep mum,"[4] while in neutral Sweden the State Information Board promoted the wordplay "en svensk tiger." The gist of this particular slogan was that one should avoid speaking of ship movements, as this talk (if directed at or overheard by covert enemy agents) might allow the enemy to intercept and destroy the ships.[5] There were many similar such slogans, but "Loose lips sink ships" remained in the American idiom for the remainder of the century and into the next, usually as an admonition to avoid careless talk in general.[5][6]

25 “Guns don’t kill, people do.” (NRA slogan)
LOGICAL FALLACIES What do you know about this slogan? “Guns don’t kill, people do.” (NRA slogan) Is it a fallacy? Which one?

26 LOGICAL FALLACIES Is it a fallacy? Which one?
What do you know about this slogan? Is it a fallacy? Which one? “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” (attributed to Harry S. Truman) Meaning Don't persist with a task if the pressure of it is too much for you. The implication being that, if you can't cope, you should leave the work to someone who can. Origin This is widely reported as being coined by US President Harry S. Truman. That's almost correct, but in fact Truman was known to have used it at least as early as before becoming president. Here's a citation from an Idaho newspaper The Soda Springs Sun, from July that year: "Favorite rejoinder of Senator Harry S. Truman, when a member of his war contracts investigating committee objects to his strenuous pace: 'If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen'." He used a version slightly nearer the one most often used nowadays, in 1949, after becoming president, when warning his staff not to concern themselves over criticism about their appointments: "I'll stand by [you] but if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." Truman was well-known as a plain-speaker, in a way that politicians in our more media-sensitive age rarely are. This was celebrated by Merle Miller, who published a set of interviews with him - called Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman, in It includes this unambiguous gem, which would hardly get past the presidential spin-machine these days: "I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."

27 LOGICAL FALLACIES Is it a fallacy? Which one?
What do you know about this slogan? “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for We are the change that we seek.” (Obama campaign statement) Is it a fallacy? Which one?


Download ppt "ENG 100 Week five."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google