C. Online chat rooms have become a great source of communication. They are very effective resources because they can allow communication to discuss lectures and labs outside of class. Some classes on campus even have private chat rooms set up for students registered in that class. Chat rooms have become a great resource due to how they can provide a learning environment both inside and outside of the classroom.
D. Dogs are a more suitable and effective alternative to weapons for law enforcement officers. An example of this occurred at UCLA in 1979, where canines were introduced to protect students from nearby gangs. The gangs eventually relocated. Suspects sometimes have claimed to be bitten, but this is extremely rare next to the good deeds and rescues preformed by these dogs. It has been concluded by the 6th Circuit Court that, “since deaths are rare in police dog cases, deploying dogs cannot by condemned as deadly force” (Savage para. 12).
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Cohesive Devices Exercise
Body image is something that almost everyone is self-conscious and aware of. @[Most people will tell you] that one of their greatest concerns is how they look, especially in the eyes of an ever-judging society like ours. It is also something that is perpetually changing generation to generation.
*Body image is something in which we, as a society, determine what is or is not acceptable. In the last few decades alone the average body image has changed considerably. @[As more and more] Americans suffer from obesity and being overweight, the average body has become slightly larger, even though the ideal body is still the skinny fashion runway model. @[We have the power to] determine what it is acceptable to look like through outlets like the media. @[By showing the "beautiful" people on things like television and movies, society is culturally setting the standard] for body image and how you should look. @[This propaganda]
also denies us of our own personal opinion of what is considered acceptable or good looking with regards to body image. @[Instead of] looking in the mirror, or even looking at others, and thinking whether or not that person looks good the way they are, we use what society and our culture has trained us as a way to judge.
Body image is also one of the great paradoxes in society today as well. @[While there] is an added emphasis on being skinnier, stronger, and tan, the obesity rate continues to rise. @[It appears as though] the ideal body becomes more and more impressive as our culture falls into becoming more and more out of shape. These are some of the ways that body image is culturally constructed.
“This exercise was pretty good at accomplishing its goals. I think it did make me go back and examine whether or not I used coherence devices and links. It was a little awkward to mark, but I understood why we did it and I think as a result of this exercise I will be more aware of using coherence devices the next time I am writing or editing.”
*Body image is something in which we, as a society, determine what is or is not acceptable. In the last few decades alone the average body image has changed considerably. @[As more and more] Americans suffer from obesity and being overweight, the average body has become slightly larger, even though the ideal body is still the skinny fashion runway model. @[We have the power to] determine what it is acceptable to look like through outlets like the media. @[By showing the "beautiful" people on things like television and movies, society is culturally setting the standard] for body image and how you should look. @[This propaganda]
also denies us of our own personal opinion of what is considered acceptable or good looking with regards to body image. @[Instead of] looking in the mirror, or even looking at others, and thinking whether or not that person looks good the way they are, we use what society and our culture has trained us as a way to judge.
Body image is also one of the great paradoxes in society today as well. @[While there] is an added emphasis on being skinnier, stronger, and tan, the obesity rate continues to rise. @[It appears as though] the ideal body becomes more and more impressive as our culture falls into becoming more and more out of shape. These are some of the ways that body image is culturally constructed.
“This exercise was pretty good at accomplishing its goals. I think it did make me go back and examine whether or not I used coherence devices and links. It was a little awkward to mark, but I understood why we did it and I think as a result of this exercise I will be more aware of using coherence devices the next time I am writing or editing.”
Freewrite
Personally I do not agree with the decision to cancel Tiger Burn before the football game this year, but I can definitly see why our university would feel the need to. Especially after Clemson already cancelled their mock burial and burning of Cocky, we were feeling pressure to act quickly in response to this. If we were to continue with our tradition, we would look like the bad guys and insensetive after Clemson already cancelled. I really think if both schools were going to cancel they should have talked it out and announced together rather then make the other school seem like the slower to act of the two.
That being said, all Clemson aside, I would have still continued the tradition. I have never experienced or been around this tradition, but I still think it should go on regardless of last months events. I have a hard time seeing how a giant burning tiger can evoke the same memories or emotions that came with the beach house fire. Maybe it is "too soon" as some people like to say, but this can also be considered a way of moving on by having both schools continue a popular tradition. Part of the healing process is getting back to a normal way of life, and by cancelling the tradition and replacing it with tractors, we are once again making note of the beach fire, and making special circumstances because of it. Its hard for me to see how Tiger Burn could offend anyone because it is all in good spirits and part of what makes this rivalry great.
That being said, all Clemson aside, I would have still continued the tradition. I have never experienced or been around this tradition, but I still think it should go on regardless of last months events. I have a hard time seeing how a giant burning tiger can evoke the same memories or emotions that came with the beach house fire. Maybe it is "too soon" as some people like to say, but this can also be considered a way of moving on by having both schools continue a popular tradition. Part of the healing process is getting back to a normal way of life, and by cancelling the tradition and replacing it with tractors, we are once again making note of the beach fire, and making special circumstances because of it. Its hard for me to see how Tiger Burn could offend anyone because it is all in good spirits and part of what makes this rivalry great.
Chapter 7, Question 5
In his essay “Going Nuclear: A Green Makes the Case,” author and co-founder of the anti-nuclear organization Greenpeace Patrick Moore states the claim that the United States should increase our reliance on nuclear power sources. Moore begins his argument by discussing how much nuclear technology has improved in the last thirty years. Much has changed since the near accident at Three Mile Island and the Chernobyl disaster. He then makes the bold statement that nuclear power is quickly becoming our only alternative. Hydroelectric power sources are nearly built to capacity, and oil and coal come with a large environmental impact, so nuclear is becoming a logical choice. To support this, he counters the popular myths about nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is in fact one of our least expensive energy sources, they are much safe than people believe they are (“no one has died of a radiation-related accident in the history of the US civilian nuclear reactor program” (310)), and they are no more dangerous to terrorist attacks than other power plants or political offices. Most importantly, nuclear power plants have lower CO2 emissions compared with coal and oil. Times have changed, and Moore believe in order to keep up nuclear energy is the way to go.
In his essay “Life in the Green Lane,” author Jamie Lincoln Kitman discusses how hybrid cars may not be all that people claim they are. He says that many people buy them based on the propaganda-fueled belief they are better for the environment. Unfortunately, many people buy hybrid models of inefficient cars, like SUV’s, which in actuality do not give much greater performance. They also have more negative feedback because of the troubles that go with hybrid batteries and their deficiencies on open highways. He believe the technology is being used the wrong way, and in some cases we may be better off sticking with an average, gas running sedan that does not have the hybrid related problems. Kitman is disgusted at the preferential treatment hybrid drivers receive, such as special parking spaces and highway lanes, when hybrid cars really are creating additional problems.
I believe the author’s biographies have a large influence of there persuasive. In the first article, Moore comes from a background highlighted by co-founding Greenpeace. One of this organizations foundation argument is against nuclear weapons and power sources. This means he clearly did his research about nuclear technology while the organization was under development. It also shows how far technology has progressed if a man so opposed to it is now a strong supporter of it. He is knowledgeable on the subject and has the open-mindedness to see and accept that the numbers do not lie; today’s nuclear plants are far more efficient. The second author, Kitman, is a high-ranking editor for Automobile Magazine, and is a self-proclaimed “professional car-tester” (306). He clearly has been around cars for quite some time, and has an extensive knowledge of the automobile industry and its political and economic ties. Moore examines cars for a living, so he would know how hybrids work and the impact the government is having on their sales and the impact they are having. Both authors use their backgrounds to their advantage when established ethos for their essays. This is very helpful in persuasive essays because it proves instant credibility and allows for a good background on the issue they are addressing.
In his essay “Life in the Green Lane,” author Jamie Lincoln Kitman discusses how hybrid cars may not be all that people claim they are. He says that many people buy them based on the propaganda-fueled belief they are better for the environment. Unfortunately, many people buy hybrid models of inefficient cars, like SUV’s, which in actuality do not give much greater performance. They also have more negative feedback because of the troubles that go with hybrid batteries and their deficiencies on open highways. He believe the technology is being used the wrong way, and in some cases we may be better off sticking with an average, gas running sedan that does not have the hybrid related problems. Kitman is disgusted at the preferential treatment hybrid drivers receive, such as special parking spaces and highway lanes, when hybrid cars really are creating additional problems.
I believe the author’s biographies have a large influence of there persuasive. In the first article, Moore comes from a background highlighted by co-founding Greenpeace. One of this organizations foundation argument is against nuclear weapons and power sources. This means he clearly did his research about nuclear technology while the organization was under development. It also shows how far technology has progressed if a man so opposed to it is now a strong supporter of it. He is knowledgeable on the subject and has the open-mindedness to see and accept that the numbers do not lie; today’s nuclear plants are far more efficient. The second author, Kitman, is a high-ranking editor for Automobile Magazine, and is a self-proclaimed “professional car-tester” (306). He clearly has been around cars for quite some time, and has an extensive knowledge of the automobile industry and its political and economic ties. Moore examines cars for a living, so he would know how hybrids work and the impact the government is having on their sales and the impact they are having. Both authors use their backgrounds to their advantage when established ethos for their essays. This is very helpful in persuasive essays because it proves instant credibility and allows for a good background on the issue they are addressing.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Chapter 7, Question 4: Global Warming
In both of their articles, authors Jeffrey Kluger and Richard Lindzen make strong claims regarding the heated issue of global warming. Both men choose to take different routes in stating their claim and supporting it, however.
In his article “Be Worried, Be Very Worried,” Jeffrey Kluger offers a very generic and common explanation of global warming. He writes in a very pessimistic tone from the get go, opening with the line “no once can exactly say what it looks like when a planet takes ill, but it probably looks a lot like Earth” (269). Kluger believes that the planet is in a freefall towards collapsing. He greatly expands on things like feedback loops and how they are the cause of the increases we are witnessing across the planet. He offers all these terrible examples of negative changes across the Earth to strike fear in the readers and alarm them, and then ends by more or less guilting them into feeling the need to change this problem. This article seems to drag on and offer a very negatively biased perspective of the problem.
In the article “Climate of Fear: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Dissenting Scientists into Silence,” author Richard Lindzen offers a new perspective to the global warming issue. Instead of using the same statistics about increases in CO2, temperature, water levels, and storms, Lindzen chooses a more political route. While he does acknowledge the facts about the figures associated with global warming, he says, “what the public fails to grasp is that the claims neither constitute support for alarm non establish man’s responsibility for the small amounts of warming that have occurred” (279). Lindzen uses multiple examples of politicians and world leaders trying to “discredit anti-alarmist scientists” and intimidate scientists into not speaking out about global warming. Lindzen mentions something called the “Iris Effect” which basically claims that CO2 in fact does not increase the global temperature. As a scientist, Lindzen offers new, alternative theories in his essay.
Personally I find Lindzen’s to be the more persuasive of the two articles. Kluger seems to drag on listing statistics and figures and describing climate and environmental changes from all corners of the Earth. Even though I am sure these figures are legitimate, he uses them in a very dry manner that I found to quickly lose the readers interest. He also uses a very cliché ending where after describing what a dire situation global warming is and how at this point there is not much else we can do, he says “we’re finally coming to appreciate the knife-blade margins within which life can thrive” (277). I felt like this essay seems to follow the mold of what every politician and scientist has been discussing and reflection on for the last few years now. Lindzen offers a fresh, alternate perspective, which I found to be intriguing and better supported. It is more direct and to the point, and makes the reader think and intrigues him or her into further looking into the topic. Also, Lindzen comes with a more credible background as a professor of atmospheric science at MIT. While both essays address global warming, they use different styles of argument, and one clearly does a more effective job.
In his article “Be Worried, Be Very Worried,” Jeffrey Kluger offers a very generic and common explanation of global warming. He writes in a very pessimistic tone from the get go, opening with the line “no once can exactly say what it looks like when a planet takes ill, but it probably looks a lot like Earth” (269). Kluger believes that the planet is in a freefall towards collapsing. He greatly expands on things like feedback loops and how they are the cause of the increases we are witnessing across the planet. He offers all these terrible examples of negative changes across the Earth to strike fear in the readers and alarm them, and then ends by more or less guilting them into feeling the need to change this problem. This article seems to drag on and offer a very negatively biased perspective of the problem.
In the article “Climate of Fear: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Dissenting Scientists into Silence,” author Richard Lindzen offers a new perspective to the global warming issue. Instead of using the same statistics about increases in CO2, temperature, water levels, and storms, Lindzen chooses a more political route. While he does acknowledge the facts about the figures associated with global warming, he says, “what the public fails to grasp is that the claims neither constitute support for alarm non establish man’s responsibility for the small amounts of warming that have occurred” (279). Lindzen uses multiple examples of politicians and world leaders trying to “discredit anti-alarmist scientists” and intimidate scientists into not speaking out about global warming. Lindzen mentions something called the “Iris Effect” which basically claims that CO2 in fact does not increase the global temperature. As a scientist, Lindzen offers new, alternative theories in his essay.
Personally I find Lindzen’s to be the more persuasive of the two articles. Kluger seems to drag on listing statistics and figures and describing climate and environmental changes from all corners of the Earth. Even though I am sure these figures are legitimate, he uses them in a very dry manner that I found to quickly lose the readers interest. He also uses a very cliché ending where after describing what a dire situation global warming is and how at this point there is not much else we can do, he says “we’re finally coming to appreciate the knife-blade margins within which life can thrive” (277). I felt like this essay seems to follow the mold of what every politician and scientist has been discussing and reflection on for the last few years now. Lindzen offers a fresh, alternate perspective, which I found to be intriguing and better supported. It is more direct and to the point, and makes the reader think and intrigues him or her into further looking into the topic. Also, Lindzen comes with a more credible background as a professor of atmospheric science at MIT. While both essays address global warming, they use different styles of argument, and one clearly does a more effective job.
Topic Proposal for Policy Paper
I will be writing a policy paper about why laws and regulations should be in place so that steroids are allowed in the medical field to those in need of them, yet are strictly banned and distanced from athletes and those wishing to physically benefit from them to gain an advantage. In order to support this claim, I will need more sources. I have a sufficient amount of information on the drug and some current policies, but I will need more opinion pieces from those supporting this viewpoint and why they too believe it is the correct policy.
Point IV
For my exploratory paper, I wrote about the three different perspectives regarding steroids, both for medical and athletic purposes. They were, universally banning all forms of steroids, allowing those with medical problems to have them available but not allowing them to be distributed to athletes, and not regulating steroids and having them readily available for whoever desires them.
I think the middle perspective needs to be the most dominant of the three. It most closely resembles what people prefer today, and has more common ground that the majority can agree upon, myself included.
This perspective can be enforced as policy by setting regulations and guidelines regarding steroids distribution and use. Though it will not be perfect, its what I believe to be the most effective policy and what will see the highest results.
I think the middle perspective needs to be the most dominant of the three. It most closely resembles what people prefer today, and has more common ground that the majority can agree upon, myself included.
This perspective can be enforced as policy by setting regulations and guidelines regarding steroids distribution and use. Though it will not be perfect, its what I believe to be the most effective policy and what will see the highest results.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)