My writing style has remained the same throughout the last four papers: large block papragraphs with multiple small points rotating around a few larger ones, all of which are to bolster my paper's arguement. The sentences are long and wordy, but they get the point across in a clear, understandable manner. Plenty of puntuation is used, and the utmost professional manner has been integrated into the papers for academic integrity.
From the revisions in class, it seems the present style is appreciated, as it has recieved very little criticism. The points are clear and strong, and analytical above all else from the multiple sources used. One change, though, has been to make multiple smaller paragraphs rather than large blocks, for ease of the reader. I still view my writing style correct, and I move to clarify what one does not interpret offhand or becomes corrective about.
Revising, the papers of others, though, has exposed my writing new other styles and new ideas. It may be wise to construct sentences shorter, making them less lengthy and allowing room for more content. In addition, adding more parenthesis rather than commas/periods would be helpful. In critical writing, though, the point shares equal value to how it is expressed, so bluntness could hamper rather than help.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
A Tale of Two Cited Articles: Scholarly Paper Four
My fourth paper topic is a closer analyzation of what "benefits" a rich, industrialized nation supposedly brings to its people, finding deeper truths and comparing the findings with what living in a poorer country brings.
McIntryre, Lisa. The Practical Skeptic: Core Concepts in Sociology. New York: McGraw Hill, 2008.
This book by WSU professor Lisa McIntyre describes the modern world and societies from the collective perspectives of multiple sociologists. Several chapters pertain to my paper four, entailing the social problems that have arisen with the unprecedented modern industrial world, how ideal benefits have brought about unforseen problems and upheavals, and the shift away from unfavored past traditions has brought about greater division and stress in several nations.
The social analyzations of pains and powers between rich and poor countries have had suprising results; "though rich people live better than poor people in general, rich countires seem to live worse off than poor countries overall" (McIntyre, 2008, 50). The increase in the amount of work per individual, the corruption of higher figures, the decrease in self worth, and the strain between different groups all seem to increase with a nation's prosperity. All great, powerful, industrialized nations are experiencing common issues: heart and liver disease spikes, fracturing social groups, and higher taxes and stress. This all seems to become a self-perpetuating cycle: as prosperity increases, so do taxes and prices, which cause more sress and deteriorating social bonds to meet them. Meeting the taxes and prices causes higher prosperity, causing them to rise higher, and the cyle builds until it can simply build no more, and collapses.
Along with these points, "The Practical Skeptic" describes sociological terms, the lives of several modern sociologists (Marx, Comte, etc), ethic and means of sociological study, and various types of discriminations, differentiations, and privileges in a society. In addition, several common sociological layouts are entailed, as are the advantages and disadvantages of each as a whole. Major findings are compared and displayed analytically, while more minor ones are attributed more to their discovering sociologist.
Wilkenson, RG and KE Pickett. Income Inequality and Health: A Review and Explanation of Evidence. New York: Social Science and medicine, 2006.
Again pertaining to my paper four, RG Wilkenson's article descibes how public and social health run perpendicular to national prosperity; as a nation rises, it people seem to fall. The greater the nation's wealth and power, the greater the gap between its people and the greater its problems overall. As said by Wilkenson, "inequality affects the vast majorit of the population, not just the poorest" (Wilkenson, 7). If an entire society is rich by comparison overall, then problems will tend to face the rich more than the poor as a result.
McIntryre, Lisa. The Practical Skeptic: Core Concepts in Sociology. New York: McGraw Hill, 2008.
This book by WSU professor Lisa McIntyre describes the modern world and societies from the collective perspectives of multiple sociologists. Several chapters pertain to my paper four, entailing the social problems that have arisen with the unprecedented modern industrial world, how ideal benefits have brought about unforseen problems and upheavals, and the shift away from unfavored past traditions has brought about greater division and stress in several nations.
The social analyzations of pains and powers between rich and poor countries have had suprising results; "though rich people live better than poor people in general, rich countires seem to live worse off than poor countries overall" (McIntyre, 2008, 50). The increase in the amount of work per individual, the corruption of higher figures, the decrease in self worth, and the strain between different groups all seem to increase with a nation's prosperity. All great, powerful, industrialized nations are experiencing common issues: heart and liver disease spikes, fracturing social groups, and higher taxes and stress. This all seems to become a self-perpetuating cycle: as prosperity increases, so do taxes and prices, which cause more sress and deteriorating social bonds to meet them. Meeting the taxes and prices causes higher prosperity, causing them to rise higher, and the cyle builds until it can simply build no more, and collapses.
Along with these points, "The Practical Skeptic" describes sociological terms, the lives of several modern sociologists (Marx, Comte, etc), ethic and means of sociological study, and various types of discriminations, differentiations, and privileges in a society. In addition, several common sociological layouts are entailed, as are the advantages and disadvantages of each as a whole. Major findings are compared and displayed analytically, while more minor ones are attributed more to their discovering sociologist.
Wilkenson, RG and KE Pickett. Income Inequality and Health: A Review and Explanation of Evidence. New York: Social Science and medicine, 2006.
Again pertaining to my paper four, RG Wilkenson's article descibes how public and social health run perpendicular to national prosperity; as a nation rises, it people seem to fall. The greater the nation's wealth and power, the greater the gap between its people and the greater its problems overall. As said by Wilkenson, "inequality affects the vast majorit of the population, not just the poorest" (Wilkenson, 7). If an entire society is rich by comparison overall, then problems will tend to face the rich more than the poor as a result.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Wise Essay
Racism and race-based-discrimination in the US.
For more than a century, the United States has been moving to undo a legacy of racism and discrimination amongst its people. The changes have been to create a society reflecting the grand document of its founding, with “all men being created equal”, having “the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” How far all have really come toward such a monumental and ideal society is entailed David Cook’s “By The Color of Their Skin” article; each change for the better seems to bring two more for the worse, shifting away from the desired achievement. Though racism is dying through the effort of the entire nation, race-based discrimination is alive as ever, spawning new policies and issues for all.
The most defining arguments of the Cook article are racism and privilege, and how both influence today’s culture. As defined by Wise, “ Racism is an ideology that says certain people, by virtue of their race, are inferior or superior to others of a different race, with race usually being defined as skin color” (Cook, 2009, p.5). In other words, the color of a person’s skin color defines how they immediately see themselves, and others see them offhand. The quality of a person’s heart and soul may be the most important characteristic of all, but is seen secondary at best to the color of their skin.
The next defining aspect of this article is privilege. Once again, according to this article by Cook, privilege can also be seen as less pressure to perform. An example in the text was, “George W. Bush mangled the English language with regularity and still became president. If Barack Obama had mispronounced words the way Bush did, would he have been given the same degree of slack” (Cook, 2009, p.5). Because skin color is so defining of who someone is this example and the idea of having less pressure to perform means people of the dominate race may not feel the need to perform to their full potential because they already feel privilege.
Ironically, antiracism has caused a new type of racism, in which the previously underprivileged minorities have become the privileged majority, and the previously privileged racial majority has become an underprivileged minority. In terms of people in terms of race being constructed in America today, Cook describes, “The mistake people make is to think that history stops and starts with each new generation” (Cook, 2009, p.6). What people need to realize is that what happens in one generation effects the next and every generation in the future and it’s impossible to start with a completely blank slate (Cook, 2009, p.6).
In their own lives today, people are affected by racism in aspects of their lives they are completely unaware of. Wise uses the example that, “Job applicants with ‘white-sounding’ names are 50 percent more likely to get called back than those with ‘black-sounding’ names, even if both have the same qualifications” (Cook, 2009, p.6). Such an attitude is engrained in American society; one cannot completely erase their own past, no matter how much they may try.
Such concept can definitely tie into paper three; similar to the quest of all for the perfect meal, the strive for a perfect, just, unbiased society continues leaping forward recklessly in great bounds, and yet remain just beyond grasp. All may be looking for perfection, but all have different ideas as to what perfection really is.
Works Cited
Wise, Tim. "By the Color If Their Skin." Interview by David Cook. The Sun July 2009: 4-12. Print
For more than a century, the United States has been moving to undo a legacy of racism and discrimination amongst its people. The changes have been to create a society reflecting the grand document of its founding, with “all men being created equal”, having “the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” How far all have really come toward such a monumental and ideal society is entailed David Cook’s “By The Color of Their Skin” article; each change for the better seems to bring two more for the worse, shifting away from the desired achievement. Though racism is dying through the effort of the entire nation, race-based discrimination is alive as ever, spawning new policies and issues for all.
The most defining arguments of the Cook article are racism and privilege, and how both influence today’s culture. As defined by Wise, “ Racism is an ideology that says certain people, by virtue of their race, are inferior or superior to others of a different race, with race usually being defined as skin color” (Cook, 2009, p.5). In other words, the color of a person’s skin color defines how they immediately see themselves, and others see them offhand. The quality of a person’s heart and soul may be the most important characteristic of all, but is seen secondary at best to the color of their skin.
The next defining aspect of this article is privilege. Once again, according to this article by Cook, privilege can also be seen as less pressure to perform. An example in the text was, “George W. Bush mangled the English language with regularity and still became president. If Barack Obama had mispronounced words the way Bush did, would he have been given the same degree of slack” (Cook, 2009, p.5). Because skin color is so defining of who someone is this example and the idea of having less pressure to perform means people of the dominate race may not feel the need to perform to their full potential because they already feel privilege.
Ironically, antiracism has caused a new type of racism, in which the previously underprivileged minorities have become the privileged majority, and the previously privileged racial majority has become an underprivileged minority. In terms of people in terms of race being constructed in America today, Cook describes, “The mistake people make is to think that history stops and starts with each new generation” (Cook, 2009, p.6). What people need to realize is that what happens in one generation effects the next and every generation in the future and it’s impossible to start with a completely blank slate (Cook, 2009, p.6).
In their own lives today, people are affected by racism in aspects of their lives they are completely unaware of. Wise uses the example that, “Job applicants with ‘white-sounding’ names are 50 percent more likely to get called back than those with ‘black-sounding’ names, even if both have the same qualifications” (Cook, 2009, p.6). Such an attitude is engrained in American society; one cannot completely erase their own past, no matter how much they may try.
Such concept can definitely tie into paper three; similar to the quest of all for the perfect meal, the strive for a perfect, just, unbiased society continues leaping forward recklessly in great bounds, and yet remain just beyond grasp. All may be looking for perfection, but all have different ideas as to what perfection really is.
Works Cited
Wise, Tim. "By the Color If Their Skin." Interview by David Cook. The Sun July 2009: 4-12. Print
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Source Selection
I find sources for English 101 essays mostly online; from there, I can find books, literary exerpts, or websites beneficial to my papers. I start with a general search online for a specific part of my paper (specified smaller arguement relating to the grand thesis), from there identifying the best sources on a basis of professionalism and source type (I'd likely use a scholarly essay before a blog entry). I might improve the method of finding sources by looking for one source medium (relating books, essays, websites) in particular first, then root out the best one for inclusion.
I find most sources online, examining books and literary works put into a digital format. A better idea may be to search the WSU library for a specific source title relating to my theme, then read the book itself; I may not find it's information otherwise. In addition, it may be wise to look for a source that supports, or is supported by, The Omnivore's Dilemma, as that is the foundation of nearly all class projects thusfar.
Much of the sources chosen in my projects are chosen because they have quotes that can be put into my essay, which easily ties the source in with anything I'm trying to say (pro or against thesis), and because they are of a professional background; quality is sought after, not quantity. However, to truly go for a basis of professionalsim, it may be better in the future to use a higher-integrity source purely for its grade; it may relate less to the paper itself, but can be shifted to tie in with more work, which would improve the essay overall. Much of what is used, becomes used on a basis of availability, when it would be wiser in the future to hunt down one great, specific source before the paper itself is started.
I find most sources online, examining books and literary works put into a digital format. A better idea may be to search the WSU library for a specific source title relating to my theme, then read the book itself; I may not find it's information otherwise. In addition, it may be wise to look for a source that supports, or is supported by, The Omnivore's Dilemma, as that is the foundation of nearly all class projects thusfar.
Much of the sources chosen in my projects are chosen because they have quotes that can be put into my essay, which easily ties the source in with anything I'm trying to say (pro or against thesis), and because they are of a professional background; quality is sought after, not quantity. However, to truly go for a basis of professionalsim, it may be better in the future to use a higher-integrity source purely for its grade; it may relate less to the paper itself, but can be shifted to tie in with more work, which would improve the essay overall. Much of what is used, becomes used on a basis of availability, when it would be wiser in the future to hunt down one great, specific source before the paper itself is started.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Norman Borlaug + Kellogg's Arcticle
In his Ending World Hunger article, Norman Borlaug discusses how the bioengineering of new plants and crops for different desirable traits and greater yield is not anything new; people have been invening in the evolution of plants since 10,000-15,000 BC. It is simply in a profoundly new manner that crops have been altered, by direct genetic splicing and other recently discovered scientific methods. New issues in the world, mainly a prevoiusly unseen world population of 6.5 billion people, need futuristic, new, innovative solutions, which crop engineering and scientific breeding look to be.
It is a long struggle to accomplish anything for the better, though; suspicious government leaders, anti-crop science groups, and reluctance of populations overall for great change hamper progress. Especially now, when time is of the essence, organizations protest the sale and consumption of genetically modified foods, urge "all natural" and organic foods only, and reduce public opinion of crop engineering overall. These groups, however, typically live in well-off portions of society and have the ability to choose their food, unlike other people in the world whom they are apparently trying to save; their arguement becomes hypocritical as a result.
The Kellogg's article discussed the laser-burning of its logo onto its corn flakes to distinguish them from potential knock-offs, and expansion of the concept to other products should it prove successful. This seems a bit much; the logo itself, and all the other cereal box features, should be enough to seperate the cereal from the competition. This may be a cover for a far greater potential advertising ploy, as people might become more endeared to Kelloggs by simply seeing the brand name over and over again every time they take a bite!
It is a long struggle to accomplish anything for the better, though; suspicious government leaders, anti-crop science groups, and reluctance of populations overall for great change hamper progress. Especially now, when time is of the essence, organizations protest the sale and consumption of genetically modified foods, urge "all natural" and organic foods only, and reduce public opinion of crop engineering overall. These groups, however, typically live in well-off portions of society and have the ability to choose their food, unlike other people in the world whom they are apparently trying to save; their arguement becomes hypocritical as a result.
The Kellogg's article discussed the laser-burning of its logo onto its corn flakes to distinguish them from potential knock-offs, and expansion of the concept to other products should it prove successful. This seems a bit much; the logo itself, and all the other cereal box features, should be enough to seperate the cereal from the competition. This may be a cover for a far greater potential advertising ploy, as people might become more endeared to Kelloggs by simply seeing the brand name over and over again every time they take a bite!
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
The Omnivore's Dilemma (15,18,19,20), They Say I Say (6-7)
Chapter 15 of "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (Pollan) detailed the life and diet of a simple hunter-gather, struggling to obtain even the least amount of food required for sustenence. With a common dependence on domestication and agriculture, going out into a forest to only hunt or pick up any meal for more than a short given time seems outlandish; there would be far less food to eat, and that meager amount takes much more energy to find, becoming much less rewarding overall. Besides, it could be poisonous! Many fail, however, to take a good look at the food they eat themselves, sprayed multiple times with chlorine, arsenic, and other chemicals, then packed with enough preservatives to cover a kitchen table. Ironically, those who naysay the hunter-gatherers "have only in the last century or two regained the physical stature and longevity of their Paleolithic ancestors."
Chapters 18, 19, and 20 describe the experience of hunting from the neutral perspective of one who has never done such thing before. Killing a wild pig, gutting it, and preparing its meat caused disgust in Michael Pollan, yet had he seen the way bacon and meat delicacies are made, these feeling would probably had been eased. The smell and sights upon preparing meat cause discontent, yet are part of eating it; the closer something is to human, the less a human will want to eat it, and the more revulsion they will feel in doing so. In addition, the hunt itself is entailed: a rush of adrenaline, fear of killing AND fear of missing the shot, and a host of other mind-shattering factors come into play. This is not bacon from the freezer; this is a living thing, that can run, defend, and feel.
Parts 6-7 of "They Say I Say" (Graff) describe why, and how best, to implant a naysayer (opposing opinion) into an academic paper, and how to best format such to suite a target audience. If one continues on with a single point throughout their paper, it will create a repeatitive and overall boring result, dissuading readers. Planting an opposing view entices outsiders to read (conflict always draws attention), and can help prove the arguement (if this paper can prove a naysaying thesis wrong, then it, and its arguement, must be superior). In addition, having an outside audience helps the formatting; if one group is meant to read, then the language and style can be restructured for them foremost; science papers should be suited for fact detail, and impartiality, while say, a blog might be for personal view and observation. It is not enough to have information; others must understand and comprehend it, caring bout and absorbing the big "so what."
Chapters 18, 19, and 20 describe the experience of hunting from the neutral perspective of one who has never done such thing before. Killing a wild pig, gutting it, and preparing its meat caused disgust in Michael Pollan, yet had he seen the way bacon and meat delicacies are made, these feeling would probably had been eased. The smell and sights upon preparing meat cause discontent, yet are part of eating it; the closer something is to human, the less a human will want to eat it, and the more revulsion they will feel in doing so. In addition, the hunt itself is entailed: a rush of adrenaline, fear of killing AND fear of missing the shot, and a host of other mind-shattering factors come into play. This is not bacon from the freezer; this is a living thing, that can run, defend, and feel.
Parts 6-7 of "They Say I Say" (Graff) describe why, and how best, to implant a naysayer (opposing opinion) into an academic paper, and how to best format such to suite a target audience. If one continues on with a single point throughout their paper, it will create a repeatitive and overall boring result, dissuading readers. Planting an opposing view entices outsiders to read (conflict always draws attention), and can help prove the arguement (if this paper can prove a naysaying thesis wrong, then it, and its arguement, must be superior). In addition, having an outside audience helps the formatting; if one group is meant to read, then the language and style can be restructured for them foremost; science papers should be suited for fact detail, and impartiality, while say, a blog might be for personal view and observation. It is not enough to have information; others must understand and comprehend it, caring bout and absorbing the big "so what."
Monday, February 22, 2010
Omnivore's Dilemma (16,17)
Chapter 16 of "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (Pollan) detailed the evolutionary pains and powers of having near-complete freedom of choice in food and diet; while other creatures seek only one food source and become evolutionarily entwined with it (in life and death), humanity can move about with the greatest ease from one appetizing bounty to another, rarely pulling a hair when one staple disappears because another suitable one is doubtlessly nearby. People will never run out of food options; this fact might ensure the overall survival of homo sapiens from famine of any one staple, but presents an imponderable complexity about what is best for one to eat. What is healthy and unhealthy has changed more in the last century than in the entire history of man previous, rigorously turning the world of food upside-down and inside-out, the world of the food-eaters turning likewise.
Chapter 17 described the "rules" of eating animals, the rules themselves being unstable and not set to a fine line by any one party overall. Some people advocate freeing humanity from animal cruelty forever by becoming vegan; this would perhaps ensure a more utopian and natural style of living and eating, but would ultimately lead to the extermination of millions of animals born to be food, and a sensless killing at that, as no food or gain would be obtained. Others push for a Polyface Farm future, where animals are treated humanely, and one gets to see everything about the chicken they buy for dinner, from its happy pecking about in a pasture, to its death, defeathering, and sale on a counter. Sustainability lobbyists look down such a road as well. Still more people content themselves with the low-priced industrial food model, where animals are treated as machines and nothing else for the sake of more food, despite all its health risks and shortcomings to all except the grand businesses involved. One thing's for sure: none will win outright, and the war between them all will definitely serve to increase the ever-worsening omnivore's dilemma.
Chapter 17 described the "rules" of eating animals, the rules themselves being unstable and not set to a fine line by any one party overall. Some people advocate freeing humanity from animal cruelty forever by becoming vegan; this would perhaps ensure a more utopian and natural style of living and eating, but would ultimately lead to the extermination of millions of animals born to be food, and a sensless killing at that, as no food or gain would be obtained. Others push for a Polyface Farm future, where animals are treated humanely, and one gets to see everything about the chicken they buy for dinner, from its happy pecking about in a pasture, to its death, defeathering, and sale on a counter. Sustainability lobbyists look down such a road as well. Still more people content themselves with the low-priced industrial food model, where animals are treated as machines and nothing else for the sake of more food, despite all its health risks and shortcomings to all except the grand businesses involved. One thing's for sure: none will win outright, and the war between them all will definitely serve to increase the ever-worsening omnivore's dilemma.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)