Test

Test

Final Thoughts...

Overall this ILS 200 class was a great experience that really helped me to develop as a writer. It opened up the door for me to use many language tools that I was not aware were previously at my disposal. It also helped me break down my arguments to ensure that ethos, logos, and pathos were all aligned and balanced with one another. I learned many new pathetic, ethical, and logical tropes and schemes to use in my writing and fallacies to be aware of and try to avoid.

The best part of this class has been being able to have my voice heard and express my opinions in an informal setting with this blog. Things that I normally would want people to be aware of but had no real means of telling them have been easily communicated through this blog. I think I will definitely continue to read blogs, respond to blogs, and maybe even have my own blog page in the future because blogs are a great way to share your thoughts with others in an anonymous fashion that you really aren't held accountable for. In saying this, that doesn't mean that people should run around and blindly post nonsense in order to anger others or start an argument, but should keep their arguments as fair, accurate and balanced as they can to strike up a positive and constructive argument.

All in all, this class was very fun, interesting, and useful and I will definitely consider taking another ILS class in the future.

KENNY POWERS... OUT

The Enormity of Experience

Language is a very powerful tool that can be used in many manners through the use of pathetic, logical, and ethical tropes, schemes and other language tool that we learned in class this semester. As powerful as language is, I don't think it can capture the enormity of experience. By actually experiencing something remarkable and formulating your own thoughts and feeling your own feelings is unlike anything that you could ever tell me or I could ever write about to you. There is a reason that people state all the time that "you had to be there" or "you really do need to experience that." There is so much setting and aura that is present when actually experiencing something that just can't be captured by language. As hard as the author may try to paint a picture to his or her audience those details that were forgotten or just overlooked that definitely contributed to the actual experience will never be shared. If I tried to tell you right now about what happened and how I felt being at the Milwaukee Brewers first playoff win in over 25 years, I could write for hours just recalling every detail that I remembered from that day a year and a half ago. You could read or listen to me babble on for hours and even if you were attentive the whole entire time, you would probably just scratch the surface of my experience of actually being at the game. Language can help to formulate pictures, but the imagined picture will never actually match up to the still frame that the creator of the message has engrained in their mind. Every last language tool in the book can be used, but language cannot fully capture experience.

Wrap up

At the beginning of this semester I didn't know what to expect from contributing to this blog seeing as I had never written on a blog before. I have enjoyed displaying my opinions on here over the last four months. I haven't had to ever post my opinions for a class in this informal of a setting. It has been a nice change of pace to be able to craft an argument while not trying to make it sound great in order to get a good grade.

Following the different blogs from my section and the other section has been an interesting experience as well. I felt like people really opened up and displayed some interesting opinions on different topics. I was intrigued by many posts and i am glad that we had this kind of outlet to post our opinions on. I feel that without the blogs it would be much harder to get all of these opinions out in the world. As the semester went on the more thought provoking the posts. There were some that I questioned and others that made me laugh. This was a very interesting way to learn and discuss rhetoric and I felt like it's effects have shaped my idea of language and how it's used so much differently than it was before. All of the contributing factors have helped provide me with knowledge that I feel like I wouldn't have got in the traditional way of learning about writing.

Language and Experience

There are many great writers that have the ability to put the reader in a certain situation by the way the word their writing and give sensory detail. Still, this can only go so far. Actually experiencing something and being in the moment is unparalleled. Language cannot ever fully have the same effect that the experience can. If I were to read an article about a basketball game, I would find out all of the same hard facts and stats that those who attended the game did. But, at the same time, the article wouldn't have the same lasting affect on me. I would never know about all of the emotions in the twists and turns of the game and all of the adjustments that were made.

Of course there are some experiences that can be simply expressed through language and nothing is lost. If someone were to write an article about me reading a book at the library. There isn't much the person reading is missing out on. Both are boring. But for the most part if you want to know about something you have to experience it.

Experience brings into play so many factors that words cannot display. All five senses are playing a role when someone is in a moment having an experience. The smell is something that can be explained but not replicated. The same goes for the feel. No one besides those who have been to the Caribbean knows what it feels like to be there. You can get a sense of what it is like but you will never truly know until you go. Experience has a greater effect because of it's complexity. All of the surroundings are what makes one instance unlike any other. That's why there are so many funny stories that get told and the people listening don't find it funny and the person telling the story says "I guess you had to be there." The language by itself does not suffice.

The Finisher

At the start of the semester I didn't know what to make of Rhetor Rick and all of the potential knowledge and wisdom he had to offer. Now that we've reached the end of the semester I see that he could, even on his worst day, put both the Dos Equis man and Chuck Norris to shame.

I have taken numerous English classes, logic classes, and psychology classes, but this class will stand out among them in the way something ancient, appealing, and beautiful sticks out from the ordinary and familiar. It's clear that rhetoric has always been present, but that I have simply not had the tools or knowledge to see it. Now, perhaps, when arguing or being presented with an argument, I won't be caught off guard without knowing what hit me or how the blows occurred. It's clear that it will be useful in my speaking and writing, and it is also clear that I have a lot of work to do (lifelong work) to truly hone and appreciate its power, maximize its effects, and use it in the right situations with ethics in check.

Though my posts will stop with this post as the semester comes to a close, cheers to you, Rhetor Rick! I've been glad to be your disciple this semester.

In closing, please accept this deliberate attempt to divert you from my post as a token of my appreciation:



Civilian out

Can language capture the enormity of experience?

This is a question that provokes further questions that will be explored in this post. If the ‘experience’ is that of the author who is trying to share the entirety of their experience with a reader, then language is not powerful enough to capture and share the entirety of it – just like how the human brain is not equipped to handle the entirety of sensory ‘experience’ that the universe consistently churns out. I ate a big bowl of Cheerios with banana slices and skim milk this morning. If I wanted to share that experience from the first crisp bite of Cheerios to their soggy finale, then I would fail in trying to pass this experience on to my reader. They might get hungry, but they wouldn’t come close to being able to recreate it without getting their own bowl of Cheerios, a banana, and some skim milk and creating a similar experience for themselves. Good authors are probably the ones that can get very close to recreating these sensory experiences in the mind of their readers, but language is still not powerful enough to evoke all of the senses or all of the potential in our brains.

But in this regard the question is a bit silly and obvious, so I will move on to what I feel is a more interesting or reframed approach to this question.

Which experience is more valuable? Is it the original author's intended attempt to share his or her experience, or is it the experience that the reader creates for themselves? With language something is always obfuscated or hidden and not what the author truly implied. The reader picks up that story and changes it for themselves based on their own experiences. Language, then, becomes the cut and paste enabler of new, created experience that is malleable, testable, and even more powerful when put together and interpreted in the human brain. The reader allows his or her own experiences to affect the experience they have with the author’s text. In a way, this “disadvantage” or shortcoming of language allows for the “good stuff,” the malleable creation of the individual mind that warps the real story, the real experiences, and creates. When Dostoevsky died, the true “experience” he meant to convey died with him, but his language continues to live through the new sensory experience invoked by his text in the reader. Thousands of essays interpret different portions of his language trying to find new meaning or interesting interpretations, and in their subjectivity there is no right or wrong experience, just a personal one.

Thus, I would argue, that while language cannot capture the every detail, feeling, and thought that goes into someone else’s experience, this creation of a new experience for the reader using language then becomes the most important experience that transcends the original and can be captured in its entirety and then reshaped into new language for the next person to create their own fully captured experience.

Pathetic Discourse

At times there seems to be overwhelming use of pathos in everyday life but I feel like that's what our society calls for. Everyone wants their message to be heard. The easiest way of doing that is through emotion. Trying to truly connect with someone else and getting them to understand your message. When it gets to be excessive is when the fallacies come into play. People want to go so far as to scare others into believing the claims that they are making. Tabloids often make extreme accusations in order to get the attention of the public. This works on a lot of people because they are drawn into the claims that are being made. Whether it be because of fear, disgust or excitement. If someone makes a claim that the world is going to come to an end, there is going to be excitement around the subject. This would draw reader in and then they would inevitably see the adds for other stories and products. I feel like these are the cases when using the pathetic is too much. Overall though, I feel like the pathetic discourse in our society does add to our culture and allows us to connect on a deeper level.

All to Blame, if any...

In all honestly, though public discourse has become more and more pathetic, I do not believe that public discourse has become too pathetic. This is primarily due to the fact that emotions are what interest us. Unless reading for the facts, people don't typically read a book unless it is full of emotion and things that draw our attention. So people over-exaggerate a little. So they make something out of nothing and at times make viewers and readers everywhere a little crazy. The problem is--the media does this because the people crave it. This may be a hard truth to face but it is also a hard truth to deny. Whether you are reading a book, listening to a speech, or hearing the news, emotion and pathos need to be involved. As horrible as it is, we are drawn to these appeals by nature. That being said, the receivers are to blame just as much as the presenters and if public discourse attempts to become less pathetic, well, everyone is going to be a little disappointed.

I can't wait to, like, post my pet peeve

It's okay, we're all guilty of this one. It's highly contagious and hard to shake, and a lot of people don't even realize how they use the word 'like' as a vocalized pause until they hear a recording of their conversation played back to them. I think it's especially funny that searching for "the word like" on Google lands you on pages that discuss how to permanently remove this nasty one from your vocabulary for good.

I apologize in advance if this post causes you to start counting or focusing on how many times people you are listening to use 'like' in their sentences.

Many people, including myself, associate 'like,' when used as a vocal pause as a replacement for "uh", "um", and other weird things we say when we are pausing to think about what to say next, with teenager or childish methods of communication. Excessive use of this word has negative connotations that reach back to that of Shaggy on "Scooby Doo" or the Valley girls in the movie "Clueless." Luckily, it has not yet worked as well on paper as it does in contemporary conversation. Consider the following examples of this word abuse:

1) And then I was like, "no way!"

2) That's like near State Street.

Would you take an article seriously if they wrote their thoughts like this? In the first example, "was like" replaces "said" or "screamed" or some verb that would give this sentence meaning. It doesn't make any sense! How did you resemble "no way" in any shape or form? In the second example, we see that 'like' can be omitted without any consequence. It really has no place in the sentence at all.

So why is 'like' so popular? Why has it become such a habit? There are interesting theories that say that today's youth never like to express their thoughts concretely, preferring instead to soften their expressions using a "fuzzy" word such as 'like.' Personally, I tend to use the word in this way when I get excited about an event that occurred and try to explain it to a group of friends as quickly as possible. I have also been told that when I am consciously trying to not say 'like' I sometimes come across as too serious or even suspicious, which makes this pet peeve even more of a mystery, since most dignitaries or orators never seem to let the word seep into their language.

I guess the real question is: will the baby boomer who might be your future boss appreciate how well your conversation matches that of a Valley girl? Don't get me wrong, Shaggy is a pretty cool cat, but we all know that hippie never got a real job!



Enough said.

Don't Be "All About" Overusing Phrases

A phrase that I once enjoyed using was the phrase “all about” when talking about liking something. For example, A few years ago I was all about using that phrase. Then this past weekend I ran into someone who made the “all about” phrase a victim of terrible overkill.

A friend of a friend brought one of their friends over to my apartment at 3 in the morning while all of the people that I live with were watching a movie as the night was coming to an end. This friend was obviously feeling drunk and was incredibly obnoxious. He commenced to play a game of beer pong with my roommates and I. I never asked his name nor really cared because I noticed very quickly that every other sentence he said included the phrase all about. He tried to make awkward conversation such as, “Let’s play beer pong. I’m all about beer pong.” Then he went on to say that he is “all about making cups” when he plays beer pong (oddly enough the objective of the game). But then we started to stray from the game and tried to make friendly conversation with this guy. I am “all about” giving a person a second chance, even if they initially rub me the wrong way. At this point I had already noticed his bad habit, and I texted my roommates so that they could realize and enjoy his subconscious language addiction. In a ten minute conversation, he went on to tell me how he was “all about” the Ying Yang Twins, “all about” eggrolls, and “all about” Tommy Boy to name a few.

My roommates and I just burst out with laughter as he proceeded to say that he was “all about” everything under the sun over 20 times in ten minutes. He was a very interesting guy with plenty of good things to say, but I couldn’t help but to concentrate on what quickly became a pet peeve of mine. No matter how good a phrase is or you think it may be, don’t overuse it. Popular and trendy phrases are great to have in your syntactical arsenal, but make sure to use them in moderation.

Response to Cognitive Fluency Article

This was a thought provoking article for me. While reading it, I noticed that everything that the article is saying is relatively true. People easily remember things that flow better. It makes sense that big name firms would choose a name that has a ring to it because that way they stay in the customer's head, even if the customer doesn't know it. Something that was interesting to me was that people conducting studies found that even the font had an affect on people answering different questions. It was also interesting that although things that are more fluent are more familiar to us, they can also get boring. This raises some interesting questions as to how much fluency one should use in choosing a name.

Revolutionary... or just plain obvious?

I have mixed feelings about this article. Part of me wants to talk about how interesting this article on cognitive fluency is and how it shapes our thoughts, choices, and beliefs; however, the other part of me just wants to say "well.... OBVIOUSLY". I do realize that these are ground-breaking studies being done and how new and interesting this is supposed to be in the field of psychology. I just can't help but think about how long companies have been creating jingles and mottos that rhyme and get stuck in our heads until we are nearly forced to buy the product. I keep thinking about how obvious a good majority of this information seems. A huge part of logos and pathos is based on this information already-- rhyming and empathy and those sorts of things. The article even addressed this idea when it discussed "The persuasive power of repetition, clarity, and simplicity..." so why is this so revolutionary? I did, however, find the study about making lists interesting-- and potentially useful! The one part that I do find revolutionary is the portion that discusses using more difficult to understand tactics in marketing or anything that requires more attention from the individual. This will change parts of logos and pathos and the way audiences are reached.

Steroids in Baseball

Keep Steroids Out of the Hall of Fame

As we move into the turn of the decade, Major League Baseball (MLB) is presented with some tough decisions to make in regards to players of the steroid era and their induction into the MLB Hall of Fame. Since 1936, the Baseball Writers Association of America has done a great job of choosing only the best baseball players to make it into the exclusive MLB Hall of Fame. Being in the position of the Hall of Fame selectors is very hard because every year there have been debates from many different viewpoints about the Hall of Fame status of numerous players. Yet, the selection committee has only selected players who are outstanding on and off the field to represent the history of America’s pastime.

In 2013, players from what has been deemed baseball’s steroid era will be eligible to be inducted into the Hall of Fame. From the late 1980s to the early 2000s, many baseball players, including baseball greats such as Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Alex Rodriguez, have been found guilty of taking performance- enhancing substances. These players have skewed their ability and statistics through the use of unnatural steroids. Therefore they should be considered cheaters in the eyes of baseball fans, and more importantly, in the eyes of the Hall of Fame Selection Committee. In order to maintain the integrity of America’s pastime, players who have been proven guilty of steroid use should not be voted into the MLB Hall of Fame.

First off, players who use steroids are directly violating one of the Hall of Fame voter’s guidelines. The fifth guideline for Hall of Fame voters is that “voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” The words integrity, sportsmanship, and character should ring a specific bell to each and every member of the committee because they are principles that stand at the heart of this issue. It is absolutely absurd to praise someone who used illegal performance-enhancing drugs that provide them with an unfair advantage as being integral, having a high regard for sportsmanship, or demonstrating good character. Just because other great players have taken various other drugs in the past does not discredit the point that steroids provide some players with unfair advantages that others don’t receive. In fact, it enhances this point because steroids give a much greater advantage to the user than the drugs that New York Times Op-Ed writer Zev Chafets says the players before the steroid era took, such as cocaine, alcohol, or speed. These drugs are either stimulants or depressants that have a temporary effect. While steroids are taken in two week cycles that have a lasting effect on conditioning muscles to get larger and to recover faster from strain, both effects that provide an immense advantage. Taking cocaine, alcohol, or speed never made anybody physically stronger or more conditioned. Even if it did, these examples of old-time players taking these drugs come few and far in-between. It was not a habitual occurrence like steroids became part of the everyday life of many great players, including Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, Roger Clemens, and Ken Caminiti. San Diego Padres third baseman, Caminiti, whose cause of death at 41 has been linked to steroid use, estimated that 80% of the players in the MLB were taking performance-enhancing drugs throughout the 90s. The sporadic problem of the use of cocaine, alcohol, and speed never even approached the magnitude that steroids did. There is a reason why the past 25 years in baseball will forever be known as the steroids era.

Additionally comparing kids who have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and take Ritalin to baseball players who take steroids is, as Chafets does, is simply ridiculous. The kids that are taking Ritalin are using it in attempt to live normally day in and day out with a disorder that they were born with. Contrarily baseball players are just carrying out their careers by playing a game. These players are not suffering from any kind of natural disorder that requires them to take steroids. Also, Ritalin is taken by these kids on a regimented basis, is doctor prescribed, and is legal. Steroids, on the other hand, are illegal and therefore obtained illegally and are oftentimes abused by stacking numerous steroids on top of each other in order to gain the upper hand on the guy that is taking steroids in the adjacent locker room stall.

This brings me to my last and most important point. With million dollar contracts on the line, competition amongst amateurs to become professional is fierce and they are oftentimes willing to do just about anything to get a competitive advantage. With baseball players being drafted into professional baseball straight from high school, tons of pressure is on these kids to perform better than the next guy to earn a big contract, so many turn to steroids. Chafets says that all MLB baseball players should be allowed to take steroids and do whatever it takes for them to perform their best, claiming that baseball players are adults that make their own decisions and not children. Well that may be true, but the competition is intense and kids start getting recruited from the time they are in 8^th grade to a senior in high school. The pressure starts to mount when the recruiting process begins, and as recruiting becomes more competitive a domino effect forms, causing steroid use to occur sooner and sooner amongst children. Yes, professional baseball players aren’t children, but they are role models and they do set standards that young ballplayers across America look up to and try to accomplish themselves. For example, ss an avid baseball fan since I was six years old, I have looked up to many steroid abusers as I grew up with the game. The epic homerun race in 1998 between Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire is a time I will remember for the rest of my life. While Sosa and McGwire were rewriting baseball’s homerun record books, they were my heroes. When I was 17, I stared at these same two heroes being indicted in front of a grand jury on steroid charges. At that moment my heart was broken, and I began to question the value of hard work and commitment that my father had taught me as a kid. Chafets claims that youth steroid use is not even an issue because the government can regulate children’s use of steroids as they do with alcohol, tobacco and prescription medication. I don’t think this point is very string considering every year, 77.4 million packs of cigarettes are smoked by underage users and 77% of high school seniors have had an alcoholic drink with 94% of the high school seniors claiming alcohol is “very easy” or “fairly easy” to get. And the underage alcohol issue has been around for centuries, whereas steroids are a newer commodity and regulation isn’t really as strict, even though the consequences may include many adverse health effects including liver damage, cardiovascular problems, stunted growth, high blood pressure, kidney problems, and sterility.

Disaster Unfolds

Adorned by the light of the rising sun, I felt a sensation I certainly hadn’t felt before when I gently kissed her tender lips good-bye as she scampered placidly across the street and hurried to catch her raging bus on the other side of the road, but as we distanced ourselves from each other and let go, I all of a suddenly took notice of something that she unfortunately did not: a black Toyota compact car attempting to come to a standstill as it violently threw her up onto the windshield and back down to rest on the cold pavement.

Nick of Time

As I sprint my path on the sidewalk past the cold, gray blur of school buildings, past the dark strangers in heavy coats who anticipate my movement and strafe out of my way, under the cranes whose lights disturb the otherwise dead night sky, and through the darkened tunnel with broken lights that line its edges, a small thought disturbs me: one sidelong glance for incoming traffic, no more, not even more than a split second in length at the upcoming intersection could save my life, my entire existence, but I suppressed the thought and continued my path directly through the intersection without even a glance for my safety, stopping the departing bus I had been sprinting for just in the nick of time.

Sentence Assignment

Textbook readings and long articles are often assigned to many college students as a way for them to obtain a better grasp on course material, but despite their purpose, the readings often do the exact opposite by using wordy, over complicated language that can either turn off a reader or just confuse him or her even more: instead the text could explain a point in a simpler more concise form that would more effectively present the bottom line.

In one sentence: VP.

Dance is my obsession and my passion, my niche one might say, I could write pages upon pages exploring (or explaining) it but today I am trying something new: one sentence; so I’ll be specific and explain my high school dance team—the Varsity Patriettes or “VP”— which may be something new to you, reader, if you are not from the Midwest or just don’t know anything about dance, because though I’ve danced at a studio since I could hardly walk and have been through competitions in that world of dance, competitive high school “dance teaming” is a whole other world (it’s a more concentrated world with more face to face, raw competitiveness that pushes—no—FORCES each dancer to work both internally and externally together in order to be the best) and to be perfectly honest, it was (and basically still is—just ask the new team) my life—not only was it my life in the sense that I would have practice four to five days a week, a halftime performance on most Fridays, and a competition most Saturdays or Sundays—but also because my teammates became 23 of my best friends and when 24 people work for nine months, on three dances, for one day… there is no better feeling than what we experienced on March 8, 2009: becoming State Champions; so in one sentence consisting of 236 words, I give you: VP.

Power of Words

Words have so much meaning in our society, but this fact is often overlooked. The way one person might look at a sequence of words could be completely different from the way someone else might look at it. The words could contain an entirely different message. The steeper the mountain, the harder the climb, the better the view at the finishing line. This idiom packs a punch to say the least. The saying can be applicable to so many aspects of life. It’s the fact that it has so much meaning that makes it so powerful. I’ve always believed that there’s only a few things that are more amazing than a group of words together that people from completely different make ups and backgrounds can take, and be influenced and motivated by them all together.

I’d been hearing this saying since I was about thirteen, but never really understood it’s full context until I was a little older. Playing sports and training for sports can be trying. With the long days of weight lifting and conditioning, sometimes one can feel like there’s no end in sight. Like your always going to be doing the same routine and that the point of it is to just see you suffer. I used to have so much anger and hatred built up inside over coaches having unfairly long practice or working us too hard. When I was thirteen, my friends and I played on a traveling basketball team. We had one coach who would come on occasion, but when he did make it to practice, we knew it was going to be no picnic. When he was in the gym, we weren’t even aloud to shoot. It was all conditioning and discipline. We, and a few others, had the same experience our freshman year of high school. We all played football and had no idea what we would have to go through. Two full weeks of two-a-day practices. Each practice four hours in duration, and each one more difficult than the last. If someone missed a call, or an assignment, it was over for us. We were chastised day in and day out. We would do the same thing every year, except, each year we would prepare for tougher competition and each year there would be less people from our original freshman class. Some didn’t think it was worth all the time, and some just couldn’t handle the workouts. It wasn’t until we all gathered when we came back home from college on break that I realized how valuable that time was. We would sit and reminisce about all the times we got yelled at, all the running we did, and all the snaps of the actual games. We had reached the peak in my mind. Our teams never won any championships or league titles so during high school there was no indicator that our destination was achieved. Now we see it. Even those who didn’t make it all four years, we still have that bond as a result of our hard work.

That is the essence of the point this saying, the steeper the mountain, the harder the climb, the better the view at the finishing line, is trying to get across. The difficulty is what makes everything worthwhile. The steeper the mountain, signifying the more adversity you face. The harder the climb, saying the more effort it takes to finish. And the better the view shows how you can stand on top of the mountain at the end and truly be proud of the accomplishments you’ve achieved. These types of situations set people apart and those memories will follow throughout life. I would hear my coaches repeat this saying over and over and I knew that is part of the reason that I made it through all the hardships. My teammates and I knew that eventually we would be on top of that mountain, we just didn’t know when.

It’s spectacular what words can do. When you’re on the field and gasping for air, you think of these words and they give you inspiration. You give each play everything you have even when there’s nothing left. This shows the magic of words and language have and how the words can be taken and internalized into each individual and produce the one thing that can’t be measured by any test or physical assessment, heart.

A common aphorism

"Actions speak louder than words"

Actions often transcend language in both importance and in persuasion. This aphorism could be considered to be a condensed version of another aphorism by Mahatma Gandhi which reads: “Be the change you want to see in the world.” It is easy to boast or it is easy to cry or complain about injustice or corruption, but it is often ineffective and a weak attempt at success or problem solving. “You talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?” By moving to action, most people believe you directly affect the world in ways words cannot; you become a leader of the change you wish to see. In D1 athletics, for example, the coach does not look for people who say they are good. The coach looks for people who prove they are good through their actions.

The form of logic used in this aphorism is inductive reasoning. There is no premise that states that words are more powerful or more “loud” than words. The conclusion is deduced by means of examining contemporary society, revolutions, and striking events that have occurred primarily due to actions taken by individuals rather than being initiated with language alone.

This sentence, first of all, is perhaps the best way to get someone to reconsider the effort they are putting into written or verbal arguments that are pointless due to the context or audience they are trying to persuade. It is a choice of words that the reader must take an extra step to process, and that is why it is so effective. If we take this sentence literally, it makes no sense. Actions are not words, and we certainly don’t speak them. A more appropriate sentence might be: “Actions show louder than words,” where the word louder indicates more impact. The reader is queued into the idea of the impact of their ideas and how a complete revisit of which method of persuasion might be more useful and have the largest impact. Perhaps you are trying to persuade people to vote for a new president, but your audience knows that you have never voted for any president in your life. Your audience will not take you seriously until you vote. No word, verbal or written, will ever persuade them to vote in this context until you lead by example and vote yourself. Sometimes words alone are not persuasive because they are unbelievable, and when change is desired, people do not get their hands dirty with words.

Saying that one’s actions have their own unique voice places action in the same playing field as language but in a way that hints that action actually transcends language. This is a clever turn of phrase

This aphorism’s most powerful impact and effectiveness can only be seen in a world where an excess of information, opinions, and wanting for change exists across all mediums of information where people are constantly wading through it wondering what is believable, surreal, or simply a waste of time. It is a simple reminder of the cases in language where your audience and yourself is separated by a brick wall that is impenetrable by language alone. Throwing words at this wall, no matter how well written, how persuasive, and how meaningful or well packaged the words are, is futile. It is a humble reminder that action often initializes or acts as a catalyst for opinions and comments and language. It is the precursor for language, and often the most effective at persuading and reaching other human beings.

Thoreau Quotation

Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.

-Henry David Thoreau

The utterance of these words in the 19^th Century by American essayist and poet Henry Thoreau gave way to radical thought and in turn great accomplishments by many innovators. On a literal semantics level I envision this quote by picturing an adventurous man following a path in the forest that has been bombarded by many footsteps in the past, but then he boldly strays from the path and continues on his way.

This interpretation is not actually what Thoreau means. He uses rhetoric to get at his point that people need to be different and go out on a limb to actually make a difference and be remembered in their short lifetime. It is extinguishing all of the fear from the reader’s body and mind to not just do what society tells you to do or just expects you to do, but rather go out and do something extraordinary that nobody has ever done before. This can apply on a large-scale level or on a much more minute day-to-day basis. It is urging the reader to take a chance and ignore failure because someday others may progress onto your path and follow your example.

This more than likely was not the first quote of its kind, but the way it was conveyed really makes it something special. It uses deductive logic by implying that if you are not walking on the path you are walking off of the path and possibly creating your own path. Also, adding the word instead implies that there is definitely two options but clearly one that is the better but bolder option.

The idea is presented with a simple “do this, but don’t do that” structure. It relies on cleverly turning the phrase “do not go where the path may lead” into “go instead where there is no path and make a trail.” It uses parallelism and repetition by starting off both parts of the quotation with “do not go” and “go.” Thoreau could’ve easily put “instead” in front of “go” to read “Do not go where the path may lead, instead go where there is no path and leave a trail.” Instead Thoreau’s poetic mind put go first to keep a good rhythm and ringing repetition.

Most unique about Thoreau’s word choice is that he uses the word “path” instead of many alternatives such as road, lane, highway, or route. I think this helps to build ethos because when I think of path, as I demonstrated before, I think of a dirt path amongst a lush green forest in the wilderness. This is fitting because Thoreau lived his life as a naturalist and even published a book called Life in the Woods (more commonly known as Walden) about his two years, two months, and two days living the simple life in the wilderness. The quote matches up with his elementary and nonconformist lifestyle.

The tool of rhetoric that Thoreau makes the most use of, as is typical of most memorable quotes, is pathos. As I stated, this quote isn’t the first of it’s kind, but coupled together with his logos and ethos congregation, this quote stands out for me among all of the other typical quotes. It is communicated indirectly and creatively unlike something as banal as “Be yourself.” Thoreau essentially has the same message with his quote “If a man loses pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured, or far away.” It was a great debate, which one of these I liked better, but I like the quote I chose more because it has the same powerful emotional message, but is conveyed more succinctly and in conjunction with Thoreau’s personality.

"...do GOOD."

"Go into the world and do well. But, more importantly, go into the world and do good." -Minor Myers Jr.

Everyone has a vision of success. Most of us have been creating these visions since before we can remember. These are ideas are enforced by our parents, our teachers, elders, even peers. Everyone tells us to work hard, do well in school, get As and we will be rewarded. The problem is that being successful by making a lot of money doesn't always reap the rewards we are taught it does. Reason being, "doing well" is not enough. We need to be taught to also "do good."

In my opinion--and hopefully yours by the end of my little spiel—this quotation could not be phrased more appropriately or meaningfully. That means a lot coming from someone who is very conscious of her “good” versus “well” usage. I just love this idiom for all it’s worth. What should be the most obvious reason as to why is its’ meaning. When Minor Myers stood up in front of his audience of graduates and recited these words, he was quite simply advising them to work hard, accomplish great things, be successful, BUT, at the end of the day, it is far more important-- and gratifying-- to have done your part in making the world a better place and to help others than to have made all the money in the world. He wasn't denying his graduates the "right," if you will, to make money or have a successful career; rather, he was simply encouraging them to resist from limiting themselves to that. This is such a simple, yet bold idea and it’s something that I feel very strongly about. I really do try to live by this; I try to not limit myself to studying or doing schoolwork. I make time to volunteer and do other things. Other things meaning things that I enjoy. I do other things that maybe don’t make the world a better place, but things that make me a happier person. I think being happy is giving back as well. To be honest, a grumpy person isn't going to be very apt to helping someone out.

Aside from the meaning, I love this quote for the way it is presented. The idea is presented with a pun-like phrase. The author played with the not-so-grammatical phrase “do good” to get across the meaning. It is almost like a clever turn of phrase as well because you wouldn’t normally--well, you as in anyone who is schooled enough to get anything out of this idiom anyway--say “do good.” This is exactly why I love the phrasing so much! I am very conscious of using “well” instead of “good” (when necessary) and I know many others are with me! I think the author uses this phrase so well and makes it stand out. He makes the reader jump back and take a second to really reflect upon what he is saying. The structure aids in pointing this out. There is obviously repetition because almost the entire phrase is repeated until the last word. This could also be considered substitution because “well” is simply replaced with “good.”

While the meaning of this phrase may be clichéd—it’s really nothing new to most people that giving back makes you a better person—the way it is stated is original. Most people choose to take an extreme position on this topic: happiness is money or happiness is giving back. Why can't it be both? I mean, we don't go to school for 16 or more years for nothing! So in the thoughts and words of Minor Myers Jr, do both. "Do well," "do good," and always, be happy.