Post 6

Grant-Davie's article was a lot like the one we had to read for Monday's class. Exigence is something not the way it should be. There is a change waiting to be made. With my visual argument it is between church and state. The law specifically states there should be a separation between church and state, however there is not when it comes to gay marriage. 

I really like how Bitzer defines the audience as being able to settle the exigence: "those persons who are capable of being influenced by discourse and of being mediators of change" (105). He also describes constraints as "persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence" (105).

The discourse in my visual argument is the fact of the law stating church and state are separate institutions but that is not the case with gay marriage. This discourse is needed because in society we have been growing over the years to accept different ways of life. Being homosexual used to be ridiculed very highly, when today we are much more accepting of different view points. The goal of the discourse is to possibly legalize gay marriage, and for the audience to realize we may have opposing ideas and beliefs but as we live our lives we should let others live theirs. The rhetor(s) of the situation would be the federal government and the law passed. I would say the audience is the people of America and the constraints would be some Americans don't believe in homosexuality. They do not want to tarnish the sacred act of marriage by letting two men get married. This is a big constraint within the issue of church and state. 

Post 5

After reading the article I found rhetoric to be an example of advertisements/persuasion. An example of rhetoric I see on a daily basis would most likely be television commercials. Usually when you are watching a certain television channel, take MTV for instance, the commercials are guided toward a specific audience; teenagers to young adults. These are the channels you see commercials for AXE body wash, Old Spice, Neutrogena, and Tampax. It is directed toward young adults who strive to look good and smell good. I thought it was interesting when Carroll brought up the idea that whenever we meet someone new we, without thinking, judge their clothes, jewelry, and hair to make assumptions on what kind of person they might be. We persuade ourselves with ideas of who someone else might be.

When you have some rhetorical discourse you write accordingly to the audience. If you happen to be upset with a grade you got in class and you write an email to your mother complaining about it, you would write differently to her than if you were writing to the teacher. The type of language used may be different, the delivery of the rhetoric, and the formality of the discourse. 

Throughout our everyday we see rhetoric and use it subconsciously. Making assumptions about other people is something we do all the time. We do not think of these ideas step by step in our head, it happens without our even knowing. 

Post 4

Imagining writing "as individual, as isolated, as heroic" can be harmful according to Porter. Intertextuality is the notion that all texts contain 'traces' of information from other texts. That no text is genius or completely made up in the writer's mind. They must have gotten some of their details from another source. I agree with Porter on this subject. It seems as if whenever I go to write something, even if it's a subject I am knowledgeable about, I need proof from somewhere else. He also brings up the idea of Discourse Communities. "A 'discourse community' is a group of individuals bound by a common interest who communicate through approved channels and whose discourse is regulated" (Porter 91). This was a concept that was hard for me to understand. However, I believe he means that when you are an experienced writer you have opinions and view points that put you into a category or 'community' of others who have the same view points. Within these 'communities' you are supervised on what you can say, what has been said, and who can say it. So then you wonder, how can an individual writer surface from this discourse community? I'm not sure the answer of my own question. Genuine originality is something that can be lost within discourse communities because there are so many restrictions.

Post 3

In Greene's "Argument as Conversation" he speaks of research as conversational inquiry. This is not just gathering information for its own sake but using the research to possibly change readers' world views or your own. We argue every day by recognizing an issue up for debate and taking a side while supporting it with good reasoning. We must also acknowledge the viewpoint of others and take into consideration why they support the opposite. By writing as a form of inquiry we inform our understandings of claims made, questions that may be raised, and disputes they address. This starts our conversation with many viewpoints and opposing possibilities. The questions being raised are questions up for debate and not already known answers. Research leads to more knowledge. When you have researched the subject thoroughly, you can answer any uncertainties your counterpart may have. Greene's audience is college based. He frequently asks for the reader to think about their own educational experiences.

Kleine addresses the other type of research used when, for example, writing a research paper. Kleine states that he saw high school and college students writing research papers, but they were not so much writing as copying. When it comes to research papers you have to do a little of both 'hunting' and 'gathering' as Kleine says, "A hunter finds what he is looking for; a gatherer discovers that which might be of use" (25). When I write a research paper, I do much of the research before I even start writing. However, that is not the case for everyone. Writing is a way to communicate your studies in an easily understood way. I believe Kleine is talking to fellow writers in his article. He sees the way young adults compose a research paper and I believe he wants to change that starting with the teacher and moving down the chain.

Post 2

Before reading the articles I always heard others talking about Wikipedia as an invalid source of information. Anyone can write about any topic is what they would say. However, I would go to Wikipedia for my own personal desire of finding information. Then, if I found something that sounded not quit right I would search other sources. I also find Wikipedia very easy to understand. Sometimes you read college-based articles and they are hard to follow, but by looking at the topic on Wikipedia you might be able to understand it better.

After reading the article, I found that you can reach external links related to your topic and also further readings. You must make sure these are valid sources of information but you have to do that with any source. It also helps create ideas for topics as well. I am in no way savvy with the Wikipedia site so when I read about the Wikipedia Interface I was delighted to find that you can look at a discussion about the topic and the history of how the article came to be. It's also nice to know that some of the material written by people is deleted quickly if it does not add any new information to the article. All of these contributions to the Wikipedia site now give me a better understanding of how to use the site more efficiently.

When writing an article in Wikipedia you have to review, converse, revise, and share with others who have written about the same topic. You do not want to add or write an article that is repetitive to something that another has written. Wikipedia authors will discuss or question some of the contributors as to why they added what they did. This article taught me how to use Wikipedia effectively and not to rule out the information just because anyone can change the data.

Post 1

My name is Betsy Shellhaas and I'm from Troy, Ohio which is near Dayton for people who have never heard of it. I am an Art History major with a minor in Art. I really do not remember my English 151 class. I took post secondary classes during high school and English classes were what I tried to take at a community college level instead of at a university. Writing is not my forte. I'm excited for this class because there was a lot of talk about visual interpretations and analysis. When I heard that I thought it might be somewhat like Art History. I was apprehensive when thinking about my writing skills, but there is only room for improvement. The idea of blogging weekly is fine with me, but that might change when we are blogging about English stuff. I do not like presentations but I will do it and I do not like essays but I will write them.