Question of the Week (1/6/12)

After reading Michiko Kakutani's piece on p. 152 in your Thinking in Writing book, answer the following:
Do you think that changes in language bring about social change, or that social change brings about changes in language, or both, or neither? Be sure to support your argument with compelling examples drawn from your own experience and/or from written sources.  Post by the end of the day (3 p.m.) on Tuesday. Enjoy your weekend.

Question of the Week (12/16/11)

Our last question of the week in 2011! Hall cites four types of reading, which one do you use most prevalently and which one would you like to cultivate. For instance, I use reading to escape everyday when reading for pleasure, but I would like to cultivate reading to engage. Then elaborate on your reasons why. Explore this question. Posts are due by the end of the school day on Tuesday. Enjoy your holiday break.

Question of the Week (12/2/11)

• 
  
  
  
   When watching 12 Angry Men who comes closest to your own style of communication? Who is farthest? Remember to comment on another classmate's response. Posts are due by 3 p.m. on Monday. Enjoy your weekend.
  

Logical Fallacies

Greetings! Please post your arguments -- including your fallacy here. Many thanks.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU

Question of the Week (11/18/11)

Seen right: The cast of the original movie version of Twelve Angry Men. Credit: Image courtesy of Studio One.

Those who wrote our constitutions knew from history and experience that it was necessary to protect against unfounded criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies and against judges too responsive to the voice of higher authority. ….Providing an accused with the right to be tried by a jury of his peers gave him an inestimable safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous prosecutor and against the compliant, biased, or eccentric judge."
— The Supreme Court of the United States, Duncan v. Louisiana (1968)

Twelve Angry Men, originally written for television by Reginald Rose in 1954 and subsequently adapted for stage (1955), film(1957) and television again (1997), effectively conveys the central importance of the right to a jury trial afforded by Article III of the Constitution as well as Amendments V, VI, and XIV. Focusing on the right to a trial by "an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed," the play/film also addresses related constitutional provisions, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the right to counsel. More broadly, the play/film embodies the central insight of Alexis De Tocqueville in his classic work Democracy in America, that the jury system is one of the most important political institutions for democratic self government. It educates citizens about the law and legal process, helps them understand their duties as citizens, and in the best case, improves their deliberations as citizens.
Do you agree or disagree with the statement above? What is another important "political institution"? How are these rights abused, or better yet, misused? Post your response by Monday at 3 p.m. We will further our discussion on this topic and this film after the holiday break. Enjoy your weekend.

Question of the Week (11/10/11)

Drawing on your analysis of Kennedy's rhetorical strategies, write a speech in which you extort your audience to take action for a cause in which you strongly believe. You need not ask them to lay down their lives, but use language effectively to stir them to some significant action. Enjoy your long weekend and have your posts completed by 3 p.m. on Monday. We will read some aloud on Tuesday during class. Your x-day next week will be on Thursday.

Question of the Week (11/4/11)

Write a satirical essay, putting to use some of the strategies you have observed in Swift's writing. You might think of this assignment in terms of advocating one solution to a problem while pretending to advocate another. Or you might think of it in terms of playing the fool among knaves. Or you might think in terms of borrowing Swift's super-rational, at times mathematical reasoning for a cause that is utterly irrational—or so rational that it forgets to take feeling, morals, etc. into account. This week post your essays by 3 p.m. Tuesday. Don't forget to read another essay and include your response. Enjoy your weekend.