Hi, everyone.
In pairs during today’s discussion of our three genre samples, please spend some time writing a brief but coherent post on the question that corresponds with the genre you analyzed:
Wald’s “Is Ethanol for the Long Haul?”: How does Wald push the limits of current research on ethanol use and production to increase the certainty of his position on the topic? To help you develop your response, use 2-3 passages from each of the following, but please only use what is relevant to your demonstration:
- Gross or Fahnestock/Secor (depending upon which critical perspective you use)
- Ong, Kinneavy, Killingsworth, or Selzer (depending upon which critical terms you need)
- Style pp. 1-25
Mann’s “The Coming Death Shortage”: What role do metaphors, lore, speculation, and prediction play in conveying how Mann thinks we should feel about the impending “death shortage”? To help you develop your response, use 2-3 passages from each of the following, but please only use what is relevant to your demonstration:
- Gross or Fahnestock/Secor (depending upon which critical perspective you use)
- Ong, Kinneavy, Killingsworth, or Selzer (depending upon which critical terms you need)
- Style pp. 1-25
Joy’s “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us”: What role do literature, contemporary science, historical science, and current events play in conveying how Joy thinks we should feel about genetic engineering technology? To help you develop your response, use 2-3 passages from each of the following, but please only use what is relevant to your demonstration:
- Gross or Fahnestock/Secor (depending upon which critical perspective you use)
- Ong, Kinneavy, Killingsworth, or Selzer (depending upon which critical terms you need)
- Style pp. 1-25
From Shelli and Cindy:
ReplyDeleteIn Wald's article, he presents the current manufacture process and the limited use of Ethanol to claim that it is not the "miracle" replacement for gasoline. In his table titled "Overview/Myth and Reality" he claims that ethanol produces as many greenhouse gases as gasoline production, the US does not have an adequate supply of corn to produce enough ethanol to be of use to every US citizen, and he also pushes his "cellulose" theory as a more adequate substitute than ethanol.
In Fahnestock's article, he talks about how stases are separated in lower and higher levels. Scientific arguments mostly address low stasis levels, which consist of "matters of fact, definition, and cause" (Fahnestock, 432). Wald does not quite use the definition stasis because he is writing to an audience that knows what ethanol is and it would be tedious to define it for them. However, in every other aspect of his article, he does define what the standard measurements of oil tanks are and also what exactly cellulose is. He uses the "cause" stasis to carefully address the reasons why ethanol research must continue in order for it to be viable. His own research on the effects of gasoline and ethanol on the environment and the citizen's pocket book fulfills the "fact" stasis.
Ong's article addresses the fiction of the writer's audience and in a passage he claims that "If a writer succeeds in writing, it is generally because he can fictionalize in his imagination an audience he has learned to know...if and when he becomes truly adept, an 'original writer'...he can alter it" (Ong, 11). In publishing his article in the Scientific American, Wald seems to see his audience as scientific, but the language he uses in his article alters the audience into seeming more of the general public. He begins his article by describing a ethanol station in Sioux Falls, SD, which gives the article more of a journalistic flair than an actual scientific paper.
In writing his paper in the journalistic fashion, he discards the traditional academic fallacy of writing in obscurities that Williams addresses in Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace. Williams states that too often, writers speak in overcomplicated manners in order to confuse the reader into thinking that "complicated sentences indicate deep thinking" (Williams, 4). Wald does not do this. He speaks plainly and presents his facts in a clear manner and in consequence, does not alienate his audience. Neither does he patronize him in "dumbing down" his paper. Instead, he informs them and outlines his theory of cellulose production with clarity and with respect for his audience.
Kyla Tosti & Kreigh Carlton
ReplyDeleteIn Charles Mann's article, "The coming Death Shortage", his argument closely relates to Gross' explanation of a theoretical paper. He argues several possible outcomes if medical technology increased the maximum life expectancy. His argument involves a deductive approach, which also relates to his theoretical reasoning. He states, "Older workers are less productive than younger ones, caring less and consuming more." Although, society has yet to witness an individual live over 150 years, he introduces an array of outcomes that would occur if life expectancy increases. Mann conveys several predictions throughout his article that attempt to frighten the audience of things to come, if a rise in the shortages of death appear. Mann predicts, "Tomorrow's rich oldsters will be expanding their disposable income to enhance their memories,senses, and immune systems. Refashioning their flesh to ever high levels of performance, they will adjust their metabolisms and computers, install artificial organs that synthesize smart drugs, and swallow genetically tailored bacteria...when lifespans extend indefinitely, the effects are felt throughout the life cycle, but the biggest social impact may be on the young." (163-164)
Mann, Charles C. "The Coming Death Shortage" 2006.
Lacey Hooie and Kimberley Cheung
ReplyDeleteMatthew L. Wald's, straightforward article,"Is Ethanol for the Long Haul" tends to go against current research so he can prove his point. He feels that ethanol may not be the best decision for our country at this time, "But is the rush worth it? Not the way we generate ethanol now" (Wald 44).
As said, Wald's article is a very easy read, he seems to have used Joseph Williams's principle, "The first is to put your readers ahead of yourself" (Williams 7) because he explains everything in great detail. He begins by giving the background of ethanol, and its uses. He then goes into his argument, which is against what current researches find, "most ethanol produced in the U.S. is sold as a kind of Hamburger Helper for gasoline" (Wald 44), and he then gradually falls into his conclusion about ethanol, "A solution would be to derive ethanol from cellulose" (Wald 49).
By proving his solution's relevance, John D. Ramage would say Wald is answering the resemblance question, "How much is this thing like/unlike that thing" During this principle, "We are simply viewing something that's not well understood or clearly evaluated 'in terms of' another thing that our audience is likely to understand better and/or accept as good or bad..." (Ramage 108). Wald efficiently answers this question by comparing ethanol usage to his solution of using cellulose. He does so in a way to persuade readers to view ethanol use as 'bad,' at least until the process can be perfected.
By writing clearly, and answering an important question in Ramage's scientific method, Wald is able to get his point across succinctly.
Jeff LaFave & Kae Grossman
ReplyDeleteFor "The Coming Death Shortage."
Mann operates under stases of value, re-defining the value of longevity, and in such, evaluating time and money. He describes a future akin to a vicious circle, in which people who earn money live longer, but in order to earn the money necessary, they must fully-utilize longevity and medical treatments. While death is not purely malevolent, humans have always viewed death as “bad” or “evil,” so the act of postponing one’s death can be viewed as a battle of good vs. evil.
From Ramage:
“But if making an ethical judgment, one’s standard of judgment is not relative to a particular class of things; one’s standard applies across classes and categories.”
“When perfection becomes the norm by which human performance is judged, the perfect becomes a resolute enemy of the good.”
Ong emphasized the importance of the audience. Considering this piece was published in The Atlantic Monthly, the readership of the publication is likely comprised of affluent, well-to-do people. Considering that this article presents unfavorable news for this group in the future, and conveys them in a negative light, the readers of this article might not take too kindly to the information presented. In addition, Mann’s claims for the next hundred years seem very sci-fi and ominous, but considering that he uses factual information from the last twenty-five years that his generational audience would familiarize with, the future does not seem as fantastical when he uses what the audience is already coherent with to inform them.
From Ong:
“For the speaker, the audience is in front of him. For the writer, the audience is simply further away, in time or space or both.”
“But ‘readership’ is not a collective noun, It is an abstraction in a way that ‘audience’ is not.”
From Style (“on the language of science”):
“There are times when the more the authors explain, the less we understand. Apes certainly seem capable of using language to communicate. Whether scientists are remains doubtful.”
Tim Mattingly and Ieshia Hill
ReplyDeleteIn a passage from Gross relating to the introduction, he explains that "according to Bacon, experimental science progresses 'by varying or extending the same experiments and by transferring and compounding diverse experiments the one into the other.'" Wald's article, "Is Ethanol For the Long Haul?" subscribes to this Baconian model. His's initial hypothesis, "Ethanol could displace gasoline, but it won't pay off until we find a way to distill cornstalks, not corn," alludes to previous experiments with ethanol. He shows his audience that he is furthering the experimentation on ethanol, that he is starting where others had left off.
One passage from Gross states, "In Nirenberg and Matthei, exclusion is partly a product of the experimental design, partly a rejection within the experiment of initially plausible, finally unsuccessful chemical affinities." Wald follows this Baconian principle in the way he lists numerous different "initally plausible" reasons why ethanol could work, and then goes on to explain how each of them would be unsuccessful. Wald doesn't necessarily exclude other sides of the ethanol debate. He inserts them into the overall experiment and explains their imminent failure.
Fahnestock and Secor explain the stasis of proposal with the question, "Should they be continued, expanded, reduced, or eliminated?" Although Wald mainly argues on the stasis of cause in his article, towards the end it becomes apparent he is also arguing on the stasis of proposal. He asks his readers, not directly, if ethanol experimentation should be continued, expanded, reduced, or eliminated. He gives his answer, explaining that it should be eliminated, but merely says "for the moment". He leaves part of it up to the reader to decide.
One passage from Joseph Williams' Style, states, "Written deliberately or carelessly, it is a language of exclusion that a democracy cannot tolerate" Ward did a great job writing carefully and making sure he didn't leave any important facts out. Never excluding an important opposing argument, Ward fairly showed both sides of the ethanol debate, clearly explaining why the opposing ideas would fail.
Another passage from Style reads, "Generations of students have struggled with dense writing, many thinking they weren't smart enough to grasp a writer's deep ideas. Some have been right about that, but more could have blamed the writer's inability (or refusal) to write clearly (4, Williams). Ward made sure in his article that his writing appealed to a mass audience, not an elite group. He wrote very clearly so anyone could understand the problems he found with ethanol. The images throughout the article also helped his readers understand his arguments.
Kellin and Zayin
ReplyDeleteWhen looking at Wald's article "Is Ethanol for the Long Haul?", Fahnestock and Secor's article can be looked at to describe how Wald moves through his article in order to make his topic more accessible to his audience. The following passage explains how he begins at his original position and uses his research to persuade his audience.
"Such articles introduce a topic by defining it and commenting on its extent, go on to consider causes and consequences, then evaluate the phenomenon, and finally turn to the future by predicting or recommending certain actions."(Fahnestock and Secor 429)
We can also look at Killingsworths article on how a writer may use different types of language in order to create his specific approach on the topic. We discussed how Wald’s article seems to be using both pathos (emotion) and logos (shared views) in order to appeal to his audience. Killingsworth goes on to explain the importance or worth of using these techniques. Wald assumes that his audience understands the need for a cheaper, healthier energy source so he plays on that shared value to connect with his readers.
“The overall picture gives us an author and audience moving toward common ground. What brings them together is the shared position of value, the need for change or growth.”(Killingsworth 27)
Joseph Williams’ book, Style, discusses the problem that many writers have with being unclear, because they try to sound intelligent by using long sentences and large words. He says that “some writers plump up their prose to impress those who think that complicated sentences indicate deep thinking.”(Williams 4)This quote may explain why Wald chooses to give so much scientific detail and include diagrams in his article. His research does make his claim more concrete, as well as, make him seem more credible. His audience assumes that he is correct simply because he writes as though he is.
Elizabeth and Ben
ReplyDelete"The full stases, from fact to proposal, constitute the backbone or outline of articles in general circulation magazines. Such articles introduce a topic by defining it and commenting on its extent, go on to consider causes and consequences, then evaluate the phenomenon, and finally turn to the future by predicting or recommending certain actions (Secor 429).
Mann's article, which was written in a general circulation magazine(The Atlantic) seems to follow this pattern loosely. Except he may spend most time commenting, considering causes and consequences.
When an argument stays in one stasis rather than exploiting the full range of stasis development, the stasis it is in becomes a powerful indicator of the author's sense of audience.(Secor 430)....The mere factual report of an attack on American shipping may outrage the public and cause them to clamor for action through no specific value or proposal arguments are directed at them.(431).
Mann Seems to stay in the stasis of cause for a lot of the article. What does this say about who he is addressing? He doesn't specifically say what we youngsters should do about the longevity-treatments, but it seems aimed at us, because all of the consequences have to do with young to middle aged people losing benefits they once had. Mann lays out the argument through cause and specific factual information. By simply providing the facts, he may be inducing future action or opinions. The audience can see the deliberate claim that Mann is making, but it seems that Mann stays within the stasis of cause throughout the article, by making repeatedly conclusions for the future.
Tak Sakamoto & FNU Zayin
ReplyDeleteIn Mann's text, he provides various claims and facts from diverse individuals from a Sociologist from a University in Japan to novels from decades ago. He does so in order to inform his audience that logner human life spans have high potential of becoming reality in the near future and that the changes in society and human culture will be "enourmous and hard to grasp that they can't be understood and planned for at the last minute." (Mann 171) He attacks this huge variety of potential changes that COULD occur from a astonishingly wide perspectives including economic, social, cultural, international, and even political viewpoints. However, his value or proposals are not apparant because most of the suggestions and ideas are restaed claims from others. Therefore the language of this text has a referential style.
In the concept of stasis, Fahnestock and Secor says that writers are ultimately trying to achieve "what it takes to convince an audience to endow the stasis and hence the topic of an argument with significance." (Fahnestock, Secor 433) Mann is making his case significant and interesting to audience by the text's referentiality and its wider range of aspects. By referencing many different acclaimed specialists and authors, his text becomes convincing and promising. And by touching an almost all aspects of human life, there is not a type of audience who do not feel involved in this topic.
He concludes this article to cause a paradigm shift, to be more aware and alert of the drastically and inconceivably different future. However, that was his only proposal, and nothing else in particular. Audience of from specific professional fields could argue that there are holes in his predictions throughout the text. In touching briefly on such wide variety of human aspects in just 15 pages, he must have known that his predictions will lack complete persuasiveness. Mann's another intention is revealed that it is an open ended argument, for interpretation. He is using the notion that critics "prefer to be engaged in an interpretive game where there are ambiguities rather than taught directly." (Fahnestock, Secor 436) By bringing many individuals from oddly diverse fields and making numerous predictions touching almost all phases of human society, Mann wanted to stir up minds and cause a controversy. His intention was to cause a minor chaos by predicting the future and making it seem so realistic and evident.
Wald pushes the limits of current research to support his position. He constructs himself as a non-partisan, objective writer. (Think ethos - he needs to convince his audience that he does not have an "agenda" other than portraying fact and defending public interest.)
ReplyDeleteHis tone is approachable, and he begins with describing a familiar scene to the audience before introducing the biological reasons for writing.
Style quotes Douglas Chadwick about scientific writing: "There are times when the more authors explain...the less we understand." Such is not the case in Wald's article; he explains scientific ideas in ways that seem both clear and relevant to a primarily non-science-trained readership.
Wald proposes a new way of analyzing whether ethanol is a responsible energy choice: life-cycle analysis. He believes (justifiably) that economics and politics have been the driving forces behind ethanol's popularity - and he points out that this is a new idea and is just beginning to be considered in legislative and scientific bodies. He blurs the lines of genre when he makes his argument effective by using human, political and scientific examples. This means that this article falls under Kinneavy's categories of expressive, social, exploratory, scientific and persuasive discourse. Kinneavy also says that " pure reference discourse is scientific, pure emotive discourse is poetic and any mixture is rhetoric." (Kinneavy 301).
Although there isn't conclusive science research to back up Wald's possible solution (use corn stalks, not corn fruit), his argument strikes the audience as both realistic and logical: there is an internal logic, and he begins with what is known about ethanol, which gives the reader security.
Fahnstock and Secor note that although many people outside science view scientific discourse as only a method of discussing relatively stable information and fact, in reality scientific writing is engaged in argument and controversy at the very first stases levels. (432) This article is an example of this - Wald complicates the definition of "clean" ethanol.
~Rebekah and Lily