Home Improvement

The articles that I read for our second reading assignment had to do with improving the area surrounding some of our U.S. cities. More specifically, the articles focus on the downfall of living in Detroit during the mid 1900’s and the efforts to improve a suburban neighborhood in Atlanta called Mableton. Rebecca Solnit chose to write about the past, present, and future living conditions that Detroit has to offer, and what seen and unseen forces are the reason behind many physical changes. She examines the past image of Detroit, going back to the English settlers fighting wars against the native people of the land. She helps us to examine what Detroit would look like if the coarse of history was different. On the other hand, Glenn Ruffenach wrote an article that used a suburb of Atlanta as his example to prove that small cities and suburbs are all facing similar problems today that have to deal with the living conditions of senior citizens. He states that areas in the united states, especially down south like Georgia, need to improve the living conditions of urbanism to make people stay and live longer. His main focus is based on the happiness and satisfaction of the people, because one of his main points indicate a need for creating a “lifelong community.” In my response I plan to extricate the views and ideals of these two writers and include my personal opinion on the matter. The evidence and support that is the base of Solnits argument is very creditable. She has been to Detroit numerous times in the past, with each time discovering a new factor that influences the way she views the city and its neoclassical form. She also uses historical evidence, such as the time when the Model T was producing 9,000 cars per day and Detroit made a name for itself through the auto industry. She mentions a great fact in her paper when she says that back in 1925, Detroit accounted for 1 and every 10 cars produced in America. Now the same exact place where the model T was born is just a broken down warehouse in shambles. Glenn Ruffenach, though, does not use empirical evidence and concrete facts to support his view of creating a “lifelong community.” Instead, he uses models and theories that have the capability to improve the areas in and around U.S. cities. For example, he mentions how new street grids in Fayetteville, Georgia could turn it into a walking town, which in turn would help senior citizens exercise and have a nice, long place to live. If the two got together for coffee, I am sure that they would agree on many points that can be taken into effect when speaking about improving a city. They both emphasize the need for better community living for older people. They would agree on the fact that older people create an influence for the young and new to come in and make a living, instead of always running in and out of various cities. My view on the situation is the exact same as Ruffenach’s, because I believe that creating a livable urban area must be focused around efforts in transportation, and most importantly, living conditions within small communities.

Mandatory Blog Entry 3

The chapter 5 reading was dedicated to the art of convincing by example. We learn how references to specific examples in the past can contribute enormously to points we are trying to make in the present. The key to a successfull example is its specificity in relation to the current probleme. The book uses an example of a man trying to convince his neighbor to keep his dog in his own yard. By using a specific example of another dog running wild outside of it's owner's fence he tries to convince the dog owner to keep his own pet within the confines of his yard. However, it is important to note that the example of a past dog gone out of control had to have happened in the same neighborhood so that the current dog owner can properly relate to the lesson. If the first dog had ruined the current dog owner's property than that example would arrouse very sharp and specific emotions and sensory memories, thereby enabling the dog owner to relate to his neighbors concerns.

Examples are not the saem as inductions because sweeping generalizations or not made. They are usually just one event being used as a lense through which another event is viewed. Although inductions can usually be informed by examples. They also need to be specifically tailored to the person involved or else the effect is no where near as potent.

Successful examples can also be fabricated, or drawn from fables and myths. Often times a fable or fictional account can be used to better illustrate a rhetor's point when history doesn't not provide as concrete of an example. Also these made up examples can be much less complicated and, through symbolism, may be easier for the 'target' to understand. Usually thsee fabricated examples will be able to best exhibit clean and complete logic without the complications that real life accounts can present. If an example is fabricated, than the only angles in which it an be analyzed are those presented by the creator of the story.

Examples from history are also very effective in the arena of politics. As the book says, to bring up 'Richard Nixon' as an example will automatically create the image of political figures and betrayal. So comparing a current figure to Nixon will force the reader to consider the traitorous similarities between the two figures, as a result of Nixon's legacy.

Another form of logos is the analogy, or comparing one action or event to another (usually hypothetical) one. If somebody does not understand why 'x' means 'y', than the rhetor can refer to a similar case were 'x' more clearly implies 'y'. Analogies are often times fabricated because, once again, by fabricating an example you can propose the most clean and clear logical thought pattern. Sometimes analogies and examples can be polar opposites. In this case the rhetor can make the argument that if something is true on one end of the spectrum, then the opposite must be true on the other end.

Maxims are also effective because they are 'wise sayings' as accepted by the general public. And who are we to go against 'wise sayings'? This is a way to put the opinion of a respected figure with the backing of an entire public against or in line with a certain argument. For example, our teacher might give us advice that goes in one ear and right out the other, but when that same advice can be tied to a Confucian Proverb it suddenly holds a ton more weight.

review

I thought this assignment was a nice hybrid of personal and academic writing. Good writing is only produced when the writer is passionate about the subject. Sometimes it is hard to satisfy writing assignments that I just don’t care about because if there is no personal investment then there is less urgency, which leads to watered down writing. Although one problem I faced with this particular paper was a surprising vagueness of the event. Once I started writing the paper I realized I had forgotten a lot more about the event than I thought I ever would have. This forced me to dig deeper for explicit details and the temptation to fabricate certain details grew stronger and stronger. However, when comparing the event to online research it put lots of things into context for me such has the seeming regularity of occurrences like this. I never quite considered the repercussions of isolation and loneliness until I saw the minority statistics for suicide.

I thought I got my points across fairly clearly, but to some degree I was still digging for something to write about rather than letting out something that was building up inside me. I have recognized that all my best writing has been when I feel as though I need to get some thoughts out on paper. Those instances are the equivalent to a player getting an adrenaline rush during a football game, an overwhelming feeling that supercharges my writing. The challenge is getting into that zone more often, I need to find a way to wire up an on/off switch to that feeling. But this paper was still an enjoyable one to write, and a good transition for me to move on from just writing personal stories to writing something the public may be interested in also.

Mandatory Blog 2

Chapter 2 was about seizing the moment, rhetorically of course. They started by addressing what the ancient greeks used to call Kairos. Kairos meant the comprehension of non-linear time, or time measured by opportunites rather than minute by minute. Although this is an ancient word and an ancient concept it can be appropriately applied to writing in today's world. An example of being "kairotic" would be writing about topic that has just turned hot, writing about an issue that is currently sweeping the community would be seizing a rhetorical moment. For example, magazine writers must do it all the time, articles discussing spousal abuse popped up everyhwere after the Rhianna incident and the "history of steriods" articles have been all over hte pages of sports magazines and websites over the past few years. The overall history of an issue would have been referred to as "chronos", but the "kairos" of that issue would be the main turning points involved in it. What were all the periods during the lifetime of that issue that truly define what it is today? That would be it's kairos. Kairos can be a means of invention because it can evolve or tweak an issure. Writers will oftentimes wait on the right moment to tackle an issue, but the window of time you choose to tackle that issue helps to define the way in which you do it. Kairos allows you to freeze these 'windows' in time an analyze the issue form all sides, keeping it in context with the time and all the parties involved. As the book explains, a perfect example of kairos writing were the gun control essays that came out after the virginia tech shootings, it is as simple as using the developments around us as fuel for our writing engine. Use current issues and events to propell our writings out into the spotlight. The opportunistic writer is often tiems the successful one, learining how to attack windows of opportunity with relevant writing is one of the surest ways to gain to attention of your readers.

Another Reeming.

::Sigh::

Ok, where to start.

Devaluing Mendenhall because he's 'injury prone' ...you have Westbrook and Palmer, nuff said. Omg but he has a bruised knee?!...he's a Running Back in the NFL, he practiced fully, he's fine. But he only avg'd 14.5 per week! ('only' being the operative word there). Thats more than your RB's are avging per week combined, i'll take that all day Mr. Burner.

Breaston, is he a true #3? he has more yards and fantasy points than Boldin, who is constantly banged up and has yet to practice this week because of a high ankle sprain. I like Breaston better than Boldin right now in a high octane passing offense.

--INTERMISSION-- Excuse me while i sift through all the failed attempts at humor in your enormous post, i need to find more stats to poke holes in.

OK, back folks...ah yes...7 catches in 6 games, 1.16875463 RPG yada yada...but wait! i thought we agreed that in those first 3 games he barely saw the field? you trickster you, that 1.16 RPG is SKEWED!!!!..lets keep our stats in context ok?

I put some heavy research (certainly not as heavy as yours) into this groundbreaking trend you refer to as "buying low, and selling high"...after being thoroughly confused for hours i think i finally got the hang of it. But, well, frankly i don't think Slaton for Forte fits that mold, i think you just traded a good RB for a shittier one.

Now, on a more serious note. By having a less than stellar draft (throwing away 5th and 6th round picks on Cutler and LJ) i put myself in a tough spot, and made a tough decision to let Randy go for an RB who i believe has a chance of finishing in the top 10 and making my team a little more stable. So Mr. Commissioner, know that i understand your bitterness stems from being ranked 7th overall and 3rd in your division with a 3-3 record, after trying desperately to fix your situation with a whopping 31 personnel moves. And hey, combine that with a dismal track record in your own league over the past few years (according to reliable sources)... and the constant updating of your Smack Talk as if it were a Twitter account starts to make a little more sense. So seeing how i have already proven that I am the better fantasy manager (SEE AP Football 2009; Week 1), I am going to hang the gloves up for now.

And as far as my dear friend Anthony DelCioppo's facial expressions are concerned, I'm just glad I had the opportunity to put a smile there, thats what friends are for right?


P.S. I was very impressed by the statistics and specific quotations in your first rebuttle, but seeing as it was not in MLA format nor was there a Works Cited page included, I'm forced to deem those quotes and stats as unsubstantiated.

a reeming

Just vote the trade down and move on with your lives gentlemen.

Randy, the guy has been a dud for me before last week (a dud in relation to the 13th overall pick i spent on him) Until he played the worst secondary in football, at home, in the snow (huge advantage for the Patriots) he hadn't put up Randy-numbers. Yea he will be a top 10 receiver, but I don't think him an Brady are reverting back to their 2007 status. And i've decided to take my chances with Anthony Gonzalez returning this season and being a solid #2 for me, with Ginn and Breaston rotating at #3. Its a big risk to put that much confidence in Gonzalez being able to return with no setbacks, but im a risky sort of guy

Mendenhall is a top 15 fantasy back already despite having only 7 carries through the first 3 weeks. In a league that is over-run with teams who use run by committee's i now have 2 solid backs who are going to guarantee me carries each and every week, oh yea and Mendenhall can catch the ball and pound it on the goal line too.

Dear Mr. Commish, or 'Burner', if i may call you that - , for some reason you seem to be absolutely TEEMING with bitterness and jealousy towards my fantasy decision making skills and subsequent leading position in the division. I'm going to attempt to put into context exactly how terrible your fantasy team really is, here are some fun facts for the entire league to enjoy:

--Steve Breaston has more receiving yards than both your #2 and #3 receivers, but even MORE interesting, is how he has received for more yards than either Forte OR Westbrook have rushed for...weren't those your top 2 picks? ouch...

--Kevin Smith may play for the Lions, but he is one of the only remaining backs who shares almost NO carries and he has outscored every single player on your team besides carson palmer.

--team redemption # of top 15 RB's (as per fantasy points) = 2

--matt's vicktorious # of top 15 RB's (as per fantasy points) = 0

Jim i still love you and respect your opinions, although i think your wrong on this one.

Seacrest out.

my brand

After sending out 12 forms requesting a personal assessment to be done by selected friends and family members, a Personal Branding picture of Kyle Murphy (the subject) was painted. Aside from a few road bumps regarding the punctuality of respondents, the assessments were not only more accurate and concise than the subject had expected, but also more agreeable to his own assessments of himself. Traits selected by the participants and subject alike seemed to pile into groups highlighting cooperative nature, outgoing/humorous personality and creative/imaginative mindset. Opinions on the subject’s greatest strengths mirrored most of these traits, while nearly all participants agreed that procrastination and lack of focus were the subject’s Achilles’ heel. Car and cereal comparisons seemed to convey ideas of solid, reliable foundation with a subtle flashiness. The culmination of these opinions reflected predictably in the ‘Team Role’ suggestions, and agreeably with the VALS survey results. Creator and Doer comprised 70% of the participants suggestions (73% if the subject’s opinion is included) for team role while the VALS survey categorized the subject as an ‘Innovator/Experiencer’.

Going back to respondents, most were prompt, and some were surprisingly prompt (Wesley and Anthony) while others needed constant verbal or personal reminders that the survey needed completion (Claire, Dave, Meagan and Michael). The most reliable person on the list (Meagan) was impossible to get a hold of and never even returned any results. So apart from a few surprises most of the response results were positive and as expected. However it required far too much time and effort to ‘reel in’ Dave and Michael so they would not be contacted for any future survey assistance.

The subject chose 6% (8 of 127) of the available traits to describe himself the best he could. It was shocking to find that those 8 traits, or 6% of the available whole, comprised 36% (31 of 85) of the traits that the respondents used to peg his personality. Also, this data does not take into account the other traits chosen by respondents that are synonymous with the 8 that the subject picked himself. This proves that the subject was fairly in tune with his strengths and flaws relative to how others perceive him. As the attached ‘Personal Percentages’ graph shows, all the selected traits can be grouped together in 7 separate and broader categories. When grouped properly the 85 traits taken from the respondents speak to the subject’s Cooperative Nature, Personality Plus’, Ethics, Creative Capacity, Passive & Aggressive Indicators and Overall Poor Personality Traits. Refer to the attached graph for percentage breakdown.

The Car and Cereal prompts give a more intangible opinion on the ‘make’ of the subject. It was here that results were most closely related, 40% of cereal choices were Lucky Charms and 40% of car choices were Luxury vehicles. Even more striking is the fact that the Lucky Charms were selected for the exact same reason Luxury vehicles were, they both represent a good foundation and just enough flash and style not to overdo it (according to the respondents). The strengths and weaknesses outlined by the respondents are a perfect blend of the structured trait selection and open-ended car/cereal comparison, and are quoted in the attached “Source A” and “Source B”.