Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Argument Analysis 1

ENGL 418
1-13-15
Kendal Gast

I defined rhetoric as the exchange and interaction of persuasive ideas.  After searching for different definitions and hearing what others in class said, I hadn’t realized how close I was to the correct definition.  Truthfully I didn’t know (or didn’t think I knew) what the definition was and thought something from the previous rhetorical analysis class would help.  Hearing the one individual’s definition of “everything” was unique and insightful.  He was right in thinking that everything around us is jockeying for our attention and approval.  This is something I find rather annoying about humans.  People want to justify themselves in how they dress, talk, act, or think, but it’s not necessary.  I think always trying to justify oneself takes away from an individual’s agency and splatters it all over the rest us; nobody is happy in end.  The individual has nothing left to appreciate of themselves and everyone else just gets pieces – shitty ones and those that smell like vanilla candles. 
            An example when I used rhetoric:  a good friend of mine was having difficulty sorting through his thoughts and struggling with anger that would often consume him for minutes throughout the day.  I suggested he write.  Write in a journal, write in some sort of structured form, anything.  He was skeptical at the idea initially, but now regularly composes poems, verse, and prose much more skillfully than me.
            An American Indian class that I took a year ago was one example of rhetoric having an effect on myself.  I knew Native Americans had a rich and unique tradition of oral narrative, but I had no clue they believed everyone was living out one of four stories in life.  Unfortunately, I don’t remember what the stories were.  (Awful, I know, and I gave away the notebook containing all those awesome notes). 
            Another class that I’ve taken, a philosophy class, changed the way I view morality.  While this isn’t a fully constructed or thought out position/idea, I nevertheless default to this when trying to explain bad behavior to someone:  it doesn’t matter what someone’s been “taught” or raised to be.  It doesn’t matter if someone thinks a certain act is morally wrong.  In the end, we all decide for ourselves what is morally “right” or “wrong”.  For the individuals that choose to murder humans with a gun, they don’t think what they’re doing is wrong.  For the victims, it’s clearly wrong.
            A little about myself:  I’m a junior in English but graduating in May.  Although I get asked what my next steps after school look like all the time, the answer remains the same:  I don’t have a clue besides posessing a raging desire to eradicate the debt I’ve accrued over the past three years.  Besides that, I’d love to travel overseas and teach English.  China, South America, Africa, it all sounds amazing. 

            Because college has shoved an ungodly wide amount of literature down my throat, picking out a favorite author or book is impossible.  However, my two current favorite titles are Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer and Life at These Speeds by Jeremy Jackson.  (He happens to be an excellent author who went to the Iowa Writers’ Workshop at the UofI).  I love swimming, biking, and running, although running takes up way more time than the other two.  Food is a sincere addiction of mine and I don’t care; consequently I abhor picky eaters and those that can’t finish the food they take.  Rather than having another helping of a main dish, I’ll always ask for dessert. 

No comments:

Post a Comment