Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Argument Analysis 3

Analysis3
Kendal Gast
2-4-16
Almossawi appears to have the goal of simply making clear what is a difficult topic to understand.  Although he does not talk about rhetoric or use specific terms in rhetoric, logical reasoning could be described as rhetoric in that well defensible positions must be taken up on the road to stasis and afterwards.  Almossawi perhaps did not see any effective introductions to logical reasoning for newbies, so he set out to create one that includes visuals.  He also chose to illustrate these concepts in a way that I am a fan of, that is, defining something by stating what it isn’t.  Almossawi also probably wants to keep the field of logical reasoning and argumentation alive while based on concrete, timeless principles.
            I chose to focus on the Participie website.  There, users can make a pie chart based on portions of the United States federal budget.  Although this was made for the previous election, the idea is still applicable to any other.  Two pies were available for users to adjust:  the federal budget and topics needed to be clarified by Obama and Mitt Romney.  You start with the averages of each pie and adjust from there.  The three main areas of spending are defense, social security and healthcare.  Very little is spent on agriculture, community development, science and technology, energy, or transportation.  These are not accurate representations of current government spending, obviously, but they still provide a unique visual and a powerful tool of participation.  Currently only 185 people have chosen to adjust a pie, and that’s only for the budget pie.  My pie focuses spending money on three key areas: science and technology, education, and energy.  The rest of the spending is much more evenly distributed, although defense has been reduced the most. 
            This could be used as an effective tool of persuasion.  Rhetors could use the average pies of a population to make any kind of argument.  The only problem is getting people with similar ideologies to participate.  Climate action groups such as NextGen Climate could send the link out to their email list of subscribers and then wait for the average pie to change in their favor.  They really don’t even have to do any work, only encourage the right population to make pies.  Any other type of action group could use this tool and then present the averages to candidates (if they saw them), important business owners, congress people, state representatives, etc. 
            Participie could also be a really effective educational tool.  If Almossawi could tweak the program so a set of adjusted pie charts could be averaged out instead of every single pie chart submitted, teachers could use this in a government class, history class, or argumentation class.  Hovering over the pieces, a short description is given about the details of our energy program or subsidiaries of social security.  But this platform could be even more effective if there were more pie charts to make, like who should be elected to this certain position, how a test should be conducted, or the choice of a pamphlet design.
            Almossawi I think directs this project towards those that have opinions on current political affairs.  While that is a broad category, most people that I encounter don’t hold any strong convictions about how the government should spend money or how the government should make policy, for that matter.  Their statements tend to be along the lines of “The government is taking our jobs” or “I think the government should spend more money on trying to get me cheaper prescriptions” or “I don’t like Hillary, she says dumb stuff”.  These types of people would not have an interest in adjusting a pie chart on government spending.  I think.  Individuals who recognize shortcomings of the government and specific areas such as science and technology or defense would be more interested in adjusting the chart. 

            

No comments:

Post a Comment