Reflection Essay Two

This essay in my opinion was much easier to write. It was cool to look at a work of writing and be able to defend it and how that writer used different parts of ethos, pathos, and kairos to drive home their argument. This assignment made me a better writer because i was able to keen in on specific things the writer did to illustrate his or her stance so now I can use their methods in my body of work. It not just being able to use their argument methods, its also being able to write in a more proper manner as well and even using that to make better writing for myself. The author did such a great job in this piece being able to relate his experiences with water boarding and bring those experiences to light via an article. Most people would need a studio but this man did it was a paper and a pen or if you are going all new school on me, a computer. The fact still remains that this was a tremendously great piece of work. The emotions that were coming off the paper into my body were amazing and so vivid. While reading this article I actually though I was in the scene of 1984 in which they are in the torture room. All in all I am gad that I was able to write a critique to, "Believe me its torture" because it wasn't just a regular school essay, it was an article with emotion and depth, feeling and darkness, really just a pleasure to read and again doing the critique I was able to enhance my own writing skills for my future life assigments.

Elephants?

Should the man killed the elephant?
Just because something is legal does that make it right?
How does conformity effect everyday life decisions?

Just because something is legal does that make it right?

Just because something is legal it doesn't make it right. People always uses the law for justification for some morally terrible things that they do. It's amazing how it seems like culture defines what is right and wrong instead of set rules that are given to us at birth. For instance some cultures think that is fine and okay to kill dogs and our culture doesn't. Other cultures do not believe in killing cows but our culture thinks that that is totally fine. Killing an elephant to us would be frowned upon yet in some parts of the world it is not frowned upon because of the monetary value of the elephant as illustrated by the story. This seems to be a more deeper issue than just the elephant being killed, it seems like that situation is almost to compare soiecty as a whole. We wake up everyday, put on cloths, go out, come home, sleep, and do it all over again. Our personality almost changes no matter where we are depending on the crowd of people we are with. One probably going out to get wasted with their parents and speak the same way that they talk to their friends. Adding onto that point if someone is in church they are going to dress a certain way and behave a certain way then if they were with friends at a party. It's crazy to see how much influence the people around us have. If a group of people call a certain situation right, that almost becomes right to you as we'll. Thats one of the huge thing that this story is trying to illustrate to us, that just because a society believes one way, it doesn't actually make something to be okay.

Commentary for Milad Sadeghiyan

To start off I do not think that this essay was a great example of a Rhetorical Critique. The thesis was well stated, but the writing after never really connected back to the thesis. The whole essay really stuck to emotional aspect of Christopher Hutchins article and never really went to anything else. For example there was no mention of kairos anywhere in this critique. The only thing that was close was when he (Milad) mentions that the article was written after the US was been in two wars but does not connect that to write timing of the article. It just felt like the whole time I was reading the critique I felt like the writer was reaching to make his points instead of finding the information for the different topics. Also the critique repeats its self over and over again, and I felt since that was happening it was losing the effectiveness of the critique. Also the author of the critique over exemplified some of the actions that he was saying that he personally was apart of. For instance, the author of the critique states that, "I was starring at the screen of my computer and sweating when he was describing the water boarding part"(critique of Christopher Hutchins). That was an over-dramatization of events and gives the reader a sense of interpreting the article satirically and that can mislead the writers audience. Leading off of that point, the following sentence again makes an outrageous statement, "Even if someone doesn’t believe that waterboarding is not torturing or not harmful, he can’t say he is still right after reading Hitchen’s personal experiences of this dangerous activity"(Milad). The statement here is basically saying after reading this article, a person is automatically going to change their mind no matter what. Making statements that are too general in this kind of paper can hurt ones overall point because after reading a statement like that, the first thing that comes to mind is how can one piece of writing be so effective that it can change ones mind no matter what. So overall things to focus on for the final draft would be to go into more detail about Christopher Hutchins writing and do not just focus on the emotional aspect of it, secondly identify the kairos and use evidence that the article was written in a good timing manner. I know that you have already stated that we are in two wars, but it never connected back to the kairos aspect. Lastly, do not make such broad statements. General statements like the one's identified above will get you in trouble while writing this critique.

Everyone's a Critic

David Harned

Prof Brown

24 March, 2012

English 1B

Everyone’s a Critic

In the article believe me its torture, Christie Hutchins describes his own experience with water boarding and how that if water boarding isn't torture, nothing is torture. He tries to go ahead and bring in the emotion and feel towards water boarding by actually going ahead and having the experience himself. This does give him a great advantage in writing this article especially the logos side of things.

First off let’s talk about how Christopher Hutchins uses the strategy of pathos to appeal to his audience. The fact that he went ahead and was actually water boarded gives him a great chance to bring real emotion to the table. An example that we can dive into is the scene that he paints before he is water boarded, "I was then turned around a few times, I presume to assist in disorienting me, and led over some crunchy gravel into a darkened room. Well, mainly darkened: there were some oddly spaced bright lights that came as pinpoints through my hood. And some weird music assaulted my ears. The outside world seemed very suddenly very distant indeed"(Hutchins). I believe that the author does a great job here of bringing the situation straight to our imagination. I can feel myself in some broken looking building, far away from civilization to where no one could hear any cries for help. This directly appeals to the emotional aspect of the human mind and allows the reader to be in the water boarding room with the author. Another example that Christopher Hutchins describes is the actual torture method, "The inhalation brought the damp cloths tight against my nostrils, as if a huge, wet paw had been suddenly and annihilatingly clamped over my face"(Hutchins). Here the reader can almost feel the wet paw damp on their face and how once a person finally has to breathe in all he or she would take in is water, thus feeling the sense of drowning. Another piece of emotion that he puts into this article is when he almost drowned when he was a little kid and how that relates to the torture room in the book 1984, "I do have a fear of drowning that comes from a bad childhood moment on the Isle of Wight, when I got out of my depth. As a boy reading the climactic torture scene of 1984, where what is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world, I realize that somewhere in my version of that hideous chamber comes the moment when the wave washes over me."(Hutchins). Right he we are able to picture Christopher Hutchins as a kid drowning to the depth of the ocean. Bringing a kid to the equation allows the reader to relate to kids in their life and how terrible it would be for them to drown. Also the fact that he was able to have an actual event happen where he almost drowned as a child gives the reader another dose of realness. If it was a random incident of a kid drowning the effect would of not be as effective because Christopher Hutchins already has credibility as the writer of the article and his experiences hit closer to home and gives the article a real turning feeling. Even having the kid version of Christopher Hutchins reading 1984 is significant because again it gives the reader the segway to look at their children and imagine them in that scenario. Overall the author does a great job of using the pathos strategy in the article.

Another strategy that the Author demonstrates is the fairness to opposing views and also showing that he is a credible person to be talking on the subject.  First off he gives instant credibility by stating that he will indeed be water boarded, "Exploring this narrow but deep distinction, on a gorgeous day last May I found myself deep in the hill country of western North Carolina, preparing to be surprised by a team of extremely hardened veterans who had confronted their country’s enemies in highly arduous terrain all over the world. They knew about everything from unarmed combat to enhanced interrogation and, in exchange for anonymity, were going to show me as nearly as possible what real waterboarding might be like"(Hutchins). This article isn't just about a man who has testimony from stories of random people this is a story of his actual experience with water boarding. Although this is all well and good there are some problems that I can see about his credibility for example Christopher Hutchins is 59 and the people who are going to water board him state that, "Waterboarding is for Green Berets in training, or wiry young jihadists whose teeth can bite through the gristle of an old goat. It’s not for wheezing, paunchy scribblers"(Hutchins). Although this is a dent to his credibility it gets enhanced by what he says later in the paragraph, "I had had to produce a doctor’s certificate assuring them that I did not have asthma, but I wondered whether I should tell them about the 15,000 cigarettes I had inhaled every year for the last several decades"(Hutchins). This really almost blows his credibility right out the window which is a shame because he brings so many good points in this article, and the fact that he goes through the actual experience of water boarding gives him almost all the creditability he needs. Navigating from the creditability standpoint to seeing if he is fair to the opposing side it seems like Christopher Hutchins does give the other side a chance to bring in their augment. For example, "When contrasted to actual torture, waterboarding is more like foreplay. No thumbscrew, no pincers, no electrodes, no rack. Can one say this of those who have been captured by the tormentors and murderers of (say) Daniel Pearl?"  It's important to bring the other sides position to appeal to them from that standpoint. It is also important for the author to respond to that claim and he does by relating Abraham's Lincoln's moral stand point to water boarding by saying, “'If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.' Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture."(Hutchins) and also that, “Water boarding is a potentially dangerous activity in which the participant can receive serious and permanent (physical, emotional and psychological) injuries and even death, including injuries and death due to the respiratory and neurological systems of the body"(Hutchins). Here the reader can see that although it isn't any thumbscrew, no pincers, no electrodes, no rack; they are still physical, emotional, and psychological injuries to the person being water boarded. At the end of the day Christopher Hutchins does a great job of using ethos to appeal to his audience.

Another point to be made is the author uses the strategy of logos to persuade his readers to agree with him. The evidence that the author has in the article is quite remarkable and is intensified by the fact that he gets water boarded himself.  Also he can justify his claim very easily because he is justifying himself, not someone else's story. He does a great job of incorporating his experiences to the facts of what water boarding does.

Lastly the article has a great sense of kairos or appeal to timeliness. This article was written at the height of the water boarding debate and had a perfect kairos level. If the article was written right after 9/11 then that would kill all of his arguments because everyone would be so focused on the inability to relate and show compassion to the victims. Although we have the same arguments, we have a much different result based on when the article gets released. For example if another 9/11 happened tomorrow by Middle East terrorist, it would not be a good idea to go ahead and write an article about how we are winning the war on terror. The fact that Christopher Hutchins waited years after 9/11 to write this article shows his readers that he has a great sense of kairos.

In the article, "Belief Me Its Torture" Christopher Hutchins does a great job of pathos, ethos, logos, and kairos. Pathos by using descriptive language in describing his water boarding experiment, ethos by being creditable and giving the other side a chance to bring up their points, logos by justifying his own experience of being water boarded, and kairos by waiting years after 9/11 to give respect to the victims. Overall the article really has a great argument on how water boarding is torture.

War Photography

Should war photography be taken and seen by mass public?
What are the benefits of war photography?
Is war photography art?

Should war photography be taken and seen by mass public?

I believe that yes we should all be able to see what is going on in the actual war zone, even if that means humanizing the enemy we are fighting. The fact of the matter is we aren't just fighting a distance species from the planet XyeShje we are fighting our own kind, humans. We are so desensitized when going into war. The media and government paint the picture that the enemy is pure evil and will do anything to harm you, and usually that is not the case and war photography brings those things to life. It allows us to relate the the enemy at a pure human level and allows us to feel some amount of compassion for the men and women of other countries that have perished by the blade of war. I have the opinion that war should always be the last step for any situation, for any country, at any time. War at its roots is evil, sick, and dark and the American public is not always as keen to that observation. If we all knew that our brothers and sisters were dying for something that could of been solved diplomatically, then our opinion on any war that we ventured into would of been greatly changed. War us sometimes necessary, but only should we rarely used. If we as a society can see the dark side of war that is brought out by war photography, I think that world would be a better place.

Hate?

Can we ever define what hate is?
Should hate crime laws be in place?
Are hate crimes an epidemic in the United States?

Should hate crime law be in place?
I personally think that hate crime laws should not be in place. I believe that hate crime laws actually keep in standard that there is a difference between people of different color or backgrounds when in reality we are all human. Why should we have a law that makes it so there is a difference between human beings? The moment when those diff ended are so blurred to the eye, that is when racism will end. Also hate can be loosely defined and someone can receive a feloney crime for something that was purely motivated by outside circumstances. An example of this is the story of the gay man and the grass clippings in the article. That man was probably going after the gay man not because he was gay, but because he sprayed him with a hose. With all that being said no one can 100% know what his pure motivation was and it is not up to a judge to figure that out especially when it is so hard to see in this situation. I do think that in some instances hate crime laws may give the lazy racis the point of where he does not want to commit the crime because of the punishment but at the same time we are losing that opportunity to preach that everyone is the same rather than different. If i was a kid and stumbled upon hate crime laws I would be confused. For example if white little mike hits black little bobby in the sandbox and he gets an extra 10 minutes of time out because the kid that he hit was black, little mike would think that for some reason bobby is different than him and that is not a good thing for actually fighting discrimination at the whole.

Commentary for Matt

Here we have an essay that is well spoken but does not include substantial arguments for the opposing side in this essay. I, being a person of the opposing side, was not convinced that the Internet was "changing the way i think" because they were barley any examples of what the Internet was doing to me to suggest that. Most of the essay was concentrated on how teen bullying has now transferred to the Internet and is a real problem. I thought this was a great point, but did lead in to the original argument of the Internet being a doomsday for everyone. The beginning was actually going great, but then the essay took a sharp u turn and from then on did not come back to the original point. Some tips for you Matt would be use some language to get your audience who are on the fence to join your side. For example, "social media has allowed to connect people around the world, but it has also allowed groups to connect together to bully other kids." Although I still think you need to think long and hard if you want to keep the "bully teen approach" ,because I did find it interesting, you are just going to need to change your thesis to match what is going on. The whole argument just seemed a little to far fetched for me. I understand your points because the style was fantastic, but if you are going to talk about how we are going to live in a disaster because of the Internet, explain how teen bullying is going to make the world into chaos. Also I would recommend using the route of how the Internet is changing the way we think because I thought you were definitely onto something there and I think that you should build your thesis around that point not this doomsday approach because the thesis as it stands now seems to make people who are on the fence that much more skeptical about your argument. However, if this was an article for a magazine with an audience that was already on your side then this was a home run, but since that is not the case for this essay I again stress that it should be looked over in another context again. One part that was very fascinating was the introduction all the way till the thesis so I would advise to keep all of that! Lastly, if I were in your shoes I would bring some more evidence, maybe some case studies on how the internet changes our brain and decreases our patience. Overall great piece to read, but needs a little touching up if you want to get people who are on the fence. Thank You!