1) Mario Savio argues in his speech that the students a Berkeley University has little power to practice their rights to free speech and the bureaucrats are not doing anything to protect student's rights. In his speech, he has used the historical point of view to get across his point to the readers. His form is very useful for readers to follow since his arguments are cohesively flowing from paragraphs to paragraphs. Also expressed transitions are well used. Becoming symbol-wise are greatly interpreted when he says “powerful minority and “powerless majority”.
2)I think social networking is a serious issue that has to do with public discourse. Some viable genres for this issue can be a post on Facebook. I think any post whether it is a video clip, an image or a comment or criticize on something can be interesting to study how people are using these sites to communicate their ideas with others and unknowingly use methods of communication which is called, “metadiscourse”. I am also enthusiastic about comments people make because they use Kenneth Burke’s ideas of stepping back and examining other’s perspective. People who spent most of their time on computer and socializing with others are even unaware of the public discourse concepts. Facebook can be harmful to someone’s cyber reputation but at the same time, it can be a learning source.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Green Architecture
Being in the sustainable public discourse class, I attended one of the public lecture entitled “Green Building Basics: Where we are” by Bill Brown who is the Director in the Office of Sustainability at IU Bloomington.” There were many components in the lecture which were persuasive to the audience why green architecture is benefited to everyone. The claim of the speaker is to persuade the audience that they are not merely discussing the saving energy plans but they are making more and more green buildings. The purpose of the lecture was to let people be aware of the issue and to inform them as well about how many buildings they have built using the Green Theme. Bill Brown is an architect and in his office there are many other architect experts who work together to make IU campus greener and environmentally safe.
Professor Brown first started with defining “sustainability” and according to him, “sustainability” is “learning to thrive within our means. He also showed the various pictures of green homes he has built. He used Harris’s move “coming to terms” when he mentioned “It’s all about green” and defined clearly what the presentation is going to be about.
To come across a point that green architecture are useful in multiple ways, he showed the Las Vegas fountain which is the water supply, the electricity producer and also a form of decoration which was very fascinating to me. Throughout his presentation, there were many slides of the different buildings he has worked on such as different libraries and some homes and commercial buildings. He explained in detail how those libraries, mostly in Indiana, are saving the day light, and the electricity. He also used the architecture related terminology and some material they have used. In the film “The 11th Hour”, there are interviews of experts and their opinions whereas, in Professor Brown’s lecture, there is only him talking and mostly about the design of architecture. The design of architecture is very important in the green buildings. Similarly in the film “The 11th Hour”, there a whole chapter entitled “Sustainable Design”.
Some statistics were also interesting to know. He mentioned that 31 states out of 50 in the U.S.A. have approved the green architecture plans. Most states are now realizing that some steps should be taken to help the planet live longer and the people need to live a sustainable life in order to maintain our planet. There are some criteria about the green buildings which he compared with the food facts. He showed all the elements that go in the green architecture such as different certification needed, and materials needed. He mentioned some of the procedure to make a normal building into a green building. He talked about how a certification is needed from the LEED organization to make a normal building into a green building.
One important aspect of green buildings is the cost. Professor Brown was aware that most people would argue how expensive it is to build a green building. That’s why he stated that it cost around $1.4 million on 64 green projects where as to build a normal building it would be roughly the same amount around $1.2 million. So Professor Brown claimed that it doesn’t make a big difference cost wise to have greener architecture. I agree with him because it we have a green building, we would save more electricity and water usage.
Toward the end, Professor Brown showed that there are two green buildings on IU Bloomington campus and they are working toward pursuing LEED certification for other buildings as well. Walter Ong’s theory of audience construction was well used since professor Brown included three different aspects of green architecture which were of people, environment, and economics. The audience was not only students but the public. He left the audience with a question, “can we design a building that saves more day light energy? Can we design a building that produces pure water than it consumes?” At the end, he answered everyone’s’ questions and showed lot of expertise in this area. I think, not only myself but many people in the audience was persuaded that green buildings are something to look forward since Professor Brown’s lecture was very effective by all means. He really gave a detailed explanation of how it works and how we can make it work.
Professor Brown first started with defining “sustainability” and according to him, “sustainability” is “learning to thrive within our means. He also showed the various pictures of green homes he has built. He used Harris’s move “coming to terms” when he mentioned “It’s all about green” and defined clearly what the presentation is going to be about.
To come across a point that green architecture are useful in multiple ways, he showed the Las Vegas fountain which is the water supply, the electricity producer and also a form of decoration which was very fascinating to me. Throughout his presentation, there were many slides of the different buildings he has worked on such as different libraries and some homes and commercial buildings. He explained in detail how those libraries, mostly in Indiana, are saving the day light, and the electricity. He also used the architecture related terminology and some material they have used. In the film “The 11th Hour”, there are interviews of experts and their opinions whereas, in Professor Brown’s lecture, there is only him talking and mostly about the design of architecture. The design of architecture is very important in the green buildings. Similarly in the film “The 11th Hour”, there a whole chapter entitled “Sustainable Design”.
Some statistics were also interesting to know. He mentioned that 31 states out of 50 in the U.S.A. have approved the green architecture plans. Most states are now realizing that some steps should be taken to help the planet live longer and the people need to live a sustainable life in order to maintain our planet. There are some criteria about the green buildings which he compared with the food facts. He showed all the elements that go in the green architecture such as different certification needed, and materials needed. He mentioned some of the procedure to make a normal building into a green building. He talked about how a certification is needed from the LEED organization to make a normal building into a green building.
One important aspect of green buildings is the cost. Professor Brown was aware that most people would argue how expensive it is to build a green building. That’s why he stated that it cost around $1.4 million on 64 green projects where as to build a normal building it would be roughly the same amount around $1.2 million. So Professor Brown claimed that it doesn’t make a big difference cost wise to have greener architecture. I agree with him because it we have a green building, we would save more electricity and water usage.
Toward the end, Professor Brown showed that there are two green buildings on IU Bloomington campus and they are working toward pursuing LEED certification for other buildings as well. Walter Ong’s theory of audience construction was well used since professor Brown included three different aspects of green architecture which were of people, environment, and economics. The audience was not only students but the public. He left the audience with a question, “can we design a building that saves more day light energy? Can we design a building that produces pure water than it consumes?” At the end, he answered everyone’s’ questions and showed lot of expertise in this area. I think, not only myself but many people in the audience was persuaded that green buildings are something to look forward since Professor Brown’s lecture was very effective by all means. He really gave a detailed explanation of how it works and how we can make it work.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Friday, September 24, 2010
Scientific Analysis
In scientific and technical discourse, there are many concepts which are introduced in Scientific American article, “The green apple”, by David Biello. This article was published on June 16, 2010 which is very recently. Over past few years, the scientific issue of global warming is important. This article talks about the problems that we will face in future due to climate change and how some major cities in the U.S. and couple of countries are trying to reduce the harmful effects using different solutions. Some of the solutions are having green roofs on buildings, installing flood doors, cleaning water and encouraging people to use natural gas rather than coal to “reduce emissions of CO2. Some more solutions that New York City has adapted is having hybrid taxis and planting more trees. It also says that along with New York, many other cities and countries are making efforts to reduce the energy use and to save the environment. Indirectly, people are encouraged to use alternate options for energy saving.
Alan Gross talks about contingent which means something that is may or may not certain, just a possibility or something that’s unpredictable according to Webster’s dictionary. In this science journal article, I have noticed the use of the word “predicted” many times. For example, “co-chaired by NASA climate modeler Cynthia Rozenweig predicts a 5 to 10 percent increase in the mean precipitation around New York City by 2080”. Cynthia Rosenzweig is a senior research scientist in NASA and also head of the climate impact group. She was told to advise New York City on adaptations for its critical infrastructure where also she is also part of the committee. This article is not fully scientific but it is justified as acting “scientific”. First, it is published in a science journal in Scientific American. Second, there are lots of different responses from people, which is very reputed scientific source and by City department’s directors like Adam Freed, who is one of certified long term planner. Third, it provides statistics which are not accurate but an average. All of these facts make me think that this article is not truly scientific but it is just acting to be scientific. On the contrary, upon looking at this article, it has the scientific arrangement because the beginning is an introduction, then there is a discussion and at last there are results, which seem like a typical science arrangement.
There are many theories of scientific arrangement which are demonstrated in the article. According to Gross, the theory of Deduction is used well in this article. This article begins by talking about New York flash flooding and then to climate changes. It gives a smooth transition between the cities which are putting effort and finally to specific efforts that have been made and will be making in future. So from very general background, David talks about specific solutions that have been found out. That’s why; I think it’s more like Gross’s deductive theory which can be simply said as descending “from causes to invention of new experiments”. Also in deductive theory, many things are not certain, similarly, in this text, many data are predictions.
Although Marie Secor and Jeanne Fahnestock talks about audience construction being challenging. I think in the higher stases, where the question of value and question of procedure arise, “the audience already aware of the value of addressing a subject in a particular stasis”. The writer already assumes the reader already holding a position with his/her individual values which has derived from his/her experiences. Without lower stasis, higher stasis can’t exist on its own. Similarly, without the fact that our planet is facing all these challenges, the value and procedure, policy can’t be answered.
The concept of Baconian Induction is also used well in the text. Baconian induction is a method of science which moves from contingency to natural necessity. This article begins with causes that are possible and unpredictable due to climate change but ends with solutions that can make the situation better, which in this case are the efforts to reduce energy use.
Alan Gross talks about contingent which means something that is may or may not certain, just a possibility or something that’s unpredictable according to Webster’s dictionary. In this science journal article, I have noticed the use of the word “predicted” many times. For example, “co-chaired by NASA climate modeler Cynthia Rozenweig predicts a 5 to 10 percent increase in the mean precipitation around New York City by 2080”. Cynthia Rosenzweig is a senior research scientist in NASA and also head of the climate impact group. She was told to advise New York City on adaptations for its critical infrastructure where also she is also part of the committee. This article is not fully scientific but it is justified as acting “scientific”. First, it is published in a science journal in Scientific American. Second, there are lots of different responses from people, which is very reputed scientific source and by City department’s directors like Adam Freed, who is one of certified long term planner. Third, it provides statistics which are not accurate but an average. All of these facts make me think that this article is not truly scientific but it is just acting to be scientific. On the contrary, upon looking at this article, it has the scientific arrangement because the beginning is an introduction, then there is a discussion and at last there are results, which seem like a typical science arrangement.
There are many theories of scientific arrangement which are demonstrated in the article. According to Gross, the theory of Deduction is used well in this article. This article begins by talking about New York flash flooding and then to climate changes. It gives a smooth transition between the cities which are putting effort and finally to specific efforts that have been made and will be making in future. So from very general background, David talks about specific solutions that have been found out. That’s why; I think it’s more like Gross’s deductive theory which can be simply said as descending “from causes to invention of new experiments”. Also in deductive theory, many things are not certain, similarly, in this text, many data are predictions.
Although Marie Secor and Jeanne Fahnestock talks about audience construction being challenging. I think in the higher stases, where the question of value and question of procedure arise, “the audience already aware of the value of addressing a subject in a particular stasis”. The writer already assumes the reader already holding a position with his/her individual values which has derived from his/her experiences. Without lower stasis, higher stasis can’t exist on its own. Similarly, without the fact that our planet is facing all these challenges, the value and procedure, policy can’t be answered.
The concept of Baconian Induction is also used well in the text. Baconian induction is a method of science which moves from contingency to natural necessity. This article begins with causes that are possible and unpredictable due to climate change but ends with solutions that can make the situation better, which in this case are the efforts to reduce energy use.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Audience and genre
Upon reading this letter, I have come to understand that this letter was written by a group of people in U.S. to President William J. Clinton regarding Iraq. In this letter, writers are trying to persuade president to take action to remove Saddam Hussein from his power and to stop him from producing more weapons of mass destruction that can attack against the U.S. The writers are also telling President Clinton to go against United Nations (UN) and change American foreign policy. Audience and genre play a big role in persuasion. The type of genre can create a different reaction to the intended audience.
In this letter, Clinton is the intended audience but since this letter was read in public, its implied audience is U.S. citizens. The real audience isn’t always the same as imagined audience. I think the purpose of the letter is to persuade him to take action against Iraq. To me, all the genres are intertwined and that’s why as the role of audience changes, the reaction of the reader also changes.
If this letter could be rewritten, a T.V. interview with letter writer(s) or a magazine editorial can be an effective way to persuade the audience of the discourse. Only this time, the audience will be bigger, broader, of different ages, and of different levels of knowledge. It can be difficult to persuade the audience; however, making this a public issue can strengthen communication or the relationship between the writer and the reader (encoder to decoder). Since this is a national issue, it’s easier to involve the “real audience” (in this case, U.S. citizens) to see the reaction to it. A T.V. interview can be excellent because even if the reader/hearer is not physically present, it gives them a chance to play a role to be a part of the news; as Ong describes how Stern gives chance to his readers instead of making a frame story like Chaucer, where a reader is a part of a nonexistent group.
The major shift of form from formal letter to an ordinary T.V. interview has an advantage that all the citizens of America will be listening/watching it and will be able to decide their opinion. Although there is a challenge, that the audience may not want to be a part of the discourse. In any successful piece of discourse, a writer and a reader must play an assigned role.
In order to persuade U.S. citizens of this issue and to take an action, I think the form can be informal. Also most Americans don’t know of the affairs of Middle East, it’s important to let the public know of them through a map that shows the U.S. alliances with different countries in the world. U.S. has special alliance with Israel and Palestine. When UN tried to conduct an inspection in Iraq of the mass destruction weapons, Iraq was not as cooperative and the report of UN inspection in Iraq claims that Iraq seemed to hide the weapons. Later, the inspection was blocked. In addition, Iraq also has a history of using the biological weapons previously against Kurdistan and Iraq-Iran War. There was no evidence of that time that Iraq has no more of weapons. The audience needs to be informed about the possible threat of an attack from Iraq. In this situation, most American would feel threatened and their feelings against Iraq could persuade them to agree with American action. The reason I want to say “feelings against Iraq” is because the stereotype about Muslim nations being destructive. I think when Americans will understand the destabilization; they will probably support the nation’s decision. Any action against Iraq can destabilize the American life style due to import of oil.
In the letter, writer(s) have said it directly that the strategies for removing Saddam Hussein from power, “Will require a full complement of diplomatic, political, and military efforts.” And that they are the supporters of this policy related issue. These small terms like “our interest” or “our nation” impact a reader’s mind and can be an advantage to persuade the reader/hearer because most people think that they are good patriots.
In this letter, Clinton is the intended audience but since this letter was read in public, its implied audience is U.S. citizens. The real audience isn’t always the same as imagined audience. I think the purpose of the letter is to persuade him to take action against Iraq. To me, all the genres are intertwined and that’s why as the role of audience changes, the reaction of the reader also changes.
If this letter could be rewritten, a T.V. interview with letter writer(s) or a magazine editorial can be an effective way to persuade the audience of the discourse. Only this time, the audience will be bigger, broader, of different ages, and of different levels of knowledge. It can be difficult to persuade the audience; however, making this a public issue can strengthen communication or the relationship between the writer and the reader (encoder to decoder). Since this is a national issue, it’s easier to involve the “real audience” (in this case, U.S. citizens) to see the reaction to it. A T.V. interview can be excellent because even if the reader/hearer is not physically present, it gives them a chance to play a role to be a part of the news; as Ong describes how Stern gives chance to his readers instead of making a frame story like Chaucer, where a reader is a part of a nonexistent group.
The major shift of form from formal letter to an ordinary T.V. interview has an advantage that all the citizens of America will be listening/watching it and will be able to decide their opinion. Although there is a challenge, that the audience may not want to be a part of the discourse. In any successful piece of discourse, a writer and a reader must play an assigned role.
In order to persuade U.S. citizens of this issue and to take an action, I think the form can be informal. Also most Americans don’t know of the affairs of Middle East, it’s important to let the public know of them through a map that shows the U.S. alliances with different countries in the world. U.S. has special alliance with Israel and Palestine. When UN tried to conduct an inspection in Iraq of the mass destruction weapons, Iraq was not as cooperative and the report of UN inspection in Iraq claims that Iraq seemed to hide the weapons. Later, the inspection was blocked. In addition, Iraq also has a history of using the biological weapons previously against Kurdistan and Iraq-Iran War. There was no evidence of that time that Iraq has no more of weapons. The audience needs to be informed about the possible threat of an attack from Iraq. In this situation, most American would feel threatened and their feelings against Iraq could persuade them to agree with American action. The reason I want to say “feelings against Iraq” is because the stereotype about Muslim nations being destructive. I think when Americans will understand the destabilization; they will probably support the nation’s decision. Any action against Iraq can destabilize the American life style due to import of oil.
In the letter, writer(s) have said it directly that the strategies for removing Saddam Hussein from power, “Will require a full complement of diplomatic, political, and military efforts.” And that they are the supporters of this policy related issue. These small terms like “our interest” or “our nation” impact a reader’s mind and can be an advantage to persuade the reader/hearer because most people think that they are good patriots.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Rhetorical analysis of Michael's essay
By reading Michael Lemonick’s essay, “Honesty is Always the Best Policy”, which has been published in May 2010 in Onearth magazine, I have felt that there is so much information about his background. Michael is currently a professor of Science-Journalism at Princeton University. He is known for his publication of global warming essay in a Time magazine. Michael has claimed that the aim of this essay is only to report the truth to the readers rather than to up the publication.
Michael Lemonick tells the readers so much about this background on science that any reader would have an impression of him being intelligent. He tells that his father was a physicist, who studies the behavior of the materials in the universe. Also he talks about an event when he was working in the Time magazine and the group of climate scientists came to the editorial staff and how he liked the story of the global warming. Where Michael had worked in the past was Science Digest magazine, which is known for science related articles targeted at people with high school level education. Michel had been really unhappy with the changes in journalism since journalism was changing toward sensational journalism. Science Digest had later changed its’ targeted audience to college students.
However Michael says that the purpose of this essay is that it lets him make a short lesson on science. He claims that it is not an attempt to sell any one idea but to report the truth the best possible. I, as a college student, liked this essay and how he’s being honest. Actually, his morals are seen in the end. I didn’t feel as if he was making any kind of argument with anybody, but I think it’s an epideictic type of discourse. He has tried his best to stay biased on anything.
On the other side, I also think that contextual approach is better on this essay since the author gives lots of background and gave reference to people and his experience with the climate scientists. The effective strategy he has invented to capture the audience into reading is by being honest and being none to less formal and that’s why the title is also so relevant to the essay. In these days, media is having great competition with other sources, so there is a heavy need for the young audience to read this publication. Michael thought as his audiences are youngsters but I felt that the ‘real audience’ to the essay is anyone of any age. The contextual approach does matter to me and to other readers since our reading and writings in this class or in public place; it is going to shape our views on different issue. Not necessarily, a person in the beginning of reading is same at the end.
Michael Lemonick tells the readers so much about this background on science that any reader would have an impression of him being intelligent. He tells that his father was a physicist, who studies the behavior of the materials in the universe. Also he talks about an event when he was working in the Time magazine and the group of climate scientists came to the editorial staff and how he liked the story of the global warming. Where Michael had worked in the past was Science Digest magazine, which is known for science related articles targeted at people with high school level education. Michel had been really unhappy with the changes in journalism since journalism was changing toward sensational journalism. Science Digest had later changed its’ targeted audience to college students.
However Michael says that the purpose of this essay is that it lets him make a short lesson on science. He claims that it is not an attempt to sell any one idea but to report the truth the best possible. I, as a college student, liked this essay and how he’s being honest. Actually, his morals are seen in the end. I didn’t feel as if he was making any kind of argument with anybody, but I think it’s an epideictic type of discourse. He has tried his best to stay biased on anything.
On the other side, I also think that contextual approach is better on this essay since the author gives lots of background and gave reference to people and his experience with the climate scientists. The effective strategy he has invented to capture the audience into reading is by being honest and being none to less formal and that’s why the title is also so relevant to the essay. In these days, media is having great competition with other sources, so there is a heavy need for the young audience to read this publication. Michael thought as his audiences are youngsters but I felt that the ‘real audience’ to the essay is anyone of any age. The contextual approach does matter to me and to other readers since our reading and writings in this class or in public place; it is going to shape our views on different issue. Not necessarily, a person in the beginning of reading is same at the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)