TOW #13- Being Smart About Your Child's Brain

Frank Bruni is an Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times. In his columns, he writes about sseveral different topics including American politics, higher education, violence in football, and gay rights. In his op-ed piece ‘Being Smart About Your Child’s Brain’, he discusses the problems circulating around school sports. Bruni believes that health should be prioritized in all sports, not simply football, because more and more injuries such as concussions and heat strokes have been occurring. Several times throughout his piece, Bruni turns to statistics in order to make his point. For example, he speaks of a scientist named Comstock, who supervises a national inventory of athletic injuries in high school students. Coomstock says “’I have 22 sports in my surveillance system, and concussions have been reported in all but one of them. That includes swimming,’” (Bruni para 13). Both hearing this from a scientist and through numbers, the reader puts the information together logically and allows them to come to their own conclusions. It also shows that this concern has proof behind it and is actually abundant enough to have concerns about. He also turns to several other scientists to prove his point, including information from Kevin Guskiewicz, Douglas Casa and more. This allows him to add ethos to his argument by turning to those who know more about the topic than he does. He also brings up current events that readers may be familiar with. He speaks of a sixteen year old in New York who developed heatstroke and ended up in the hospital with kidney damage during practice. The current event proves to the readers that this is still something that needs to be addressed and shows the drastic effects that this problem has on the high schoolers. I believe this was a rather effective piece, as he understood where he was standing in the audience’s eyes. As he was a writer and not a scientist, he knew how to properly back up the information, and to what extent so that it wouldn’t be overwhelming to the reader. It seems his audience are the parents, as he discusses a lot of parent’s questions at college conferences and their lack of focus on the sports.

TOW #12- The Lucifer Effect

As discussed in my previous IRB post, Philip Zimbardo looks to answer the question: “What makes good people good bad?” Delving into his book, he didn’t waste any time in preparation to tell us his thesis. Apparently, there are multiple, as he says “On thesis of his book is that most of us know ourselves only from our limited experiences in familiar situations that involve rules, laws, policies, and pressures that constrain us,” (Zimbardo 291). It’s a haunting proposal, to think that we do not understand who we really are until we are unrestrained and without limits. Zimbardo asks us to think of ourselves as we read this book, and consider what actions we think that we’d take versus what may actually happen with the wrong influences. He claims that this could happen to any of us. Even the best of us can become tainted. The most significant tools that he uses to draw his readers in are the allusions. The title itself is an allusion, referencing God’s favorite angel, Lucifer, who eventually fell from heaven and soon took his place in hell as the ruler. He also addresses a work that later became a bible of the Inquisition, The Witches, which he calls “the first documented sources of the widespread use of the dispositional view to understand evil and rid the world of its pernicious influence…” (Zimbardo 356). He goes on to speak of how the process of eliminating evil brought a new evil onto itself: the torture and massacre of ‘witches’. Initially, Zimbardo presents these as a way to distance ourselves from true evils. Whether you view biblical tales as fact or fiction, Zimbardo knows that the reader feels that they are too far from the story to be able to actually relate. However, when the reader is then pulled back into reality, when the reader finally comprehends that this could be them, it develops an overwhelming sense of anxiety, and the need to do exactly what Zimbardo asks of his book. The reader begins to analyze what they’d choose to do when Zimbardo proposes his interactive scenarios and his personal experiments. I believe that this was a brilliant way for the reader to become immersed into the story. Despite it not being based on anything religious, I still think that it could bring in the religious audience due to the title and the allusions within the book. As for people like me, who are here for the science, it brings a factual and analytical allure that any psychologist would look for.

TOW #11- Mothering My Dying Friend

Catherine Newman is the author of her memoir Waiting For Birdy and posts weekly to her blog Bringing Up Ben & Birdy. She is most popular on parenting websites, most of her posts being recollections of her parenthood. In her short story memoir, "Mothering My Dying Friend", she finds a relationship between her experience as a parent and her experience taking care of her friend of 44 years who was dying from cancer. Newman makes it clear to the reader that the beginning and end of our lives are nearly identical. Several times throughout the piece, Newman mentions children or infants. For example, she says "After I had my newborn, I was stunned by the basic fact of birth," (para 17). This, and many other statements like that, keeps bringing attention to the idea of children right after Newman discusses her interactions with her dying friend. This placement allows the reader to create a connection between the two stages of life, infancy and death. The author also sets the mood through her tone and word choice, using words such as 'excruciatingly', 'banal', and more. This creates a much darker, sadder atmosphere. This way, the reader can understand the pain that she and her friend went through while experiencing her inevitable fate. I believe that Newman did a great job with this piece, pouring all of her emotions into it. However, she knows to limit some of the pathos that is put in so that she can relate to the reader. Overall, she puts a more realistic perspective on death, the thing that we consider so out of our reach.

TOW #10- Denver Water

Denver Water is an industry that provides clean water to the communities within the city of Denver and surrounding suburbs. They often advocates healthy and limited usage among the community as to make sure the residents within Denver do not use more than they need. This image depicts an orange park bench with only the width of a single person available for seating. The white words on it read "USE ONLY WHAT YOU NEED." The capitalization and contrasting colors between the bench and the words allows it to pop out to the audience and grab their attention. Initially, the audience may only make the connection between the statement and the bench. However, once they read that it is from 'Denver Water', they then comprehend that the true message that is being stated is that the reader should only use as much water as necessary. Using the connection between the two allows the audience to fully understand the reasoning behind it. Had this been an entire bench and they used space to sit than they needed, the reader would be considered obnoxious, rude, or even greedy. The statement written upon the seat implies that is how the reader would appear if they were to do that with their water supply as well. I believe Denver Water did a brilliant job when executing their advertising methods. As their audience is assumed to be the general public, as almost everyone uses running water. Placing their advertisement in a public place on such a common, day-to-day item allows it to grab the viewers attention. It almost serves as a puzzle or a guide to lead the reader to the real purpose of the message written upon the bench. Not only is it a creative and witty way to state their purpose, but it is also very interesting and allows the reader to almost interact with the message themselves.

Tow #9- America, the Not So Promised Land

In ‘America, the Not So Promised Land’, Tara Zahra, a historian who studies nation, family, and ethnicity, speaks about the immigrant perspective on America as the so called ‘promised land’. She claims that, despite America considering itself the land of opportunity, many immigrants regret coming to America in search of jobs and safety. Several times, Zahra turns to quotes throughout her op-ed in order to make her statements. She turns to historians, economists, and immigrants themselves in order to get different perspectives on the matter. For example, Zahra uses quotes from Bosnian refugees who explain why they came to America, recalling “’We were afraid of poverty… We thought we wouldn’t be able to step out on the street because of drugs, murders, and similar things. We were afraid that there was no health insurance similar to what we had…’” Using the perspective of the refugees allows the reader to understand what America is like from a foreign perspective. It also allows them to provide reasoning behind what they chose to do. Also, as Zahra is not an immigrant herself, it allows her to develop ethos in her argument. Having the perspective of a person going through the experience personally allows the reader to develop a sense of sympathy. She also turns to history in order to develop a cause and effect argument. She says “In spite of the rhetoric of globalization, we still live with the passports and border controls introduced after the First World War. This system, a response to xenophobic agitation, created the current distinction between legal immigrants and “illegal” aliens. In 1965, the quota system was eliminated, enabling more migrants to come to the United States from Asia, Latin America and Africa. But it remains difficult for migrants to respond nimbly to changing economic or political conditions,” (para 13). Her main argument is that despite the elimination of the terms that we find were so commonly used throughout our history, it still develops a bias among the communities within America. As she must use several perspectives from outsiders, it seems that Zahra is attempting to address the American audience. Therefore, she can introduce them to a perspective other than their own. It seems that Zahra is attempting to take away the pride that America is using in attempts to cover up their biases against immigrants. Though I find the essay was well informed and filled with facts and different perspectives, I would have liked to see her add a bit of pathos in it. It was there, but had the potential to be expanded on a bit more, especially in an essay where it could have worked very well.

IRB Intro Post #2- The Lucifer Effect

What makes good people go bad? That question still rings around until this day. There are theories following this question: a bad history, lack of attention, need for love, etc. However, the director of the Stanford Prison Experiment, Phillip Zimbardo proposes his own ideas. Phillip Zimbardo is a university professor at Stanford University, teaching previously at Yale, NYU, and Columbia. He has been given several awards as an educator, researcher, writer, and service to profession. The Stanford Prison Experiment, for those who do not know, was an experiment performed in which college students were picked out and randomly given the role of either a guard or a prisoner. They had to behave as their role for two weeks in a prison simulation. However, the brutal transformation that took place among the ‘guards’ deemed the experiment unsafe, cutting it down to only six days. Analyzing his and others’ experiences with this vivid transformation, Zimbardo does his best to answer how or why this darkening takes place. As I hope to be either a therapeutic psychologist or a forensic psychologist, I am hoping to be able to turn to this book for the darker end of my career. This title caught my eye; I always thought that evil was something that was developed or created from something darker. A violent upbringing, the constant feeling of hopelessness, regret, a lack of attention, and much more are all examples of reasons that I have found that result in some sort of ‘evil’. According to the Bible, Lucifer was once God’s favorite angel. However, that all turned upside down when he became a fallen angel and became the one the Christian community recognizes as Satan. When we think of evil we think of Jeffery Dahmer, the Zodiac Killer, Hitler… Never once do we look up and realize that we may fall victim to a darkening one day.

TOW #8- Rethinking Narcissism by Dr. Malkin (Part II)

In a continuation of my independent reading book, Rethinking Narcissism by Dr. Malkin, he turns his purpose from educating the reader about narcissism to teaching them how to recognize and communicate with narcissists. He focuses on many situations that would involve narcissism: Narcissism among parents, siblings, significant others, or friends. He even considers whether the reader themselves is trying to understand how to handle being a narcissist. Typically, Dr. Malkin tends to use statistics, anecdotes, and a first person perspective in order for the reader. For example, he discusses a study in which they used the subconscious to identify how narcissists typically identify their behavior among others. He says “In the group shown the neutral pictures, those who scored high in narcissism gave the same response as most narcissists do when asked if they’re loving or caring of devoted or loyal people: essentially [they choose] not me.” (Malkin 1786). Essentially, his statement is describing that deep down they don’t really feel that they are superior to others, but it is the idea of making themselves look better that helps them thrive. However, the use of this scientific experiment uses logos in order to help back up his theories and statements, providing more to his already established ethos. In this particular section of the book, it seems that Dr. Malkin tries to put the audience into perspective by using terms such as ‘you’ and ‘they’. He tries to address the reader directly as he is trying to instruct them in personal situations. In instructions, Dr. Malkin says “Here’s what you might say to a narcissistic friend in similar situations: You’re my best friend. Whe you call my selfish, I feel ashamed, like I’m a bad person in your eyes…”(Malkin 1861). Putting the reader into a situation that they may have, or may need to deal with in the future, he is able to properly teach them directly what to say. Using words like ‘friend’ also help establish a general situation that the reader may be able to put themselves in. Overall, Dr. Malkin’s rhetorical strategies remain rather consistent throughout his book. However, his purpose alters from educating people about narcissism to instructing people how to deal with narcissists or echoists.  I believe that this book did very well when it comes to teaching his audience about this lesser known mental disorder, and that he does a great job keeping their attention using the many different rhetorical strategies throughout.

TOW #7- What Family Really Means

Frank Bruni is an op-ed columnist for The New York Times and was once a staff writer for The Times Magazine. He reflects on diverse topics such as politics, education, violence, gay rights, and his personal life as a gay man. In his essay, “What Family Really Means,” Bruni responds to the Synod of Bishops on the Family, which is a meeting where bishops of the Roman Catholic Church reconsider their limitations on family within their community. This includes welcoming unmarried couples, allowing divorce and remarried couples, or accepting children of same sex couples into their church. Bruni directs his attention to religious families who may fall on the conservative side, playing to their beliefs in order to make his point. Several times, he uses statistics in order to play towards the catholic perspective, using poll statistics that state “… while respondents clearly viewed a family headed by a father and a mother who are married to each other as the ideal, most of them did not view it as the only acceptable situation. More than 80 percent were O.K. with divorced parents, single parents or unmarried parents living together. More than 65 percent were O.K. with gay or lesbian parents,” (para 16). With this one statistic, he eliminates most arguments that Catholics may have depending on the limitations on marriage. He expresses that if a majority are okay with expanding their beliefs, the Roman Catholic Church should consider doing so as well. Bruni also uses an anecdote in order to make his argument. However, in order to follow his belief, his anecdote does not focus on the Catholic religion but instead on what a family is as an entirety. He speaks of his friend Elli, who helps boys in Zimbabwe take on American education and helps guide them through their lives as developing adults. Though she is not related to them by blood or law, they made a commitment to each other. The boys rely on Elli and give her a relationship while she in return cares for them and keeps them as safe as she could. Though they are not related by blood, Bruni looks at them as a family. Later, he also brings up the AIDS epidemic that swept the gay community in the 1950s.  Bruni says, “I saw this happen time and again in the 1980s and early 1990s, when AIDS ravaged gay America and many sufferers found themselves abandoned by relatives, whose religions prodded them toward judgment instead of compassion. Friends filled that gap, rushing in as saviors, stepping up as providers, signing on as protectors. Where families were absent, families were born,” (para 20). Once again, he advocates the idea that family is not just ties at birth. He says that a family is any group that can traverse life better as a community than the individual can do on their own. In the end, he is using these references and logos in order to appeal to the Catholic community and encourage them to broaden their perspective on the idea of family. He believes that they focus too much on blood and chromosomes, when the real importance should rely on commitments and strengths. Personally, I believe that Bruni did a brilliant job with his piece. However, I fear that I may have a bias when reading this. I believe and agree with everything that Bruni is saying in his essay, but looking at the information that he puts on the table, someone who is looking from the Catholic perspective might be encouraged to agree. Overall, his thesis was clear and all of his points were well addressed in order to appease his audience.

TOW #6- A Conversation on the Edge of Human Perception

Christopher Bollas is a British psychoanalyst and author of many books studying different branches of psychology, primarily the mental disorder schizophrenia. In his memoir, "A Conversation on the Edge of Human Perception", he depicts his many interactions with his subject, a woman he calls Lucy. Lucy is a schizophrenic, and often time her hallucinations and long-winded stories are the prime subject of his research. Despite schizophrenia having no definable cure, Bollas seems to find a way to help diminish her hallucinations with simple conversation and analysis. As a psychoanalyst, Bollas follows the belief that the way the mind works is settled within the unconscious brain and that mental disorders are manifested under 'hidden' circumstances. By following this approach to psychology, Bollas believes that every behaviorism that Lucy portrays has a trigger, and puts that together in order to help her feel better. In comparison to other strategies, such as the neurobiological approach, which focuses on chemical imbalance, he believes that faults in personalities or behaviorism have a more mentally rooted cause. Through his memoir, Bollas is trying to encourage other psychologists to use the psychoanalytic method when it comes to therapy, especially for schizophrenics. In his memoir, he uses cause and effect in order to explain Lucy's behavior and to explain how the psychoanalytic approach works. He discusses how she believed that she was once attacked by a dragon. When he looks back on their conversation, he discovers what the source may have been for her vivid hallucination. He says "I suddenly realized that earlier in the session I had told her it was good that of late her bad memories were not “dragging on,” and I said that I thought my use of this phrase might have brought an image of the dragon into her mind," (para 13). He brings up a connection that the reader may not have noticed directly in order to give a purpose to her behavior. Bollas also describes that it is often that schizophrenics are treated with medication opposed to therapeutic help. He says "Sadly, many of today’s schizophrenics receive powerful antipsychotic medications in hospitals and are discharged on a cocktail of drugs that dulls their lives. Their zombielike states are caused not so much by their mental alterity as by their treatment. The tragic irony of this approach is that the patient is met with a process parallel to schizophrenia itself: radical incarceration, mind-altering actions, dehumanization, isolation," (para 18). His word choice, such as the words 'zombie' and 'dehumanization' gives the reader a sense o responsibility. It makes the reader believe that somehow they have done something in order to encourage this oppression, and makes us feel pity the schizophrenic opposed to shun them. With teh use of Lucy, as well, he provides us with a face. She is a character that the reader can see and understand and listen to, and the reader can make of her what they will. However, anything that the reader may interpret from her behavior is entirely their opinion and is not depicted by the author for the reader. Bollas, using his strategies, provides us with a rather interesting and influential memoir. By placing the responsibility on the reader to develop their own opinions and beliefs on the schizophrenic, it forces the reader to make the choice on their own. However, it is the logic that supports the second part of his point. So many times psychologists turn to medical attention opposed to communication and understanding when psychologists are trying to help a person with a mental disorder. Instead, Bollas believes that psychologists should turn to the psychoanalytic approach in order to properly assess the person that is being dealt with.

TOW #5- Anti-Abuse Advertisement

The ANAR foundation (Aid to Adolescents and Children at Risk) is a Spanish organization focused on helping children or teens that are facing abusive situations. This particular advertisement, as you can see, shows two advertisements at one. On the left, there is an image of a young boy with the quote at the top (translated from Spanish) "Sometimes, child abuse is only visible to the child suffering from it." On the right, however, we see a picture of the same boy now bruised and bloodied. Faintly in white, the words say "If somebody hurts you, phone us and we'll help you," along with an emergency number. The most interesting part about this particular advertisement is depending on the perspective that you are looking at it from, you see different images. Typically, adults who are taller than about five feet would see the image on the left, the sentence being shown being used as a warning. Those under five feet, who are primarily children, see the image on the right. They get a hidden message so that even with a guardian they can see the image secretly without alerting their parent. That way, if they really are being abused, their parent would never know how they would have gotten the given information and the child would not be held responsible. On both ends, Pathos is being used very strongly, however, it is being used more so on the image on the right. Though the graphic content may be too much for children to see at that age, they would probably be at an old enough age that, since they can read, they would understand. The image on the left primarily focuses on the image of the child, sticking with a monotone color scheme in order to make adults understand the message without having to look so much deeper into it. However, it is letting the adults know that they may not see how they are hurting their child, but the child knows how much it is hurting themselves. It is simply giving the parents a yellow light, warning them to stop what they might be doing before it is too late. Personally, I believe that this is a very powerful piece that really does portray abuse and does its best to help children in need. However, I find that the image on the right may be a bit too much of the audience it is aimed for. According to the article explaining the image, the audience is meant to be children ages 10 and under. I'd find that, in that age, it would be a bit much to see a child that could be me beaten and bloodied. To a further extent, it may also be traumatizing. Typically children don't understand when they are being abused, as well, as there is some type of manipulation or conditioning that is put forth behind it that makes children think that they deserve it as 'punishment'. However, I believe that his image does its purpose. It both raises awareness and gives children a way out in a unique and powerful way that uses interesting strategies to appeal to different audiences.

TOW #4- IRB Post: Rethinking Narcissism

In ­Rethinking Narcissism, Dr. Craig Malkin puts an interesting perspective on the notorious mental disorder. As addressed in the last IRB post, he shares his belief that there are different levels of narcissism, the middle ground being the healthiest. In the first of his four parts in the book, he gives the background knowledge behind narcissism and describes the spectrum. The second part describes the difference between healthy and unhealthy narcissism.

Being a scientist, Malkin obviously provides plenty of statistics to appeal to his ethos and logos. He turns to several studies, surveys, and psychological analyses in order to support his thesis. For example, he says “In fact, numerous studies have found that people who see themselves as better than average are happier more sociable, and often more physically healthy than their humbler peers,” (Malkin 310).

Malkin also addresses the origins and history behind narcissism using allusions. For example, he speaks of Aristotle who asked the question “’Who should the good man love more? Himself or others?’ –and answered it. ‘The good man is particularly selfish.’” (Malkin 397) On the contrary, he addresses the opposing argument as well, explaining why narcissism may have been looked at negatively in history. He both addresses Buddha’s teachings that self is an illusion and the Christian teachings that too much of oneself becomes the sin, pride.

When describing the narcissism spectrum, he uses different anecdotes to properly exemplify the traits that he is describing. For example, when describing living at the lowest end of the narcissism spectrum, also considered ‘echoism’, he says “I once worked with a woman who rigidly refused to let anyone help her or support her, even after her husband died… she was determined to be alone instead of surrounded by supportive companions giving her special attention,” (Malkin 583). On the opposite end, he describes the extreme narcissists using Bernie Madoff, “who swindled hundreds of millions of dollars from his clients and who, when caught, scoffed at the ‘incompetence’ of the investigators for not asking the right questions. Even as he faced life in prison, he still managed to feel superior,” (589). Using these ancedotes, he is able to also give an example of what each type of narcissist is like. He provides different examples too, addressing healthy narcissism, introverted narcissism and more. However, to write on all of those would have to take up another post.

So far, Malkin does an impressive job of holding the reader’s attention and providing information in a way that is both engaging and informative. He creates a broad audience using his many rhetorical strategies, and keeps the reader entertained the whole time the book is in their hands.

Note: I am reading this book on a kindle, so the citations are in reference to a location on the kindle, not page numbers.

Also, just for fun: Dr. Malkin provides a narcissism test in his book. If you are interested, I found a shorter version online: http://www.drcraigmalkin.com/the-narcissism-test I scored in the middle at a 6, which is a healthy narcissist.

TOW #3- I Keep My Relationship Offline. It’s Better That Way by Anna Goldfarb

Anna Goldfarb is an advice columnist for The Frisky, an author of the memoir Clearly, I Didn’t Think This Through’, and an author of her own personal blog which she titled ‘ShmittenKitten’.  In her article, published in the opinions section of the Washington post, she explains why she chooses to keep her relationship status private from social media despite her interest with the websites. Her article seems to address both the general public and those who read her blog. In the article, she addresses her readers in a way that would make us believe that they were not her intended audience, using terms like ‘my readers’ or ‘my followers’. However, after taking a glance at her blog I found that she shared it on there as well. This makes me believe that there was a broader audience than originally intended. For her readers, she seems to use the article to explain her actions. However, for the readers who may not be familiar with her blog, she may be encouraging them to step back when it comes to sharing their relationship on social media. As a humor blog formerly made fun of her bad dates and bad boyfriends, it turned upside down when she met her current boyfriend. As she had nothing bad to say about him, she found there was no way to continue posting about these events. However, when she gave an update on her romantic status, she felt overwhelmed by the amount of feedback she got on it. As a hater of couple bloggers herself, she felt as if she had almost betrayed her audience and single friends by shoving her relationship status in their face. This led to her to take a step back when it came to blogging about her relationship status, refusing to post anything else involving him at all. To convince her audience to do the same, she uses several different rhetorical strategies. First, she keeps a satire and narrative tone to her article, presenting an almost relatable understanding to the reader. Following that, she even goes so far as appealing to logos by sharing a study performed on Facebook by the Science of Relationships. Basically, it argued in favor of her point by saying “… Users who overshared (“Pining away for Jordan…I just love you so much I can’t stand it!”) were judged to have good relationships, but they were also declared the most unlikable,” (para 10). Despite the suddenness of the logos, I felt that it was well placed in an article I was expecting to be entirely opinionated. However, I felt that when reading the article, there was something missing. I wasn’t sure, and still cannot be sure, what it was. For an article that reached nearly 900 words, it seemed very limited in its approach to make an argument. Goldfarb, as a blog writer, seems to focus more on making her narrations humorous or eye catching than actually provided sufficient information in order to make her statement. Perhaps I find a bit more logos in an argument that is surrounded mostly by narration would do well. However, I got her point. The problem is that I was not quite convinced. Now, I’m in no relationship myself. Though I expect that if she can barely even convince me to give more than a “Yeah, okay,” to this article, I do not believe she’d be successful in convincing a person in their own relationship to approve any more.

TOW #2- Alcoholism Advertisement

This advertisement from 2009 was published by the advertising agency BBDO Warszawa from Poland. After looking into it, I found that is simply all it is: an advertising agency. With no apparent ulterior motive behind the company that is easily seen, all of the focus is put onto the actual advertisement.The topic that the advertisement is covering is alcoholism. As we can see, the man behind the bottle seems to be smiling and having a good time. However, as he raises the bottle of alcohol he reveals his face. This time, it is distorted and almost grotesque. Below the picture, we can see the words "Suddenly it got scary? It's hard to tell when fun becomes disease. Don't try to check it yourself."

As the advertisement is about alcohol, it is mostly targeted towards the general public of ages 21 and older. As it uses the word 'yourself', it seems to be targeted towards an individual who may be suffering from an alcohol addiction. It even goes as far to provide them with an alcoholism hotline at the very bottom of the poster. The image in the bottle is meant to catch your eye and almost be disturbing. It is meant to make the viewer uneasy, contributing to the strategy of pathos. This exaggeration of the behavior is almost horrific, and means to make the viewer step back and think about the image. Though most of the strategy used in this image is pathos, I can understand why. As time and time again, the viewer may have heard the statistics and such about alcoholism, it may take more of a visual shock for them to see what could actually be happening to them when they are suffering from alcoholism. This impact may convince them to call the hotline provided or get help wherever necessary.I believe that this was a very interesting and unique portrayal that definitely caught my eye as I was looking at it. Using strategies like the distorted face easily catch the eye which is something that a visual text really should use often. It creates an impact very easily and makes it so that the viewer pauses to observe it more closely.

TOW #1- There Is No Theory Of Everything

Simon Critchley is a professor of philosophy at The New School. He received his Bachelor’s from the University of Essex, his Masters in Philosophy in the University of Nice, and his Ph.D from the University of Essex. His work typically focuses on the relationship between the ethical and political within philosophy (The European Graduate School, 1). In Critchley’s article, There Is No Theory of Everything, he is describing his personal experiences with philosophy in school and how it developed his theories today. He explains that he believes though philosophy is an important branch of science to study, there are certain limits to where we actually need to explain things. Some things can be solved scientifically, but other things simply fall into natural instinct. There is no way to truly explain the natural occurrences and reactions. 

Throughout reading his article, I came to recognize that it was intended for other philosophers or those who are interested in philosophy. Much of the information and terms that he provides are rather uncommon to an everyday reader, yet would catch the attention of another philosopher. At the beginning of the article, Critchley provides several anecdotes in order to apply ethos to his argument. Using famous philosophers that other philosophers would likely be familiar with, such as Morgenbesser, Plato, and Xenophon, he is proving to us in the very beginning that he is educated in what he does. He says anecdotes, such as talking about Morgenbesser’s last words on his deathbed, “become a way of both revering the teacher and humanizing them… keeping them within human reach,” (Chritchley, para 4). 

Critchley emphasizes this point made by his anecdotes by providing his memories of his philosopher professor, Frank Cioffi. Cioffi was a very eccentric man whose passion about what he taught made him more likeable to both his students and the reader. After introducing us to Cioffi, he uses him to support his idea that there is not a theory for everything. As Cioffi has a rule of “no B.S.”, he had the perspective that not everything had to be calculated and hypothesized. Using this eccentric character to help make his point, Critchley helps emphasize his idea in words that are not his own. 

Critchley’s purpose is simply to educate and convince others of his theory. He believes that many philosophers put most of their time trying to complicate things that are best left simple. In order to make well-rounded and focused theories, we must allow nature to be natural, and science to be scientific. Though I feel that it could be executed a bit better, I believe that Critchley accomplished his purpose. He introduces us to this ‘character’ who encouraged him to start believing in this theory, as well as providing us with several anecdotes in order to establish ethos with his reader. He also uses many hyperboles to better represent his argument. Overall, Critchley’s work is well rounded and adds up to an interesting thesis. He was not afraid to put his voice out there, and was even willing to use rhetorical strategies in order to argue a scientific topic.

IRB Intro Post #1- Understanding Narcissism

As a person who is deeply interested in psychology, I thought that I would analyze some of the most notorious attributes in the psychology: narcissism.Narcissism is described as both a notorious trait and mental disorder. It is defined as 'excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one's physical appearance'. Narcissistic Personality Disorder takes it one step further; it is often associated with lack of empathy with others, a constant need for admiration, and a tendency to be manipulative or demanding (Psychology Today). However, in Dr. Craig Malkin's book Rethinking Narcissism, he addresses narcissism in a different light. While he does recognize the negative attributes of being a narcissist, he recognizes what positive aspects can come out of the trait as well. Not only does he plan to share how narcissism can be a positive trait, he also shows how to balance it in order to make a positive environment for the reader, both internally and externally. Dr. Malkin claims that narcissism is often used as an insult with very little understanding of what the term actually means. He says that while, yes, it can be bad if not taken under control, there is a balance that makes narcissism a positive trait that he wants to advocate in his book. Dr. Craig Malkin serves as an instructor for psychology in Harvard Medical School. He is a frequent contributor to psychological websites, posts, and his blog titled 'Romance Redux'. My assumption, from the information provided in the introduction of Rethinking Narcissism, is that the book will address both the disorder and the personality trait in hopes of spreading awareness and knowledge.  I am very excited to look at things in Dr. Malkin's perspective and seeing how it will even open my mind to other disorders or personality traits. Perhaps I myself will develop into a bit of a narcissist (A balanced narcissist, I promise!).

How It Feels To Be Colored Me by Zora Neale Hurston

Zora Neale Hurston is a writer of twentieth century African-American literature. She was a civil-rights activist and spent her life collecting folklore from the South, the Caribbean, and Latin America. She is looked up to among many other famous authors during the Harlem Renaissance. In her essay, How It Feels To Be Colored Me, she describes exactly what the title entails. She explains that before, when she lived in a town made up of only colored people, she didn't feel like she was colored. However, it was when she left to go to school at thirteen years old that those feelings changed. Surrounded by a primarily white community, she described that it felt a bit different. However, unlike how I expected, she didn't begin to speak of racism and hatred that was thrown towards her. Instead, she simply describes that everybody seemed to expect her to feel more colored than she did. She explained sometimes she didn't feel colored, and sometimes she did, but most of the time, she simply felt like herself. Hurston goes on to describe to her audience, who, I expect, are those who are white, that her race doesn't define her. She says "The terrible struggle that made me an American out of a potential slave said 'On the line!' The Reconstruction said 'Get set!'; and the generation before said 'Go!' I am off to a flying start and I must not halt in the stretch to look behind and weep," (Atwan 115). Later, she describes a scene where she is dancing to music of her cultural descent, enjoying every minute of it. When she looks to her white friend and sees that he isn't enjoying the music as passionately as she is, she realizes that his culture is far away from hers; it is elsewhere, on another continent. However, this doesn't bother her. She simply says that she is like a brown bag among white bags, but if you dump it out and look inside, every bag is just as different as the other. Hurston lured the unknowing audience in with the idea that this would be a story where she was laughed at, where people pointed fingers and called her names just because her skin was dark. We were expecting a story in which she would feel disgraced that she was colored. Instead, she says "'Sometimes I feel discriminated against... it merely astonishes me. How can anyone deny themselves to the pleasure of my company! It's beyond me," (Atwan 117). As a girl of half-African-American decent, this essay made me feel the opposite of what I was ready to feel. I was prepared to feel sorrow, apologetic, and disgust at how my people were treated in my history. However, now I feel enlightened, encouraged, and willing to share this essay so others of my skin color can feel just the same. As for those who may not share the cultural past, Hurston raises a glass to them and says 'Being colored does not mean that you're damaged or broken, it just means that there's something a little different in how we once were.'

Moving On: You still hold onto what you once where, but are becoming something new

Artist: Peter Jansen

They All Just Went Away by Joyce Carol Oates

Joyce Carol Oates is an American author who has published over forty books in her time as a writer. She, as described in her memoir, was born in New York. There, she would spend days exploring abandoned homes that had yet to be rebuilt or were taken away by nature. The way Oates write is almost haunting (best read listening to dark piano music, I find), and leaves the reader in almost a sense of wariness, waiting for the actual horror to start. Of course, it does come, just not in the way that the reader would expect. After discussing her adventures in abandoned houses, where once-valuable items scattered the floor and windows were smashed by vandals, she goes on to describe a family, the Weidels, who lived in a house just around the street from her. She foreshadows the darkness of the story with the fact that her father would not allow the Wiedel family to visit (not including the puppy that they had). Rumors had spread of all types of abuse within that house, only subtly hinted for our author, who was quite young at the time. Things got worse: There were bruises on Mrs. Wiedel, the family dog was shot by Mr. Wiedel, the children had occasional mental outbursts. It all built up until the house burned to a crisp by Mr. Wiedel. He was arrested, the family was split into foster homes, and they weren't heard of again. At least, not until Ruth, the eldest of the two daughters, and Oates reunited in High School. When Oates described her, she says "There was a tacit understanding that 'something had happened' to Ruth Weidel, and her teachers treated her guardedly," (Atwan 561). Despite this, Joyce was still curious about what was going on in Ruth's mind. After befriending her, she asks questions, one of the most prominent being why the family never returned to the home that could possibly be rebuilt, to which Ruth responds "They all just went away," (562). Even after being invited to see it once more, Ruth refuses, though she seems that she wants to. After pondering, I believe that I can see exactly why. It seems that Oates is trying to tell us that the reason houses are abandoned isn't simply because someone got up and left. If a house is abandoned, something seriously bad must have happened there. It is something that people refuse to recognize, refuse to touch, even if they were a part of it. Ruth going back to an old home would be like being forced to look back on memories that one never wanted to relive. Her lasts words are "I guess I better not," despite seeming to want to so badly. She wants to go and see her history, but who would want to look back and seeing where your life was breaking into tiny pieces? The essay, I find, is a wake up call; Every abandoned house we see has a cruel and dark history that can only be represented in the form of decay.

Hiding from Memory: Easier Said Than Done

Source: http://blueribbonproject.org/life-skills/relationships/22-relationships/165-domestic-violence-the-fact-behind-the-myths.html

The Solace of Open Spaces by Gretel Ehrlich

Gretel Ehrlich is an author, poet, traveler, and essayist. She was born in California and moved to Wyoming in her later years. In Ehrlich's essay, The Solace of Open Spaces, she describes what it is like to live in the state of Wyoming. In every description that she provides, it seems that she always describes how vast the land is and how little actually covers it. She simply shares some of the experiences she has there, and describes it in a way that makes the reader feel like they are on a barren, alien planet. By the end of the essay, I will admit, I was very confused. She ends her essay, after talking so much about the land itself, speaking of outer space and how she believed that it could heal what was "divided and burdensome in us," (Atwan 476). I sat, brows furrowed, rereading the ending over and over; How exactly did this relate to the essay? It was only when I reread the title that I came to my senses. The space that she was speaking of, I recognized, was not simply outer space, but the space of the world that she had lived in for so long. Wyoming was filled with nothing but space, nearly barren to human eyes (or at least, that's how she describes it). I hadn't picked up on it before, but rereading the essay she compares the land to outer space several times, one significant statement being "Canyons curve down like galaxies to meet the oncoming rush of flat land," (Atwan 68). Ehrlich says that, originally, she hadn't planned to stay. Instead, she was coming here to 'lose herself' in the emptiness. However, what happened was the completely opposite. She says that the rawness and numbness inside of her had faded away; the country was a clean slate for her. She complains often that those who pass through don't recognize what is actually valuable in Wyoming in the beginning of the essay. We, as readers, are left to wonder, what? She is basically saying 'there's nothing in Wyoming. Nothing.' Then what are we missing, we may ask? I find that Erlich works backwards in answering that question. She gives us the curiosity and confusion at the beginning of the essay, forcing us to think exactly what passersby are thinking. She feeds the confusion more and more, making us doubtful of what she offers to us. Finally, when she makes her point, she doesn't slam it in our faces. She gives us a metaphor, instead, and makes us make the connection of the metaphor to the story. Ehrlich's ability to provide us with such an artfully written finale made me respect her work, even if at the beginning I doubted it. I'd be interesting in reading more of her work in the future and seeing what else she has to offer.

Alone: Finding The Light Among Nothing

Francesco Romoli