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!).