Response to Lambert Smith: Times have changed for student protesters

I think this article started off really well. The "problems" that students are having today concerning protesting was very suprising to me. I never would have guessed that students care more about watching TV than doing good for their world, and standing up for what they believe in. I actually found it pretty dispicable that students barely even care what about what is happening around them.
But, on the other hand, students may have reasons why they aren't so strongly against the war in Afghanistan. First of all, there isn't a draft. So many don't feel the need to get involved if it doesn't involve them directly. I find this kind of sad, that people only care about things that revolve around them. I think the author was right when he said how "everyone is cocooned in their own little worlds." This is so true. The society and culture that we have today isn't as involved as it used to be.
I think that needs to change. People need to start caring about the rest of the world, and thinking outside the box. I am sure a great number of people already do this, but there are too many who have become unaware and shut down from the rest of the world. Lambert Smith proves this by stating simply that people won't bother to protest because their favourite TV show was on that night. The day of the meeting actually had to be changed so people would even attend.
This is why our culture and society needs to change--drastically. Little changes are happening everyday, and that is great, but we need to do even more.
To start, just telling other people about this topic, or other worldly events that get society more involved and aware, would be extremely helpful. There are many things like this that people can do. They may seem small, but every little bit counts.
I didn't really catch what the conclusion of the article was trying to point out. After protesting, a student asked for a plastic bag to clean up after themselves. Was this meant to be a bad thing? Smith said in his concluding sentence that the times have "most certainly change." The whole argument he was making throughout the writing kind of clashed with this last part. How did practicing cleanliness and being polite strengthen his argument that students aren't as envolved anymore. It seemed a bit off topic to me.
I liked the rest of the article though. It was defianately the shocking facts that got me interested in this article. That is what is so great about reading. You have a different experience each time, and although it may not always be a positive one, you always learn something new.

MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail

As I began to read this article, I was immediately drawn in. The combination of superb word choice, and the impressive quantity of persuasive techniques astounded me. Just the argument alone was enough to get me interested, but the way MLK wrote it was really what got me to read the article so closely. I am pretty sure that this article was the one I spent the most time reading each word. Because I took so much time to understand it, I really got the whole meaning of the letter. There is no doubt that this is my favourite article from our course-reader, for several reasons.

First of all, I really liked MLK's writing style, particulary the persuasive aspect of it. The respect that he showed in his writing towards his opponents took his argument to a whole new level. It really proved just how accepting and wise he really was. It is so easy to get caught up when writing persuasively, and start insulting the opponent in attempt to strengthen the argument, but MLK stayed away from all of that. Just that simple act shaped his letter into one of the great pieces of writing in history, in my opinion.

Another reason why I liked this letter was because of the persuasive techniques used. There are so many that I will not name all of them, but I will mention I few that really stood out for me, and had a lasting impression. He used great examples and references to support his argument. Bringing in such historical figures such as Jesus, Socrates, and Hitler to compare and contrast them to the points he was making was a great idea. And the way he blended in these references to his writing was exceptional.

Yet another rhetorical strategy that really made an impression on me was the use of repetition in a subtle yet effective way. Just one example of this was the paragraph-long sentence just after his "horse and buggy pace" line. The way he squeezes in so many examples in a repetitive manner all in one sentence might appear exhausting and daunting, but it actually worked perfectly.

MLK's letter was outstanding in every detail and aspect. In addition to being my favorite article, "Letter from Birmingham Jail" was also the only writing that I could find no fault in. If anyone could find something wrong with the essay I would like to hear about it because I could not find even one.

Arguments of Definition

I thought this article brought up some very interesting points, although some parts were a little dull for me. For example I didn't really like how the author had six examples in a row as the intro to the chapter. This seemed a little bit redundant to me, especially since this is how the other chapter started out. It didn't really work for me the first time, so I thought that was one area the chapter could have changed.

What I did like about the writing was the points that were brought up. For example, I really liked what the author said about the first great English dictionary. I never thought about how "dictionaries reflect the prejudices of their makers". Before reading this I assumed that dictionaries gave unbiased, logical and scientific definitions. But I was proved wrong. If you didn't read the chapter, or don't remember this particular part, the dictionary writer, Samuel Johnson, described oats in a close minded, prejudiced manner. "Johnson defined oats as "a grain which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people." This really helped me see that actual people write dictionaries and definitions. They aren't always correct.

It takes a number of people and point of views to make a definition whole and accurate. I liked the example that was given about the wetland, and how there were a number of definitions for it. "The definitions, taken together, do help distinguish the conditions that are essential and sufficient for determining wetlands." I like how this was described, and it makes sense that "Essential conditions are those elements that must be part of a definition but that--in themselves--aren't enough to define the term."

The chapter was interesting, but at the same time a little boring. I liked parts of it, but not others. Repetition and too much structure is what bored me. It was the viewpoint of the author, and the ideas that caught my attention. In writing, what stands out most are the ideas that the author puts forth. That's why I believe this piece of writing has value and purpose to it.