Jacob+Weiss

Jacob's page 1-15-08

I believe that there has been a few times when I was able to appeal to either my writing or another author's. I know that when I write something it is exactly how I feel so to me that is considered appealing to it. I always look for ways where an author relates to me in his the writing. I enjoy reading papers that I can understand and relate to. When I write it is easy for me to appeal to logic, emotion, and character. I would say that the one I struggle the most with is character. This is the most difficult for me mainly because character can be such a wide variety. How I normally try to appeal to character is through their actions. Does the author create a character like me or someone with a different mindset? This is how I normally relate myself to an article and it has seemed to work for me. There are many ways to relate yourself to an author through logic, emotion, and character.

Jake Weiss 1-20-08 Miss Wendt English 101 A2

In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official

The article __In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official__ was written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006. The author discusses his opinion that the United States Senate should make English the official language. So many people living in the United States speak other languages and don’t even understand English but yet they are citizens here. Krauthammer is frustrated because he does not want to see Spanish language taking over the United States. This article is effective and includes a lot of persuasion. Ethos is used when Krauthammer tells of us his background so we have a good knowledge of the author to make his article look like it was written by someone with a good background. Logos is used when Krauthammer tries to influence us to believe that Spanish is in fact growing and we as Americans need to make a stand for our language and make it official. Pathos is used when Krauthammer tries to worry us that the Spanish language is taking over and many people here speak it and cannot even speak English. I have encountered people who could not speak English and I was actually in shock that they live here and cannot speak the language. I totally agree with Krauthammer that we need to make English the official language because people need to speak the language of their country in order to be a citizen. This is what Krauthammer discusses in the article. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1200741,00.html

Jake Weiss 1-24-08 Miss Wendt English 101

The article __In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official__ was written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006. In this article Krauthammer discusses his opinion about how our country has many Spanish speaking individuals that cannot speak English. This is a major problem that we face and Krauthammer brings this to our attention in his article. Krauthammer believes that the senate should declare English the official language of the U.S. Charles Krauthammer makes some good points in his article that greatly influence the way I feel about this situation. There are three main ways Krauthammer tries to persuade: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. He starts by using ethos is his first paragraph to show us that he has a good background of bilingualism and is very knowledgeable. This is very important to the reader because if we did not know that he was well educated in this area then it would be very hard for us to be persuaded. Next Krauthammer uses logos in his article to help us realize that it is logical for us to believe that the U.S. can handle this situation and that everything can workout. He explains that we are able as a country to take care of the things that we need to. Last Krauthammer uses pathos to help persuade us. Pathos is discovered when Krauthammer discusses how proud we should be of our country and our language and we should do everything we can to hold on to that. As Americans we need to show how proud we are of our country and support what we think is right. As you can see there are many ways Krauthammer persuades us to believe him. He discusses his family background so we know that he has been through this before and has developed a way do deal with it that worked already. This is huge- very huge- This helps us to believe that what he says is true. My first thoughts toward this article were that it was a little boring and something that wasn’t very interesting. I kept on reading and really liked it- For some reason I begun to understand where he was going with his ideas. This article actually did persuade me to believe that we in fact should make English the official language right away. The U.S. has too many Spanish speaking cities that are only Spanish speaking. This causes a very large problem in our world today. There are actually people living here that cannot understand the president of the United States. How can we allow this to happen? There are many things we can do; It is our opportunity to do something about it and that is just what Krauthammer is doing. Our country struggles to keep out the aliens- Instead of not only keeping them out, we are almost letting them choose what languages they want to speak in our country. After reading this article, I fully agree with the author and we must make English the official language before it is too late.

1-26-07 English 101 Miss Wendt P2 Word Paper
 * Jake Weiss

The Definition of a Man**

There are so many ways that the word “man” could be defined. The actual definition of a man is a male having qualities considered typical of men or appropriately masculine. I would have to disagree with this definition for many reasons. The definition of the word “man” is very hard to define. Many people would agree that the word man just means being masculine. For example, being a hunter. I have read articles written by experienced authors like Dr. Aaron Rochlen who is a licensed psychologist at the University of Texas that has studied the field of men and there health needs. Dr. Rochlen says, “Many times men are their own enemies.” Dr. Aaron means that often men are to afraid of showing their actual feelings that they stay hidden with cause them more stress and can lead to future health problems. So does this fear that some men have actually define them as a man? If they are scared of crying because it makes them feel less masculine I would have to agree with Dr. Rochlen that the definition of a man would be a male that is emotionally and physically sound. This means that a man is not just a beast but is emotional and can show their actual feelings without hiding themselves. The word man as been around for thousands of years. It has changed over the years drastically. Years ago the word man just meant that a male was full of testosterone and uncaring of their emotions. Now the word is more to do with a males emotions and how he cares about something or someone. This is a big change and some would even say that it is the opposite of the first definition. Why has it changed so much? This is a hard question to answer because no one can really say why it has changed so much. I would agree that the new definition of a man makes way more sense over that of the last definition. Today’s definition of a man is very accurate. In today’s society, life is more about emotions and finding out what type of person you are internally rather than how much you can bench press. I think that most of you would agree with me when I say this. Men are more than just strong they are also the care givers. Men provide for the family which is a major part in life. If a man loses his emotions then things don’t go that well. Men must be emotionally strong and able to hold their composure. This is where the definition of a man has changed. Being emotionally strong does not involve physical muscle so a man is more than just strength. Men who are very emotional are treated more like women. Many think that these men are homosexual. Why does our world jump to these conclusions so easily? We define a “man” as a male with the ability to show his emotions but yet we criticize and judge men that follow this definition. We know what a man is so why must we ridicule them. Our society has set a standard of men that men who cannot follow are considered different. This is wrong and is why I have chosen to write this paper. I have done some research about this and have looked at both sides. In a way I agree that a man is someone who is masculine and strong physical but I also say that a man is someone who shows his emotions and does not hide how he feels. I believe that this should be the universal definition of a man because some men do not have the ability to be physically strong but are mentally stronger than the brutes. When we think of the word man instead of thinking of a middle linebacker in the NFL we should think of the androgynous man and the emotional strength he possesses. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man dictionary def. http://www.utexas.edu/features/2005/mental/index.html article

1-29-07

man1  /mæn/ - [man] - noun, plural men, verb, manned, man·ning, interjection –noun
 * 1. || an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman. ||
 * 2. || a member of the species //Homo sapiens// or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man. ||
 * 3. || the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind: Man hopes for peace, but prepares for war. ||
 * 4. || a human being; person: to give a man a chance; When the audience smelled the smoke, it was every man for himself. ||
 * 5. || a husband. ||
 * 6. || a male lover or sweetheart. ||
 * 7. || a male follower or subordinate: the king's men. He's the boss's number one man. ||
 * 8. || a male employee or representative, esp. of a company or agency: a Secret Service man; a man from the phone company. ||
 * 9. || a male having qualities considered typical of men or appropriately masculine: Be a man. The army will make a man of you. ||
 * 10. || a male servant. ||
 * 11. || a valet. ||
 * 12. || [man|enlisted man.] ||
 * 13. || an enthusiast or devotee: I like jazz, but I'm essentially a classics man. ||
 * 14. || Slang. male friend; ally: You're my main man. ||
 * 15. || a term of familiar address to a man; fellow: Now, now, my good man, please calm down. ||
 * 16. || Slang. a term of familiar address to a man or a woman: Hey, man, take it easy. ||
 * 17. || one of the pieces used in playing certain games, as chess or checkers. ||
 * 18. || History/Historical. a liegeman; vassal. ||
 * 19. || Obsolete. manly character or courage. ||

1-31-08

Brute

My definition of a brute is anyone who acts animalish and without regard for themselves or someone else. Also they have no remorce for what they did and feel no mercy.

In the article "Brute" I would say that the patient was the brute, or at least acted as more of a brute. I choose the patient because of his actions and animalish behavior. For example, the patient was grabbed by four grown men and he ended up throwing all four men off of him. This alone should convince you that the patient was the brute. Another reason for my decision is that was a very strong bullheaded man that took a beating and went through a lot of pain but yet still had plenty of energy to do the things he did. Yes the doctor also acted as a brute when he peirced the patients ears to the bed so he could keep him from jumping around but this wasn't an act of madness at all, it was what the doctor had to do to restrain the patient to save his life. A brute, in my opinion, does things that may be harmfull to others or themselves simply because they can. The doctor had a choice to make to save the patients life so he made it. The patient was acting in a fit of rage really for no reason and that is why I classify him as the brute in my opinion.

2-5-08 Journal 3

The word I chose to write my paper on was man. I chose this word because this was something that greatly interests me and that I could find much information about. I don't think anyone knows the actual definition of a man. This topic is something that captures the eye of the audience so i knew I could do a good job on it. After doing some research on the word man, I developed a good understanding of what the word means and how our world perceives it. The two arguments I used to in my paper were refutation and definition of the word. Refutation was used when I argue peoples views of what they think the definition of what the word man means. I argue this point and prove how that definition is wrong and show them with examples that my definition is more accurate. The other argument I use is definition of the word man. I found the dictionary definition of the word man and proved that the official definition isn't very accurate in terms of how our world perceives a man. These are the two arguments I used in my paper and how I plan to persuade my audience that my definition is correct.

Jake Weiss 2-17-08 Miss Wendt English 101 Analysis and Evaluation Paper

Same-sex Marriage

In today’s society, we have all heard the question about whether or not same-sex marriage should be allowed. There still is no answer to the question because it is a very difficult one to answer. There are so many reasons it should be allowed and so many reasons why it shouldn’t be. After carefully reading the articles //What Shall I Tell My Daughter// and //The Message Of Same Sex Marriage,// each have persuaded my opinion but one has persuaded it more than the other. In the article //What Shall I Tell My Daughter// written by Meg A. Riley, she discusses her personal experiences with her daughter and what her daughter faces at school because her mother, Meg A. Riley, is a product of same-sex marriage. Dreading those late night conversations with her daughter, Riley eventually realizes that the time has come to talk to her daughter about her situation. Everything is as if it was a proper marriage. For example, they were married in a church with a pastor, family members gathered around and no problems. The problems seamed to have came when other children in school noticed that this family did not include a father. Riley will discuss whether it is right for the president to put the views in her head that her family is not included in the constitution because her mother has married the same-sex. The authors main argument involves the use of pathos. Riley places us in her position by telling us about her life which sounds terrible for her and her daughter which makes the audience feel great sympathy for her and allows us to be persuaded through emotion. For example, Riley uses her daughter as the prime argument on how she is treated poorly in school and what she must go through everyday because her family is not normal. Riley also uses the President of the United States and makes someone who is the leader of the country even feel bad about what they are facing everyday. She asks that President Bush come watch her daughters eyes as Riley tells her that her family is not part of the people that the leader of the country serves and protects. Riley also uses logic in her argument but it is not nearly as great as the use of pathos. An example is the simple fact that her daughter faces cruel children everyday and cannot help but to deal with having no father. This is the most obvious form of logos that author uses. The author has no really persuading form of ethos because she focuses most of her article on pathos. In the article //The Message Of Same-sex Marriage// written by Maggie Gallagher, she discusses her experience with a young man she met on a shuttle. This young man was a college student so he had little experience with life and they got to talking about same-sex marriage. The young mans name was Mathew, and he asked Gallagher why she was against it. She replied, “Marriage is a place where we not only tolerate people having babies and raising children, we positively encourage it. Same-sex marriage will be a public and legal declaration that the state of Massachusetts believes that children do not need mothers and fathers. Alternate family forms are not only just as good, they are just the same as a husband and wife raising kids together.” Gallagher means that same-sex marriage is just the same as a husband and wife raising children. Mathew agreed and also stated that kids do not need a mom and a dad because kids accept whatever there family situation is and that he knew a friend who had been through this same situation where his mother married a woman and he said his friend turned out ok. Gallagher and Matthew both agree that if a father figure is not included in a family from the start, the child will not need a father figure at all. They believe that there is nothing to be deprived of if it is not there from the start. They both believe that mothers and fathers are optional, and adults are fragile and their emotional needs come first. The author uses all three argument strategies: logos, pathos, and ethos. For example, logos is used when Gallagher states, “Advocates of gay marriage are trying to persuade us that same-sex marriage wont affect anyone but the handful gay and lesbian families.” This is very true because it would affect everyone and not just the people involved because those children who grow up with same-sex parents that try and get a job some day may not have the skills to associate with different sexes as well as children who grow up in normal families. Pathos is used when the author is talking to Matthew about how if he was a father, would his children need him. This just gets the audience thinking about children growing up without fathers and people feel bad for those that do not have a father. At the same time Gallagher persuades us that children who do not have fathers learn to deal with it and are not scared from the neglect of a father figure. The last argument used is ethos which is used with the character Matthew. Gallagher discusses her conversation with this college student and he discusses his insight about a friend he knows that has a mother that married a woman and the young man is fine. These are the argument strategies Gallagher uses to try and persuade the audience that same-sex marriage is just as good as a husband and a wife. After evaluating both of the articles, the article //What Shall I Tell My Daughter// persuaded me more than //The Message Of Same-sex Marriage// because of its use of pathos and strong support. As I was reading the article, I had a constant feeling of sadness for her family and what they go through everyday unlike in Maggie Gallagher’s article. For example, Meg A. Riley uses a life experience of hers so you know she is very credible, and she gets into detail of exactly how her life is along with her daughters. As I read Riley’s article, the first thing I noticed was her use of pathos which indeed greatly persuaded my opinion on the subject of same-sex marriage. Gallagher’s article on the other hand was more difficult to understand and I actually needed the opinion of other readers to find out what exactly her opinion is on same-sex marriage which is not good for persuading an audience. After finding her thesis, I then struggled to find her argument points and if she was credible enough to be persuaded. Clearly Riley’s article jumped out at me more and was a great deal more persuasive than that of Gallagher’s article. A real life story rather than an opinion of a young man on a shuttle is much more appealing to listen to. For example, Riley uses a close family member who she cares for deeply and shows her true feelings toward rather than Gallagher who uses a random young man off the street. The emotion Riley uses is so strong in her article that it completely influences my opinion toward same-sex marriages because I was completely against it and now I feel sympathy for those who deal with this feeling of not having support in their lives. This was crucial in Riley’s article and is what made my decision to be persuaded by it. Gallagher’s on the other hand I thought was very week with logos and ethos because she is not very credible and does not capture my emotions very well. Meg A. Riley’s article //What Shall I Tell My Daughter// was the most persuasive and compelling unlike that of Maggie Gallagher’s article //The Message Of Same-sex Marriage.//

Proposal Questions 3-5-08

1) Should we pull the troops out of Iraq or would it be better to leave them there a while longer to ensure our countries well being?

I believe that we should leave the troops in Iraq for a while because if we pull them out to early that would allow for any terrorists to rebuild their organizations and attack us again; This time could be much worse if we give them the chance. It does sound great to here talk about pulling the troops out but in reality it is a bad idea. Why should we give terrorists another chance when we have full control now? The logical thing to do is leave them there.

2) Should we take action in dealing with making our environment a better place like the use of fossil fuels?

I think that we need to do something about the environment because right now we do not take care of it and there ae many ways we could. Fossil fuels are a huge issue today and we need to limit the use of them and other harmfull substances to ensure the live of the planet and ourselves.

3) What should be done about healthcare in our country?

In my opinion we should have free healthcare for everyone. People who are seriously ill cannot be helped because the cost of healthcare is to high. I see a problem with this and something needs to be done. I know a man that has a brain tumor who is not wealthy by any means that now owes millions of dollars for his surgeries that he will be paying on for the rest of his life. That is ridiculous. I believe that this is a strong issue that needs to be dealt with.