Arg/Pers Essay: John Locke

Throughout their famous writings, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all discovered and developed novel methods of government, some of which we still use today. Many of the forms of government they discussed were based solely on the power of the leaders. However, Locke created a government based solely on the supremacy and consent of the people. He made sure to pinpoint that while under the rules of natural obligation and social contract, the people have the utmost authority. He mentions that with this type of authority, the people’s gain their well-deserved rights because their voices are heard within a government of consent. He then shows that executive stability comes from this rule where the people feel content and collective. Therefore, I believe that Locke’s form of government is the best overall because his simple rules of accordance are versatile and globally appealing.

            One of the most universal concepts that Locke introduces in his piece is the idea of democracy.  Locke talks a great deal about the makeup of a democratic society all throughout his piece. He describes it as, “the mutual agreement of men freely acting in the choice of their governors” with the people, “uniting together … free and independent … [with] no natural superiority or subjection” (sec.102). These simple principles outlined by Locke are seen in action all across the world in hundreds and hundreds of places that have taken in democratic rule. As stated by the Historical Atlas of the Twentieth Century, “31% of the human population has been living in fully democratic nations”, much of the percentage deriving from nations like India and Germany.  So Locke’s global appeal is clearly represented within the wide influence of democracy.

           

Unlike many other philosophers, Locke expresses a strong sense of philanthropy while emphasizing the potency of teamwork towards one central goal. As he says in section 99, “whosoever…out of state of nature unite into a community, must…give up all the power, necessary to the ends…for [uniting].” He later mentions that the people come together to “judge the ablest, and most likely, to rule well over them” (section 107). This idea of collectivism in order to vote for a trusted leader has become the basis of many developed countries around the world. No matter what government each of these countries hone, the basis of most are found within the foundations of voting. For example, a republic, which is one of the most popular forms of government in the world, is defined as “a government in which supreme power is held by the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives governing according to law” (usconstitution.net). The well-known concept of collective voting is a continual reminder to the world of Locke’s original philosophy.

Locke also evaluates what runs a well formulated society. He came to the understanding that the happiness of the people is the key to an efficient nation. He states that “the obligation anyone is under [within a society]…beings and ends with the enjoyment; so that whenever the owner, who has given nothing but…consent...is at liberty to go” (section 121). In simpler terms, Locke explains that anyone who is looking for a government with the will to consent and the want to be governed is allowed to leave the regime when they please, as long as it is for their pleasure. These ideologies that are introduced by Locke are then re-described as the basic civil liberties of the Declaration of Independence. As it says in the preamble, “we hold these truths to be self-evident…that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (usconstitution.net) Because Locke’s idea of a people-pleasing government is cited directly in our Declaration, we can see the large effect that Locke’s versatility has on society today.

            Although other philosophers believe that a society based on the rights and happiness of the people is too unstable, I completely disagree. As stated by the famous American writer James Cooper, “individuality is the aim of political liberty. By leaving to the citizen as much freedom of action and of being, as comports with order and the rights of others, the institutions render him truly a freeman. He is left to pursue his means of happiness in his own manner.” Here, Cooper draws out a governmental syllogism about the unity of the people. He says that when the individuality and individual rights of the people come together, it leads to political collectiveness.  So, if the people’s individual rights are expressed in the collective, then the citizens are happy. As a result, with a contented and consented community, there will be a well-run government because if those who hold the most amount of power are pleased, then society as a whole will be just fine.

           

            As expressed through his great influence around the world, Locke has proved to us that his form of government comes out on top above the rest. With his original, simple and understandable ideas of a well formed society, he has led to the foundation of governments on a global scale. The idea of democracy, independence and voting have all derived from his genius listed in The Second Treatise of Civil Government. In conclusion, Locke’s hard work and fortitude paid off, and all because he kept the people in mind.

SOURCES:

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/20centry.htm

http://www.usconstitution.net/declar.html

The Second Treatise of Civil Government -John Locke

AOW #10: AD --- Heinz Ketchup

AD: http://cdn.geckoandfly.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/without_heinz_tomato_ketchup_sauce_advertisement.jpg 

This is an advertisement for Heinz ketchup. Here, the advertisement is depicting a tangible image of how much you need and want this ketchup because of its deliciousness of course!

The author or creator of this advertisement is the Heinz advertisement department. I researched online on their website www.heinz.com and although I didn’t find any specific people in advertising, I did find a good amount of information on the ethos of the company as a whole. I learned that Heinz is a very global country (they give foods to over 200 countries around the world and are either the number-one or –two in market position in many countries). They are not only known for their ketchup, but they are also known for their meals, snacks and even infant food and nutrition. As stated by their website “Heinz is committed to enriching your family’s eating experience(s).” So, in short, they use communal memory in order to express their ethos.

The context of this piece would be either temporal or causal. It would be temporal because when you saw this ad, most likely you were eating food, just ate food or are going to eat food. So, based upon that speculation, your reaction to the advertisement would be in-the-moment due to the communal memory about food and its taste. It could be causal as well because Heinz made this advertisement based on past occurrences. They didn’t refer so far in the past that they had to “research” but far enough that people had to reflect on what they’ve eaten before and how it relates to the use of Heinz condiments.

The purpose for why this ad was created was to show to the audience that they­ need Heinz ketchup because, without it, food would only taste like cardboard!

The audience this is written for is a very wide range of people. This ad could be read and understood by many – from adults who read the news to kids who read magazines. So I believe that the audience is both children and adults and everyone in between.

There were many rhetorical elements in this piece. In this ad, they used the rhetorical elements of contrast, placement, headings, enthymeme and juxtaposition. They used contrast within the color scheme/choices. They contrasted the dull colors of the “cardboard” food with the bright red of the ketchup. This showed that the ketchup is vibrant and that the food is dull and boring without it! They used placement within the items in the ad as well. They placed the dull food at the bottom and allowed your eye to follow down the picture until you caught a glimpse of the attractively bright condiment below. They also used headings as an effective rhetorical element. They made the heading simple and sweet and allowed for some enthymeme just by saying “_______ without Heinz”. They allowed the audience to assume the minor premise that “FOOD = CARDBOARD” without the major premise that Heinz is delicious and, therefore, makes food taste great. The last rhetorical element, juxtaposition, also goes along with the color scheme because they juxtaposed the bright colors and deliciousness of the ketchup with the dull, boring and gross cardboard above it.

They completely achieved their purpose because as a consumer of Heinz as well as my knowledge and use of communal memory, I was convinced that I need Heinz – especially because I use it so much! Also, who wants to eat cardboard anyway?

AOW #9: Pillsbury Commercial

http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/business/1194811622255/index.html#100000001178641
This commercial was about the Pillsbury Dough Boy and all of his baking items that he sells. It was more geared towards the holidays because of the items he was showing (holiday cookies, breads, etc) as well as the sense of family and togetherness all throughout.
The source or author of this commercial would be the Pillsbury marketing team. More specifically, The J.M. Smucker Company is the head company that runs over everything for the Pillsbury items. I did some research on this company at pillsburybaking.com/legal and I realized that this company has been in business for over hundreds of years. I also realized that they’ve organized and ran many companies that are very popular today, such as: Smucker’s®, Folgers®, Dunkin’ Donuts®, Jif®, Crisco®, Pillsbury®, Eagle Brand®, R.W. Knudsen Family®, Hungry Jack®, White Lily® and Martha White® - which shows me they are credible because of the many successful businesses they’ve been running!
This context of this commercial would definitely be temporal. It would be because the commercial is filmed as if it is in the moment because the Pillsbury dough boy is watching the baking scenes right as they happen, and not as scenes of the past.
The purpose of this commercial, I believe, is to encourage families to use Pillsbury products because with Pillsbury, “traditions…memories… [and] holidays” are “made easy” (as shown in the advertisement in the last few seconds). I also believe that their purpose was to evoke a sense of homely-emotion or “togetherness” that can only come from baking together, as previously stated, because of the holiday-feel throughout the entire commercial.
The audience was more geared toward families – specifically the parents who set up all of the holiday festivities and make all of the food. I believe this because even though there were a lot of kids throughout the commercial, at the end, it said “Holidays made easy” and the only people who really make the holiday are the adults of the families!
The two main rhetorical elements that I noticed throughout the piece were pathos and communal memory. The first one, pathos, was directly shown through the expressions of the people enjoying the festivities of the holidays as well as through the music in the background. They both expressed to the audience that “at-home” holiday warmth feeling you get when you’re celebrating with the people you love. This make the items more appealing because that sense of togetherness seems to be coming from baking together and in order to get that feeling “Easier” they make you think you must buy the products! Communal memory is shown through this commercial through the generic holiday celebration: all of your family members at the table/mingling while something delicious is in the oven. Communal memory in this commercial allows the audience to emotionally connect to that specific event and want to buy whatever makes them feel this way.
Yes, they completely achieved their purpose. They did because they made the audience want to buy the product through emotional and “connectible” appeal. They created a sense of togetherness through “in-the-moment”, sensitive events.

AOW #8: Bonded by Disability Article

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/nyregion/bonded-in-love-and-disability-a-couple-keeps-a-promise-till-death.html?_r=1

This is an article about true love between two people who have very similar situations. The article is talking about a man named Edwin Morales who met Noemi Rivera. They both met when they were both about 7 years old. Edwin Morales had cerebral palsy and the impairment of his nerves and muscles and his arms and legs. Surprisingly, Noemi Rivera was in very similar conditions and she had the same disease. After they both met when they were seven, they got married three decades later. However, the article also talks about Noemi’s death and the reflection of their lives together and how they helped each other stay strong!

This author of this article is Jim Dwyer. First of all, his article is in the New York Times, so obviously he is a very learned writer. However, after researching, I found that he won the Pulitzer Prize for Spot News Reporting, which is a very prestigious award. I also discovered that his book 102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers was in the National Book Award finals.

The exigence of this piece, based on the date would definitely be temporal or causal. It would be temporal because there was a very small amount of time between when the article was written and when the funeral actually happened. Also, I can tell that it could be temporal or causal because he used words/phrases like “on Thursday” to signify that the event was in extremely close vicinity to when the actual article was produced. It showed that the only Thursday or day we would be talking about would be the one that is CLOSEST to the current date.

The purpose of this piece was not only to express pathos through a heart-wrenching tale, but it was also to evoke thought about the true communal memory of our society. Besides the story telling, his other purpose was to allow the audience to question the communal memory of what a good relationship really is. It made the readers think about what defines a “perfect couple” or “perfect relationship” and makes them understand that there is no “perfect” couple and that none are the same (like this couple).

I think that the audience would be anyone and everyone. However, more specifically, the audience would be people who read the New York Times online or on the newspaper.

Rhetorical elements:

Pathos – There was a significant amount of pathos included within the passage. It was mostly included in the beginning and in the end when he was saying that the man “sat near his wife’s coffin at a funeral home on St. Nicholas Avenue and discussed the days of a life”. This communal memory of silent remorse/reminiscence added to the pathos immensely. Also, at the end, the few lines of dialogue between Edwin and his father in-law touched the audience as well.

Organization – event --- past --- event

The rhetorical organization was very effective because they started with the present then somewhat added a narrative flashback and then came back to the present at the end. It was interesting because it was somewhat like a mini classical argument structure all put into less than 6 or so small paragraphs. The beginning could represent the expanded “hook” because they start out right in the middle of the funeral/event. Then the middle could represent somewhat of a narrative – flashback because he talked about the couple’s past/gave background knowledge in the 3^rd person. This then led to coming back to the present day which is the resolution or conclusion of the entire piece.

I completely believe that the author accomplished his purpose because, as previously stated, pathos was intermingled within the introduction and conclusion. By ending and opening with intense/flat-out, real-life scenes from the specific couple, I could really get the feeling that he was trying to put out. I could see that we must put differences aside and realize that one of the most important things that make up a relationship is caring for one another and if both sides of a couple care about each other, then it DOESN’T MATTER if it is “perfect” or not – because it is perfect to those two people.

IRB 2 #1: Revered Wisdom - Buddhism

Title of book:
The title of the book I chose is Revered Wisdom: Buddhism.
Author:
The author of the book is Sir Charles Eliot.

Breakdown of the book:
The entire book is 331 pages with 9 chapters so here is how I will break it down:
SECTION 1: Chapters 1 - 3 (pages 7 - 114)
SECTION 2: Chapters 4 - 6 (pages 115 - 234)
SECTION 2: Chapters 7 - 9 (pages 235 - 331)

I chose this book for many reasons. First of all, I wanted to read something different and new, and I have never read a book about religion before! Also, I am considering converting/"adjusting" to Buddhism someday, so I thought that this would be a good jump-start to my journey!

IRB #3: Jagger by Marc Spitz

This section was a lot alike to the last one (giving that it is a biography of Mick Jagger and cannot divert much from the linear course of his lifetime). However, in this section, Spitz added a distinctive amount of insight that delved deeper into Jagger’s life, past just what the press said. I can tell that Spitz has done a fine job on his research because, as a reader/part of the audience who loves the Rolling Stones, I learned a lot more than I knew before and I was also able to piece together the information that I brought to the table about this icon. In this section, Spitz describes how Keith and Mick were a part of the “drug-revolution” of the 60’s and how they took the toll of many by spending their time in jail (something of which I never knew!). Spitz also included a quote from a filmmaker that listed the reasons why the Stones were so world-renowned: “‘they were a bit like the Beatles…they [peed] on a garage… [and they had] that famous saying which was going around: ‘Would you let your daughter marry a Rolling Stone?’’”. Basically, this section outlined how they became famous, what happened during the course of this clime and what this fame did to them in the end [it broke up their band/members several times throughout the process – noted by Marc Spitz throughout the book].
            The author’s, Marc Spitz’s, writing, I believe, was extremely effective in projecting his purpose to the audience. Stylistically, he included “rock” jargon or diction all throughout the story as well as elongated syntax with interweaved quotes (from established writers). As for the diction, I didn’t quite understand some of the sayings/words (because it was more directed to established rockers) but the ones I did understand added aesthetics/description to the life of Mick Jagger. He also used rhetorical jargon i.e. “context” and “ethos” which was very interesting and eye-opening! At a rhetorical standpoint, Spitz used a lot of comparison and contrast with other bands c/c to the Stones (like them compared to Beatles). He also included a lot of the Classical Argument structure, details/imagery, and creativeness in the chapter titles while also establishing the ethos of the writers he quoted as well. All of the comparison/contrast within the story had to do with comparing the Stones (and their musical style) to either the Beatles or to the blues/soul bands that the Stones strived to be. As for the CA structure*, Spitz used narration when explaining a certain event/unknown thing that he mentioned (could also stand for short defining essay) and always used refutation/confirmation while supporting the Stones against all others. As previously stated, there was abounding details/imagery included when describing scenes and as for ethos, he always made sure to explain who the person was before quoting them (showing how their info was valuable by expressing their connections to the Stones). The titles of the chapters were also very creative and you could understand their relation to the story in the midst of your reading.
* I realized through this story that you can use any parts of the CA in any order in any type of writing – as long as it works with your topic you are addressing. I.E. when Spitz added narration right in the middle of the story and it worked perfectly!