Blog Post #5

A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Foer used the fallacy Black-or-white, introduced in on the website your logicalfallacyis.com. It is described as presenting only one or two solutions when in fact there are more possibilities that exist. This fallacy is present in chapter 5 “Influence/Speechlessness”. At the end he talks about how vegetarianism, that is the only solution he brings up after talking about how chickens are processed.

         In reality there are many solutions to stop ill treatment of chickens and other animals raised and processed like this. For one, this book is a solution; he is making the issue known to a wide-variety of people, except he doesn’t mention it as a solution we could take advantage of. He discusses how we don’t have to become vegetarians but if we want to lead healthy lives eating the meat that is processed this way is not an option. In fact, there are many other options like raising your own animals, even though it may be expensive, it is still another solution, but he still does not mention it. He also only mentions the health advantages of vegetarianism, but what about the health advantages of eating meat. He fails to offer both sides of the argument.

         He puts vegetarianism at the end of the chapter after describing what really happens to chickens because it makes us think it is a great thing, not only for us but for animals as well. But is it the only solution and it is really the best?

Misinterpretations (Week 6)

In Chapter 4 of Eating Animals, Safran Foer brings up the "Myth of Animal Consent," the defense commonly used by ranchers to argue that animals agree to give themselves up as food for humans as long as they can live a "safe" and "protected" life in these factory farms--the idea stemming from the belief that nature is cruel and man can offer a safe haven (even if the last stop on that joyous ride called "safe haven" is death and consumption).   

The Fallacy--Misinterpreting the Evidence:  It seems that these ranchers are misinterpreting the evidence that there is of nature being cruel to justify their process of poultry farming.  It also seems that there is a colossal misinterpretation of the feelings of the animals themselves.  There is very little evidence to show what animals actually think at any given moment, so that evidence does not even provide a solid foundation for the farmer's argument.

These farmers may also be applying the "straw man fallacy," creating a side of the argument that is easier to justify for themselves, although I don't think that this fallacy applies as much as the first one.

Week 6 Prompt

Find a logical fallacy in either Chapter 4 or Chapter 5 of Eating Animals. Point out what fallacy it is (either its specific name or give a description of it) and why this particular section in EA is a fallacy. Take a look at Heinrichs or http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com for descriptions. 

Alternatively, if you don't want to find a logical fallacy, you can point out a piece of logic that is not a fallacy, and explain why it is good logic, based on what Heinrichs says. 

post 4

Coffee Shop:
I thought the coffee shop assignment was really fun and I really enjoyed it. It made you think a little outside of the box especially since we were only analyzing the rhetoric of articles and written works before this assignment. It gave me a new perspective on the decor and how places are set up. Some of it was a little difficult to analyze but overall I think it went well. I think I could have been a little more prepared and I wish we didn't overlook a big part of our coffee shop but I think we will be ok.

Essay:
I thought this was a fun essay to write. I enjoyed really breaking up a piece of writing and analyzing it. I felt that I didn't do too good on my rough drafts so for my final draft I really made some serious corrections to it and wanted to make it a good piece of writing. I'm really looking to getting a good grade on our first major assignment so that I can start off on a solid note. I hope this essay did that for me.

post 3

I thought the word cruelty stuck out at me the most in this chapter. It was an ongoing theme in many of the other definitions Safran Foer gave us examples of as well. He first defines cruelty as willingly causing "unnecessary suffering" to a being. In this case that would be an animal. He makes a point to state that nature isn't cruel. It is the circle of life. Animals kill each other for food to stay alive. The last sentence in the cruelty section is really what made me think. "Cruelty depends on the understanding of cruelty and the ability to choose against it. (53)" We as humans know that we are putting these animals under stress and pain for our own gain. We are consciously making these decisions. To me that is the saddest part. The author brings up KFC later in the chapter and in this section he makes in a point to explain how cruel KFC is to their chicken. These chickens have a hard life from the moment they hatch to the moment they day and it is mainly our fault. I also feel that cruelty and suffering go hand in hand in some ways and I really liked how he ended the section with this word. It used cruelty and our acts of cruelty to bring it all back to how much these animals actually suffer and that we are directly causing this. It used pathos very effectively and brought the argument to a close.

post 2

The author of Eating Animals uses many rhetorical analysis techniques. I feel like one of the main techniques he uses is pathos. He uses pathos very much especially in the first and second chapters, but I think that the main reason he did that was to grasp us emotionally before he gets into the main points of his argument. Foer also uses logos to establish his argument as well. He uses it to help him seem more relatable. The stories that he tells us to really appeal to our emotions also helps him seem more relatable and more of a person. Also the author uses logos since he makes his arguments make sense. The main example in this book so far is that since we eat pigs and cows, why don't we eat dogs as well. He makes a point to state that dogs aren't smarter then those animals so what stops us from eating them. In my perspective this is a very logical argument. It makes a lot of sense to me. In chapter 6  of Thank you for Arguing he touches upon virtue, wisdom, and disinterest. Heinrichs knows that not everyone shares the same virtue/opinion he has but he makes it a point to say that he doesn't have anything against people who aren't vegetarian. He doesn't have practical wisdom since he admits that he makes mistakes and he isn't perfect. It makes him seem more human. Overall, the author uses many rhetorical techniques we have already talked about.

post 1

"Thank You for Arguing" is a very interesting book that has given me a new perspective on arguments and rhetoric. All of the little tricks the author is teaching us are seen in everyday conversations, which makes it more interesting. It gets you thinking while you're having a conversation or listening to someone talk. You really see these tricks come into play. The way he writes it is also like an instructions manual which makes it very fun to read. Overall this book is a great tool for teaching people about rhetoric and argument. I'm excited to keep reading it and learn more tricks.

Coffee Shop

Overall, I felt that going to Java House Coffee Shop was a fun way to still be learning. I feel like it was a good way to get out of the classroom and see rhetoric in an everyday location. To be honest, I thought that in this rhetoric class it would be all about reading boring books and writing essay after essay, but it is really so much more than that. I think that rhetoric is in a way starting to grow on me. Going to a coffee shop was way out of the ordinary and I love being spontaneous. During the rhetorical analysis of the coffee shop I feel that my group worked together well on top of presenting to the class in an appropriate manner. If I were to do this small group project again, I would most likely prepare myself better the night before. I happen to be one of those people who has a weakness of speaking in front of others and at times, is very difficult. What matters most is that I made it out alive.

            As for the essay went, I feel my final essay was something I worked really hard on and hope that it will be reflected in my grade. I was astonished how quickly our first draft was due and I was nervous about what my other peers would say, however, I knew that I still had another week or so to improve my writing. I cannot speak for everyone in the class, but for myself, it really helped to get feedback from my peers and Ms. Pearson on my rough draft and even more help on my polished copy. It made revising a lot easier!

Coffee Shop and First Essay

Coffee Shop
The Coffee Shop assignment was interesting, I had honestly never thought about the arguments that establishments make. I understand what advertising is, but I never thought of that as an argument. Analyzing all the small things that make a coffee shop was interesting, and it really created the idea that the tiny aspects of a coffee shop can all come together and make an interesting argument. The speech was fine, no complaints from me, I would have like more time so we could have really gotten our point across, but nothing we could do about that.

Paper
I don't like my first paper. I don't think it's the best I could do. I really refined and edited it and I got the idea that Mrs Pearson set across, but I would have liked more time with it. That's on me. I really went over and over my third essay, improving it all the way. An I can't say I hate what I submitted, I just always think I could be making it better and better. I also got confused on what we should have turned in, and am currently attempting to fix that. Moral of the story for me on the paper, I learned more on the refining process, and I took editing really seriously, and it showed in my paper and all, but I want to put more time in my next projects, because I really think with all the editing I would do, I feel like it can only get better.

Week 5 post

I really enjoyed doing the rhetoric of a coffee shop assignment and it ended up being easier and more fun than I had expected. Before this assignment, I never took into consideration the kind of argument that a coffee shop, or any place for that matter, can make. I thought it was interesting to actually look into the details and figure out what the coffee shop was trying to convey. At first I didn’t know how the assignment was going to go because I didn’t know if I would be able to interpret what the coffee shop was trying to say but after talking with my group it became easier and clearer for me to interpret. I think that having the first speech as a group speech was a good idea, as it lessened the pressure and made it a good preparation for future speeches, not just for the upcoming group speech but for individual speeches as well. Overall, I thought that the group speech went well and I think we could have easily talked about it more but we ran out of time. I also think that I could have prepared more and practiced so that I didn’t lose my train of thought. And as for the upcoming group speech, I will definitely be more prepared and am confident that it will go well. I think that a group speech is a great idea so that we know what it’s like to work with other people and learn how to get along with different people.

Coffee Shop Assignment

I actually really liked the coffee shop assignment. It was nice to do something different. I think splitting into groups and making it a group speech was very good because it was less stressful than if we would have had our first speech be a individual speech. I think maybe I should have prepared what I was going to say in the speech a little more, or ran through it a couple more times, so I wouldn't have been so nervous but all in all it went well. It was also really nice to put what we have been learning into a real world perspective. I never really thought about an argument that a place could be making, but after looking for an argument at the coffee shop it has made me realize that we are just so used to everything saying something different that we don't really even think about it.
The writing assignment went much easier than I expected. It was nice to have due dates for each draft because it prevented me from procrastinating the paper. I also loved how we got feedback from you and our peers. The workshops were very helpful. I am very glad that it's over and am kind of nervous to give our first big speech. I felt that because of the feedback I received my paper turned out pretty well, so hopefully speech workshops will help me to not be nervous for those as well.

Week 5 Post

At first, I didn’t know what to expect with the coffee shop assignment, but once we got started, I enjoyed it. I liked how it was different from anything we had done before, and how we weren’t just sitting in the class and we were out seeing how rhetoric works in real life. I was skeptical at first because I had never heard of looking for rhetoric in a coffee shop. Once we got started I think we found it easier to analyze the coffee shop and all the rhetoric it contains. Also, I think it was a good thing we had the list of questions to guide us because otherwise I don’t know if we would have been able to figure out what we would be looking for. I also found it interesting because I had never analyzed a coffee shop before and I hadn’t paid that much attention to what decisions coffee shops would make in order to get a certain message across. I also thought that the group presentation was good practice for any other speeches we have, and it was a fairly easy speech to give. All in all, I think it was a very good assignment. It was fun to see how things can be considered rhetoric even just in every day life and it was fun to get out of the classroom and have a different sort of assignment.