Political Rhetoric In Boca

As explained in "Thank You For Arguing" politicians manipulate rhetoric all the time in order to convince their audience. We can see this in the Presidential Debate that took place in Lynn University on October 22, 2012. Here are examples of logos, ethos, and pathos as well as of demonstrative, forensic, and deliberative rhetoric:

Ethos: 

"We ended the war in Iraq, we focused our attention on those who actually killed us on 9/11." 

-President Obama 

"I and Americans took leadership in organizing an International Coalition."

-President Obama 

Pathos: 

"Attacking me is not talking about how we're going to help the Middle East."
-Mitt Romney

"We want people to have peaceful lives, which they can enjoy."
-Mitt Romney

Logos:  

"In nowhere in the world was America's influence as great as it was 4 years ago."
-Mitt Romney

"America remains the strongest indispensable nation."
-President Obama 

"We're 9 million jobs short of that." 

Demonstrative: 


"I was proud that our students came out number one in both english and math."
-Mitt Romney

-"We kept out schools number one in the nation."
-Mitt Romney

Forensic: 

"The policies that you're promoting don't help small businesses."
-President Obama

-We do it by reducing spending and number one is removing Obama Care."
Mitt Romney

Deliberative: 

"We are going to have North American independent sources of energy."
-Mitt Romney

-"We have got to champion small businesses where jobs come from."
-Mitt Romney 

Argument vs Fight

In chapter two we learn the distinction between a fight and an argument: an argument is used to persuade while in a fight you want to dominate your opponent. This is unquestionably true.

We, in high school tend to fight instead of attempting to persuade. In fact, I doubt that many of us have an argument with our parents. We might start off attempting to have an argument when we ask them for permission to go to a party or event, but when they say no, this argument may end with a "I never want to speak to you again, you don't understand me" or a "God, no one in this family gets my feelings." This has certainly turned into a fight and guess what? Against parents, no matter if your points are valid, you will never win.

My mother always taught me that there are three people/things that you cannot go against because you will hardly ever win: the government or law, teachers, and your parents. This book has proven her wrong. Apparently, with argument and it's tools we may manage to convince our audience into believing what we think.

Commercials use argument to convince us that the product/service their selling or providing is the best for us. One perfect example of this is the pepsi commercial in which our favourite artists of the time participated: Beyonce, Britney, Pink, and Enrique Iglesias. The commercial clearly uses argument as it manipulates ethos to convince us that Pepsi is the best soda option for us since everyone wants it, even those that are supposed to be fighting in the colosseum.

So if instead of intimidating your opponent or losing to a fight, why not argue? Your opponent doesn't realize you're manipulating him, you basically end up winning discretely.

The Importance of Language

Talking, it seemed to me, was the point of adult existence. I have never lost that sense." (Pg. 146)

Talking is our main way of communication and as was explained in a previous blog entry, without communication there cannot be any further advancements in society. It is curious how we have managed to create all these different languages and understand each other in such a way. We have created our own complex system of communicating, which has brought us to high-tech technology and developed nations.

Language was always the most important thing for Tony Judt, in fact, it was what he was passionate for. Judt enjoyed communicating and was a teacher for most part of his life. With his disease, he lost the ability to speek clearly as his speech became slurred. Ironic isn't it, how the most important aspect of his life was stripped away from him by a neurological disorder.

Judt might have lost his ability to communicate, but his ideas were still there. They were always trapped within his mind, waiting to be let out. This may be another aspect of Judt's physical imprisonment. Except this time, it's more of a verbal imprisonment. 

How did Judt deal with this imprisonment? Did he get to a point in which he could only answer yes or no questions? Did he have an interpreter? How could he write his ideas down if he could hardly move? Did he live in silence for the last years of his life?

In my opinion, for Judt language not only represented society and humanity, but also his freedom. Without his words, he was trapped in a world of despair.

The Reason Behind Judt's Zionism?

Even though it may sound completely ignorant, I was not sure what Zionism was before reading this book. Judt never explains what the belief is and I was therefore reading about a man who was interested in Zionism without even knowing what it was. 

This is why I decided to investigate and found out that Zionism is a form of nationalism of jews that supports a nation state, referred to as Land of Israel, for all jews to return to. Throughout the book, Judt sustains that he is not very religious, but at the same time he has a strong interest for Zionism. Judt criticizes jews that are highly religious, which makes me wonder how he would ever be able to live with them under one nation state? Of course, there is nothing wrong with these jews in my opinion, but if this man couldn't tolerate them then how would living with them be any easier? 

Besides, this form of nationalism requires a strong pride in religion, which at one point in the book, Judt says is harmful and unhealthy to a human being. Of course, any obsession or excess of something can't be beneficial. 

Another thing that stood out to me with this interest is that Judt was never religious at all and did not comply with many requirements of the jewish faith. In fact, he didn't support many of the main beliefs of the religion. Then again, Judt could have had different periods that he didn't discuss in the memoir in which he felt differently towards his religion.

Does Judt discuss more in depth his Zionist beliefs in any of his other books? Has he participated in any  been involved in any movements that represent this form of the religion? 

Free Cars

Tony Judt grew up during World War II when rationing was at its peak. In fact, Judt's sons and family members would say that their father grew up in poverty. This is exactly why Tony Judt appreciated every detail and blessing he had all throughout his life. Judt knew how to save up, which later helped him with the costs of his illness. Everything happens for a reason.

Judt never fully enjoyed cars to the extent at which his father enjoyed them. According to him, cars were a new toy to Western culture, which is why his father was so obsessed with them. Once there is a new object everyone seems to want it, but Judt grew up with these innovative cars, which made them seem meaningless. This is something that's very common amongst us today, we get so used to having things at our reach that we never realize their importance in our lives.

Judt's family had issued with his father's spending on this new toy, which caused many discussions between his parents. This is might as well be another reason why Judt learned how to ration goods and spend wisely so well, he learned from his father's mistakes. 

However, there is a valid reason behind his father's obsession, even though the spending is still not reasonable. Cars could have represented freedom and a new life, which at times of war was important. Cars could have given Judt's father more appreciation over life. Most of all, these cars represented freedom, something new at the time. They were a ray of hope and optimism. 

Offending the Gods

"It might be thought the height of poor taste to ascribe good fortune to a healthy man with a young family stuck down at the age of sixty by an incurable degenerative disorder from which he must shortly die. But there is more than one sort of luck. To fall prey to a motor neuron disease is surely to have offended the Gods at some point, and there is nothing more to be said. But if you must suffer thus, better to have a well-stocked head." -Tony Judt 

This phrase is found on the first page of the book, but Tony Judt maintains opinions similar to this one throughout the memoir. As stated in previous blog entries, Judt suffers from a disorder that has killed him slowly. The author states that the reason behind this disorder is some offence toward the Gods. In a way, he blames himself for this sickness in a way that not many do. However, I don't think it's his fault he has fallen into this sickness. 

In my opinion, we all offend the Gods in some way and you could be the most religious person there is and never offend Them, but still have the same chances of suffering from such a disease. Unfortunately, no one knows the exact causes of these degenerative diseases, meaning that they are unavoidable. Judt was not very religious, but he was jewish and did go to the synagogue once in a while. Apart from this he was very interested in Zionism and in fact, dedicated a part of his life to this belief. Regardless of this, he was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's and it does not mean he did something to deserve this disease. He just unluckily developed it in his late years. 

By a well-stocked head, Judt refers to intellect. This degenerative disease does not affect his head or mind in any way, in fact, he was reasonable all throughout the disease. Judt put a great effort into becoming highly knowledgeable his whole life, which is why he may have this gratitude toward being able to conserve this knowledge. After all, how lucky would it be to lose all those years of dedication? 

Which Language Rules to Flout. Or Flaunt?

Reading this article of the New York Times, we learn about two different types of people:
Descriptivist: Those that try to describe language as it's used.
Prescriptivist: Those that focus on how language should be used.

The proper use of language is essential since language is, in my opinion, one of the basics of humanity's existence. Humans rely on language to express themselves and communicate amongst each other, if it is not used properly, language could be misleading. In this case, the improper use of language becomes an obstacle in the advancement of our society. After all how could society move on if communication amongst it's people is mediocre?

I am not saying that words HAVE to necessarily ALWAYS be used properly as many prescriptivists believe with words such as which, not, if, etc. After all, even though how an argument is expressed is important, the thing that sticks to people is the what of that argument. Despite this, you should always be careful because the how can indeed change the what.