Unit 2 Reflection

    Society as it exists today have used many ideas that were set by many philosophers, such as Hobbes and Locke, to create a foundation for the two separate parts it splits into: the government and the individual. They hold a symbiotic relationship to survive and improve upon aspects of the society. Within this unit, we read and analyzed with a rhetorical mindset to understand the essential questions that were posed to us; what is the government's duty to the individual and what is the individual's duty to his government. Hobbes and Locke held differing ideas about government and how it plays into the social contract theory, and their theories answer the questions posed differently.

     Locke, who believes that, "Men being, by nature, all free equal, and independent, no one can be put out of estate, subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent." which means he believes all men were born free and their rights are given to them from birth. like an inheritance. This would be more of a democratic view, meaning the individuals hold the power to morph the government. Thomas Hobbes on the other hand, wanted an absolute government which means that the government held all the power in order to control the individual, but later form a stronger society. This becomes established as a communist outlook to government and the individuals hold no power to government. Through Locke's theory, the government duty is to uphold things such as order, give fair trials, and maintain the laws that are established by the whole of society, whereas Hobbes' theory would mean the government must create the law and maintain it with or without the individual's consent. Locke's theory is more prevalent today compared to Hobbes' theory, where many democratic nations exists compared to communist nations.

    Through the readings we have covered, there are many different forms of government, and therefore many ways to answer the questions posed, but then I believe that Locke is more prevalent in our society.   In AP US history, we learned about how philosophers such as Locke was used to create The Constitution  of the United States, and by learning about the way I, as an individual, have obligations and contracts with the government was interesting. The US constitution also used parts of the Iroquois Constitution, and many of the same obligations from that as well, such as support, call to arms, checks and balances, etc.

 I actually wonder just how well this applies to my daily life, and the government that I live under. We as individuals within society must live by rules of the state we live in and honor the rights and rules we are given by the constitution, and the United States government have the duty to enforce and judge according to the rules. I also have the right and ability to vote for senators and representatives to represent what i believe in based on what I believe in. Through this unit, I have been enlightened about the process in which I have a part, a say, an obligation to partake in. Not only that, but also just how the government works and what kind of responsibilities i have to the government and the government has to me. I also learned just what the government was based on, as well as lessons in history. Overall it was a very informative and philosophical, in terms of government, unit, and it really helps to understand just how government is formed and maintained.

Advertisement: Dettol

http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/creativeadvertising4.jpg

     This is an advertisement for Dettol, most likely to promote some type of hand sanitizer. It portrays a hand, but with many other hands doing some type of action. These actions seem to be things we do everyday, and by doing this, it shows just how messy and how many locations we touch with just our hands. Naturally from there, the audience must have an impression from this fact and come to the conclusion that some of the place they touch aren't very clean and the number of times they use their hands. In a way, this could be an ad to promote clean hands, but the little bottle in the corner represents the solution. I, however, think that though it is a good advertisement, it does not promote their product as strongly. Like I said above, the message is that your hands are dirty, and there are many solutions to clean hands. Rather than promote their product, which is miniscule in the corner, it does a better job of convincing the audience that their hands are dirty, and therefore, must be cleaned. This may result in the buying of other cleaning products instead, such as sanitizer gel or soap.
     This advertisement is aimed at everyone, and the purpose of the article is to make the audience self conscious about their hands. This advertisement brings to light just how dirty ones hands can be and by doing so, makes the audience wonder about their own. The creator is Dettol, a company that sells a line of liquid and solid antiseptic cleansing products manufactured by Reckitt Benckiser. The over arching statement is that the hands come into a lot of places, and that these places can be dirty, which means  the hands are dirty. Again, the purpose may have been to sell their product by showing people just how dirty their hands could be, but may have done a better job with the showing than the convincing.

Pizza as Vegetable

http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/2e9e1738-3a0d-4906-b524-2cacbbbf33e6.html

This summarized what Congress has done this week that seems to be, from many peoples' perspective, idiotic.  a quote from a news article from StarTribune says, "Regulations protecting pizza as a vegetable were included in an agriculture bill that became part of a stop-gap budget Congress passed last week. Tomato paste in pizza sauce is the reason it qualifies under federal school nutrition guidelines." This means that because child obesity was such a problem before, the USDA tried to rid school lunches of pizza, but Congress voted tomato paste as a vegetable, saying it holds, "dietary fiber, potassium -- a nutrient of concern for children -- as well as Vitamins A and C" There is debate now from people wondering whether this should be an issue handled by Congress or by regulators. The link for the site is here:

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/wellness/134208058.html

Rhetorical uses shows the graph showing the line drop below zero and labeling the graph as approval rating shows that their approval ratings just got destroyed. It went from high to low really fast, showing how hard they failed, also with the weight being shown with the thunk and the hole in the ground from the arrow hitting it, symbolizing the impact it made. This can also be used to show how well they were doing, though this is not likely. The guy that pokes his head out of the doorway and asks, 'any changes?', as if he thought there wouldn't be a big change, smiles unknowingly. He wouldn't be happy if he saw the graph, which helps show the difference between him, who doesn't see it and the guy who does. The cartoonist uses expression to show this difference, where the congressman is grinning in a way, and the other man who is portrayed in the cartoon has a bland, out-of-it, jaw dropping face, (hard to describe...) and by putting the graph on the other wall, he was able to show this difference clearly. I feel like the Congress is 'in' may also be symbolic of something else besides making it an obvious indication that Congress is meeting, but I'm not sure. The audience of this piece would be the people who wanted to learn about recent activities in Congress, and also kids and their parents as well, because this is relevant to their school lunches. 

Good news! Killer solar flare won't destroy Earth!

 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45259420/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.TsCQ7D0b3eE

This article was about how the sun will not destroy the Earth. That and the apocalypse of 2012, and disproving the theory behind the so called doomsday. It first talks about the solar flares, and how it cannot be possible to shoot a 93 million mile solar flare towards Earth; it just doesn't have enough energy. Then It disproves another theory about how a body  four times the size of our current home, Earth, will smash our planet to smithereens. It has been named Nibiru, and is only a theoretical theory. This is because there has been no planet that has been identified as the Planet X, another name for the body. Then he ends the article with a quote of a scientist saying that there is no problems to look forward to.
The context of the article is the apocalypse, and the purpose of the article was to dissuade the audience that there is no apocalypse. The audience of the piece are people who know about the 2012 doom, and want more information about the topic. It also goes for non-believers as well. The author did a good job supporting his argument with actual information, usually a very good counter-agent against imaginary theories with no backing theory. The solar flare had some backing to it, but was countered easily by providing the information about other maxima flares and how there isn't enough energy, and Nibiru was countered by quoting a NASA scientist who has the credentials to be quoted as a counter. In terms of the triangle, he stated facts most of the time, so he used logos, and he also put in bits of quotes that were more informal to perhaps get to the reader more using pathos. He did not establish ethos. In terms of organization, he states the problem and counters it, then goes into what it could do for the flares, and how the problems that occurs isn't nearly enough to destroy the Earth, thoroughly refuting the arguments and the counter-arguments.
The Author, Mike Wall, has written a couple of science-related articles for msn, but he does not have a profile of information, but this was okay due to his use of quotes and support.

The Tipping Point Conclusion

Overall,  The book was entirely about the growth, and potentially the spread of, an idea. The concept of this is down to three laws, which are: The law of the few, the stickiness factor, and the power of context. Each plays an important part to creating an epidemic.
The law of the few is simply the people who are able to spread the idea. The book specified three types of people who would excel at this,who are the Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen. Connectors are people who have spread their influence over a large amount of places, causing them to be very good at getting word across. The Mavens are people who persuade people to make decisions, and the Salesmen are people who are good at convincing or endorsing something. The stickiness factor basically is how attractive the object or idea is to the people, and how easily it sticks. Lastly, the power of context is the situational place a spread of an idea has to possibly become an epidemic. 
Through these three laws, Gladwell goes into many examples where these laws are applicable. This includes: fashion, smoking, crime, suicide, television shows, etc.


The laws themselves seems like they apply to what we learn in the classroom about rhetoric, as well. Firstly, with the law of context, the writing must be for a purpose. For example, in the three Cs of writing a thesis, Context is an important part, and defines what the essay is going to be about. The stickiness factor also can be incorporated as well. How attractive can you make an idea, or a stance? That is all about the goal of rhetorical writing which is to make a side attractive and appeal to the audience. For instance, Marcus Tullius Cicero's, "The Defence of Injustice" The opposing side of Evil was appealing to the audience, or close to anyway. The law of the few is that if very influential people are able to send a message, they have a much easier job doing so. An example where all three can be put into practice is 9/11. George Bush used the context of terrorist attack and the fear that was instilled into the people to create the argument of the war against terror. He had a very influential position that could reach nationwide, a reallly great context, and a very favorable sticky factor.



Overall, the book was very interesting, and has a lot of uses, or effects that can be seen in my everyday life.