Hi.
One of the things that stuck out most to me in this reading was the first line on page 150 of the first real paragraph under "Writing in the Discipline." The quote was: "one surefire way to infuriate your critics is to call their motives into question." I thought this was such a good quote because critics often times are degrading and, to a point, pretty condescending. Their thoughts usually go unquestioned because they have the label of a "critic." But when the tables are turned, and the critic's motives come into question, they get pissed because they are not accustomed to being questioned. In this reading however, it says that while it is one thing to do things like that in politics (where people "improve" themselves by bringing down someone else), doing that in writing is not considered persuasive because it "entrenches existing disagreements rather than encourage people to work together to solve real-world problems." I agree with this comment. I think that in the political realm, immaturity and stupidity are what people go for but in the real world, solutions come from collaboration and cooperation.
I liked how the Feeding the World article outlined how the essay was written. It makes it easier for me to figure out what it is i need to do for my papers.
Bye.
No comments:
Post a Comment