Introduction to Cultural Understanding

1. What (specifically) is a culture? Put this in your own words. I want to see how well you can define culture on your own.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, culture is the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group or rather the totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.  As I see it, culture is a set of traditions, behaviors, beliefs, and customs, shared within an ethnic group and carried on into next generations.   

1. What cultures do you belong to? What specifically makes you a part of this culture?

In terms of culture, I would have to say that my family and I belong to a pretty much Americanized culture.  Although I am of an Irish and German heritage, I was not exposed to many Irish or German cultures, behaviors, or beliefs because my family was born and raised in
America.  The only exposures I have had to my culture are a few traditional Irish recipes that have been passed down on my mom’s side of the family.  Omitting the fact that I do not have red hair and lack an Irish accent (obviously the result of being born in the United States to parents who also do not have an accent), Irish definitely does run in my family, my last name will tell you that.    

1. What cultures (list 5) would you like to know more about? (Note: these cannot be cultures that you classify yourself among. I want you to explore cultures outside your own.)

Actually, since I do not know much about my own culture, I think this would be a great opportunity to explore and learn about what it is that makes my family and I who we are.  But, I suppose that is not an option.  Five cultures I would like to know more about are:

Japanese, French, Scottish, Chinese, Italian

1. Now that you have chosen your cultures, rank them by preference (i.e. your top choice should be #1 and the one you wish to consider a last choice should be #5)

1. Japanese

2. French

3. Scottish

4. Chinese

5. Italian

1. Finally, for each of the cultures you have listed, make a quick list of what you already know about that culture. 

1. Japanese – Have street style that is dramatically different that of the
U.S. (Harajuku); the use chopsticks at every meal. 

2. French – The birthplace of the art movement known as Cubism; famous for art.

3. Scottish – Celtic mythology (Loch Ness); bagpipes are played here.    

4. Chinese – Their New Year’s is celebrated in January or February; the use symbols/animals to represent many things (everything is symbolic); the use of chopsticks at every meal; worshipping of Buddha.    

5. Italian – Close friends and family kiss each other on each cheek.

Add a comment February 7, 2007

Delving Further into the Subject

1.  What credibility did you give to the article after a first reading? Did you feel that the author adequately persuaded you to see their side of the issue? How subtle was this persuasion?  After first reading Monroe Anderson’s article, but before truly analyzing it in detail, I felt slightly convinced to see his side of the issue.  Although I originally did not approve of the legalization of marijuana because I thought it was a flat out stupid idea, for a moment after reading the article I actually considered how legalizing marijuana might not be a bad idea.  The two statements
Anderson made that made me see his side was when he said, “we’re spending $1 billion a year to put them there and another $8 billion a year to keep them there” and “we could regulate, license and tax marijuana.  Instead we blow billions on busting and jailing peaceful citizens from whom we could collect millions in tax revenue.”         2.  How have your feelings changed now that you are more aware of the author’s ethos? Do you feel that knowing the credibility of the author changes the way in which you view the argument presented? What have you learned about the author’s education, peripheral writings, and career that altered your view of the article you are studying?   My feelings quickly changed as soon as I began to analyze
Monroe’s article in depth.  Realizing his unprofessional use of language; he constantly used slang terms that did not seem educational to me.  Also, I found that
Anderson failed to cite his references and statistics which, in my opinion, made his article less credible.    3.  If you were writing an argumentative essay on the article’s topic, would you consider using the article as a credible source in your essay? Why or why not?   I definitely would not have to think twice about this question.  I do not think that this would be a credible source to use if I were writing an article on this topic.  I would only use sources in which had citations to refer to.  I mean, although this article might have been written for today’s generation, it should still sound somewhat profession…maybe that’s just me. 

1 comment February 4, 2007

Questions to guide me through my essay.

What is the argument the author makes in the essay? 

Monroe Anderson is trying to argue why marijuana should be legalized in
Illinois.

Is this argument clear? Does it make the point?

It is quite obvious that
Anderson wants marijuana to be legalized.  I think he makes a good effort to make his point. 

Which side of the issue does the author take? Does he enforce his opinion?After reading Anderson’s article and after much debate in class, I found that
Anderson made it unclear what side he is on.  He presents reasons for why marijuana should be legalized then turns around and contradicts his own statements.  For example,
Anderson notes, “we could regulate, license, and tax marijuana. Instead we blow billions on busting and jailing peaceful citizens from whom we could collect millions in tax revenues.”  He then counteracts this statement by saying, “…an entire industry from bureaucrats to law enforcement agencies to penal systems that are making money by keeping marijuana illegal.  He leaves the reader wondering, “so, is it a good or bad thing if we legalize marijuana?” and “Was this guy smoking pot when he wrote this essay?”    

What facts does the author use to support the argument? What references does the author use to support their argument? How does this factor into the author’s ethos? Do these facts support the author’s logos? How? If not, what should be done to aid in supporting the author’s logos and, therefore, improving his own ethos? 

The reader can not help but wonder if the facts presented are actually proven fact because
Anderson does not cite his sources.  Also, although he gives some statistics, we are given no information as to where these statistics can be found.  For all the reader may know, Anderson could have just had these numbers pop in his head while “blowin’ some weed.” 

Anderson’s use of unprofessional language also makes the reader question who the author of this essay is, what type of person/people are trying to convince the reader why the government should legalize marijuana—a business man, a man with a degree in law, or a pot smoker who just wants to smoke his marijuana in peace?  I can see how
Anderson could have used phrases like “blowin’ some weed”, “Roaring ‘20s”, and the reference to marijuana as “pot” to “relate” to his audience; however he published this article as well as many others in the political columns of Chicago Sun-Times.  This means the reader assumes that Anderson’s audience would be businessmen, although, with the slang language he uses and his lack of citations we can not help but wonder how educated businessmen would find this article the least bit scholarly material.     

How does the author use pathos to aid in his persuasion? If the author has not used pathos, what could be done to improve upon this appeal? 

Anderson did not use much pathos to persuade his audience, but if he would have presented the other side to his argument he could have used pathos to make it convincing. 

Anderson’s argument did not strike me emotionally.  To make his argument more convincing, Anderson should have used professional-level language rather than slang terms.  Also, Anderson definitely should revise his paper and add statistics and quotations that he can provide citations for and actually cite those sources for his reader.    Did you have an opinion on the topic before reading this article? Has that opinion been changed or reinforced through reading the article? If you were ambivalent to the topic before, how has this changed? If your opinion has not changed, what could the author have done to change your mind? 

Before reading Anderson’s paper, I did not feel that it would be beneficial to legalize marijuana.  Although, in the process of reading his paper, I might have started to shift my opinion of legalizing marijuana, by the time I had thoroughly analyzed his paper, I could not see myself voting for marijuana to be made legal. 

If you were writing this article, what would you have done differently in order to persuade the audience? 

If I were writing this article, would have absolutely no undocumented sources.  Every quote, number, statistic, or example would be cited so that the reader would know that I researched my topic.  I would have used professional language, no slang, because this type of article might be read by the scholarly and I would not want to lose their interest. 

Add a comment February 3, 2007