Breakthrough Writer

Research Links for "Unspeakable Conversations" (92)

">

Since your research paper for this reading focuses on the ethics, or lack thereof, of Peter Singer's eugenics argument, the following links are directed to eugenics and the worthiness of Singer's defense of eugenics. 

Links

Institute for Social Ecology

Club 166

Second Hand Smoke

Happy Nevertheless

Since your research paper for this reading focuses on the ethics, or lack thereof, of Peter Singer's eugenics argument, the following links are directed to eugenics and the worthiness of Singer's defense of eugenics. 

Links

Institute for Social Ecology

Club 166

Second Hand Smoke

Happy Nevertheless

1A Lesson Plan for “Unspeakable Conversations” (92)

 

Part One. Lexicon of Terms Pertinent to Peter Singer’s Moral Philosophy.

 

One. Utilitarianism, the philosophy that we should sacrifice the individual for the greater good of the collective whole.

From Economy: Definition: Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy, generally operating on the principle that the utility (happiness or satisfaction) of different people can not only be measured but also meaningfully summed over people and that utility comparisons between people are meaningful. That makes it possible to achieve a well-defined societal optimum in allocations, production, and other decisions, and achieve the goal utilitarian British philosopher Jeremy Bentham described as "the greatest good for the greatest number."

 

This form of utilitarianism is thought of as extreme, now, partly because it is widely believed that there exists no generally acceptable way of summing utilities across people and comparing between them.

Two. “quality of life” argument: human life is only valuable if a certain “quality” can be achieved; otherwise life is better off destroyed.

Three. “normal children”: They can achieve a “quality of life” and should take priority over “abnormal children” who should be euthanized.

Four. “infants are replaceable”: we should replace abnormal infants with normal ones for the “greater good.” The moral imperative is that we are reducing suffering and adding more productive citizens to society as opposed to citizens who put a burden on society.

Five. Eugenicist, one who defends the idea that we should select what humans are desirable based on genetics and which ones should be replaced, that is euthanized, for the betterment of society. The eugenicist also develops the criteria for making these choices.

Six. Nebulous definition of “personhood.”

Seven. Intrinsic value of human life, called the sanctity of life vs. conditional value of human life based on “quality of life.”

Eight. Apologist for eugenics. An apologist takes controversial or unpopular ideas and makes them appealing by defending their validity and showing why those views are correct.

Nine. Peter Singer is an advocate for genetic re-engineering.

Ten. Market-driven and peer-pressure-driven forces for genetic re-engineering. The result will be a loss of diversity. Most women will like Salma Hayek and Beyonce while most men will look like Will Smith and Brad Pitt. See the New Eugenics. 

 

Part Two. Peter Singer’s Major Arguments

 

One. Peter Singer’s quality of life argument for infanticide:

His stated reason, rather, is that such children have diminished prospects of eventually enjoying an adequate "quality of life", in his words, and to allow them to live would take away resources from what Singer calls "normal" children. He therefore advocates killing "disabled" infants, if the parents so choose, and replacing them with "normal" ones. The terminology of "replacement" is Singer's own; his philosophy "treats infants as replaceable", in his words (Practical Ethics p. 186).

 

Why, then, does Singer argue that infants born with this condition can justly be killed? Because they are "abnormal" and do not have "good prospects" (Rethinking p. 214). This notion of "prospects" runs like a mantra through Singer's discussion of Down syndrome children: "the future prospects of life may be so bleak" (211), "the prospects are clouded" (213), and so forth. But what sort of prospects does he have in mind? On p. 213 ofRethinking he lists several activities which a person with Down syndrome will supposedly never be capable of: "to play the guitar, to develop an appreciation of science fiction, to learn a foreign language, to chat with us about the latest Woody Allen movie, or to be a respectable athlete,  basketballer or tennis player." This list reads like a parody of bourgeois myths of achievement, success, and respectability. To Singer, however, these are legitimate reasons for killing a newborn. After all, if you can't do your own financial planning, why should you be allowed to live?

 

Two. Peter Singer’s utilitarian argument for infanticide:

What counts as a "severe disability" for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion, but he has discussed a number of specific examples, both hypothetical as well as actual cases. The conditions he has explicitly named as sufficient justification for active infanticide include Down syndrome, spina bifida, and hemophilia. Here is Singer's reasoning on the latter condition, taken from his popular textbook Practical Ethics (P. 186): "Suppose a woman planning to have two children has one normal child, then gives birth to a haemophiliac child. The burden of caring for that child may make it impossible for her to cope with a third child; but if the disabled child were to die, she would have another. . . . When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him."

 

Three. Peter Singer’s definition of a “person” or someone who is worthy of the label “personhood”:

a conscious being,  a creature who has the capacity to imagine the future. This definition can apply to humans, animals, an creatures. A “person” should not be killed, but a human baby suffering severe retardation or some other handicap is not a “person.”

 

Four. Utilitarian Slippery Slope:

If we agree that we should aim for the greatest good for the greatest amount of people and that handicapped people burden the “greatest good,” at what point do we stop at defining who constitutes a “burden”? Smokers, the obese,  criminals, the handicapped, the autistic? Where do we stop?

 

Five. Peter Singer’s “Worse Off” Argument:

Disability makes a person worse off and therefore that person should be killed. And Peter Singer is comfortable judging who’s “worse off” and who’s not, a very subjective condition. See page 97 and page 106 top.

 

Six. Peter Singer’s Eugenicist Position:

The eugenicist position endorses selection according to desirable and undesirable genetic traits, and favors the elimination of the latter. Singer's argument sorts people into two categories, "normal" and "abnormal", and declares the ostensibly abnormal ones fair game at birth. He doesn't even bother to try to provide "objective" grounds on which to classify some human physical or mental conditions as "defective" (a term he used in earlier editions of Practical Ethics) and contrast them with "healthy" ones. Instead he simply welcomes whatever arbitrary social norms happen to prevail, thus turning his argument into a vehicle for prejudice. But of course there is no perfect, flawless version of the human form against which putatively "inferior" specimens could be measured.

 

Seven. Harriet McBryde Johnson’s quality of life argument:

Studies show that the public underestimates the quality of life for most handicapped people based on stereotypes. See 104 top.

 

Part Three: Essay #3 Option:

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.”

 

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis One:

While Singer’s argument for infanticide is consistent with his utilitarian worldview, his position collapses under the close eye of scrutiny in which detect huge holes or flaws in his reasoning. These flaws include __________________________, ___________________________, ____________________________, and __________________________.

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis Two:

If we accept Peter Singer's utilitarian argument as a just rationale for infanticide, then we are paving the way for genetic re-engineering as a tool to create a Super Baby that all parents will be forced to breed. This forced breeding of the Super Baby will result from ______________________, __________________________, ______________________, and ____________________________________. 

 

Defense of Peter Singer: Thesis Three:

McMahon has treated Peter Singer’s infanticide argument with gross unfairness. While McMahon is correct that Singer needs to tidy up some of his vague definitions, Singer’s general argument can be ethically defended as actually helping the human race when we consider _________________________, _______________________, ___________________________, and _______________________________. 

Part Four. Some Salient Titles

Must I Conform to Peter Singer's Definition of Happiness So I Can Live?

Be Happy Singer's Way . . . Or Die

Let Go of the Stale Past and Become New and Improved, Peter Singer Style

We Limit Ourselves By Dismissing Peter Singer So Quickly

 

 

Part One. Lexicon of Terms Pertinent to Peter Singer’s Moral Philosophy.

 

One. Utilitarianism, the philosophy that we should sacrifice the individual for the greater good of the collective whole.

From Economy: Definition: Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy, generally operating on the principle that the utility (happiness or satisfaction) of different people can not only be measured but also meaningfully summed over people and that utility comparisons between people are meaningful. That makes it possible to achieve a well-defined societal optimum in allocations, production, and other decisions, and achieve the goal utilitarian British philosopher Jeremy Bentham described as "the greatest good for the greatest number."

 

This form of utilitarianism is thought of as extreme, now, partly because it is widely believed that there exists no generally acceptable way of summing utilities across people and comparing between them.

Two. “quality of life” argument: human life is only valuable if a certain “quality” can be achieved; otherwise life is better off destroyed.

Three. “normal children”: They can achieve a “quality of life” and should take priority over “abnormal children” who should be euthanized.

Four. “infants are replaceable”: we should replace abnormal infants with normal ones for the “greater good.” The moral imperative is that we are reducing suffering and adding more productive citizens to society as opposed to citizens who put a burden on society.

Five. Eugenicist, one who defends the idea that we should select what humans are desirable based on genetics and which ones should be replaced, that is euthanized, for the betterment of society. The eugenicist also develops the criteria for making these choices.

Six. Nebulous definition of “personhood.”

Seven. Intrinsic value of human life, called the sanctity of life vs. conditional value of human life based on “quality of life.”

Eight. Apologist for eugenics. An apologist takes controversial or unpopular ideas and makes them appealing by defending their validity and showing why those views are correct.

Nine. Peter Singer is an advocate for genetic re-engineering.

Ten. Market-driven and peer-pressure-driven forces for genetic re-engineering. The result will be a loss of diversity. Most women will like Salma Hayek and Beyonce while most men will look like Will Smith and Brad Pitt. See the New Eugenics. 

 

Part Two. Peter Singer’s Major Arguments

 

One. Peter Singer’s quality of life argument for infanticide:

His stated reason, rather, is that such children have diminished prospects of eventually enjoying an adequate "quality of life", in his words, and to allow them to live would take away resources from what Singer calls "normal" children. He therefore advocates killing "disabled" infants, if the parents so choose, and replacing them with "normal" ones. The terminology of "replacement" is Singer's own; his philosophy "treats infants as replaceable", in his words (Practical Ethics p. 186).

 

Why, then, does Singer argue that infants born with this condition can justly be killed? Because they are "abnormal" and do not have "good prospects" (Rethinking p. 214). This notion of "prospects" runs like a mantra through Singer's discussion of Down syndrome children: "the future prospects of life may be so bleak" (211), "the prospects are clouded" (213), and so forth. But what sort of prospects does he have in mind? On p. 213 ofRethinking he lists several activities which a person with Down syndrome will supposedly never be capable of: "to play the guitar, to develop an appreciation of science fiction, to learn a foreign language, to chat with us about the latest Woody Allen movie, or to be a respectable athlete,  basketballer or tennis player." This list reads like a parody of bourgeois myths of achievement, success, and respectability. To Singer, however, these are legitimate reasons for killing a newborn. After all, if you can't do your own financial planning, why should you be allowed to live?

 

Two. Peter Singer’s utilitarian argument for infanticide:

What counts as a "severe disability" for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion, but he has discussed a number of specific examples, both hypothetical as well as actual cases. The conditions he has explicitly named as sufficient justification for active infanticide include Down syndrome, spina bifida, and hemophilia. Here is Singer's reasoning on the latter condition, taken from his popular textbook Practical Ethics (P. 186): "Suppose a woman planning to have two children has one normal child, then gives birth to a haemophiliac child. The burden of caring for that child may make it impossible for her to cope with a third child; but if the disabled child were to die, she would have another. . . . When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him."

 

Three. Peter Singer’s definition of a “person” or someone who is worthy of the label “personhood”:

a conscious being,  a creature who has the capacity to imagine the future. This definition can apply to humans, animals, an creatures. A “person” should not be killed, but a human baby suffering severe retardation or some other handicap is not a “person.”

 

Four. Utilitarian Slippery Slope:

If we agree that we should aim for the greatest good for the greatest amount of people and that handicapped people burden the “greatest good,” at what point do we stop at defining who constitutes a “burden”? Smokers, the obese,  criminals, the handicapped, the autistic? Where do we stop?

 

Five. Peter Singer’s “Worse Off” Argument:

Disability makes a person worse off and therefore that person should be killed. And Peter Singer is comfortable judging who’s “worse off” and who’s not, a very subjective condition. See page 97 and page 106 top.

 

Six. Peter Singer’s Eugenicist Position:

The eugenicist position endorses selection according to desirable and undesirable genetic traits, and favors the elimination of the latter. Singer's argument sorts people into two categories, "normal" and "abnormal", and declares the ostensibly abnormal ones fair game at birth. He doesn't even bother to try to provide "objective" grounds on which to classify some human physical or mental conditions as "defective" (a term he used in earlier editions of Practical Ethics) and contrast them with "healthy" ones. Instead he simply welcomes whatever arbitrary social norms happen to prevail, thus turning his argument into a vehicle for prejudice. But of course there is no perfect, flawless version of the human form against which putatively "inferior" specimens could be measured.

 

Seven. Harriet McBryde Johnson’s quality of life argument:

Studies show that the public underestimates the quality of life for most handicapped people based on stereotypes. See 104 top.

 

Part Three: Essay #3 Option:

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.”

 

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis One:

While Singer’s argument for infanticide is consistent with his utilitarian worldview, his position collapses under the close eye of scrutiny in which detect huge holes or flaws in his reasoning. These flaws include __________________________, ___________________________, ____________________________, and __________________________.

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis Two:

If we accept Peter Singer's utilitarian argument as a just rationale for infanticide, then we are paving the way for genetic re-engineering as a tool to create a Super Baby that all parents will be forced to breed. This forced breeding of the Super Baby will result from ______________________, __________________________, ______________________, and ____________________________________. 

 

Defense of Peter Singer: Thesis Three:

McMahon has treated Peter Singer’s infanticide argument with gross unfairness. While McMahon is correct that Singer needs to tidy up some of his vague definitions, Singer’s general argument can be ethically defended as actually helping the human race when we consider _________________________, _______________________, ___________________________, and _______________________________. 

Part Four. Some Salient Titles

Must I Conform to Peter Singer's Definition of Happiness So I Can Live?

Be Happy Singer's Way . . . Or Die

Let Go of the Stale Past and Become New and Improved, Peter Singer Style

We Limit Ourselves By Dismissing Peter Singer So Quickly

 

1C Lesson Plan for “The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love” (130)

">

Part One. Lexicon

1. Eros, a form of passionate or erotic love that is capricious and therefore not a solid foundation for marriage
2. Capricious, fickle, vacillating
3. In paragraph 6, we see that marriage is the precursor to love, not the other way around.
4. Chanel No. 5 Moment; egotistical love in which the couple puts on a show to the world in order to prove how superior they are in their happiness regardless of the discontent and emptiness that roils underneath.
5. In paragraph 7, we see that some ancient cultures were suspicious of infatuated love and looked at it as a form of insanity and derangement.
6. To dote on your lover is considered a sign of weakness; to dote means to excessively serve; in modern America a man who dotes excessively on his woman is called Captain Save-A-Babe.
7. Love is seen as idolatry, inappropriate worship of a human being, according to some religious cultures, as explained in paragraph 14.
8. In paragraph 35 we read that mutual fidelity is a recent invention. Fidelity in this context means monogamy.
9. On page 137 at the top we read about The Great Marital Shift in which people’s expectations had reached a new level—a level which many might argue is too high because it has created unrealistic expectations. 

Part Two. What were the causes behind making love the foundation of marriage? 

1. The distribution of wage labor made children less dependent on their parents so they could marry at a younger age when their passions were more hormonally charged.
2. Economic freedom was accompanied by the notion that people married for passion and individual choice rather than coercion or force. See page 138 top.
3. The Enlightenment Age diminished the role of religion so that marriage was less based on religion and more based on the private agreement between a man and a woman. See page 138.
4. In the 1700s mothers and wives were held in higher esteem, no longer looked at as “necessary evils.” See page 138.
5. The idea that marriage could lead to Hakuna Matata, a blissful paradise, spread from Europe to America in the 18^th Century.
6. The woman was look upon less and less as a servant beholden to the tyranny of her husband, but more and more as an equal. See page 139.
7. The “mercenary” marriage (140), the idea that marriage was a necessary evil created to maximize one’s financial empire, was replaced with an egalitarian marriage, a relationship of two equals.
8. The foundation of free choice, personal freedom, and the expectation of self-fulfillment, a break from thousands of years of tradition, bred selfishness and narcissism, forces that undermine marriage. See page 140 bottom. 

 

Part Three. Essay Topic Options for Essay #1: Develop a thesis for one of the samples below: 

Option #1:

While the transformation of marriage from an impersonal business to the quest for personal fulfillment and equal partnership has its advantages and moral virtues, it is apparent that marriage as a tool for happiness and self-fulfillment has turned on itself and become deleterious (harmful) to marriage evidenced by _____________________________, ____________________________, ______________________________, and _________________________________. 

Option #2: 

Of course, narcissists who use marriage for their own selfish ends will fail. But we should not construct a philosophy of marriage on the aberrant behavior of these nincompoops. While a marriage that aims for personal fulfillment and egalitarianism (partners treating each other as equals) surely has its share of foibles, it is the best marriage model we have. A comparison of the modern marriage model and the antiquated (outdated) one shows that the modern model is morally superior evidenced by _________________________, _____________________________, _________________________________, and ________________________________________. 

Option 3:

The modern marriage model is rooted in a romantic, unrealistic view of human nature, which is incapable of too much freedom. While I’m not advocating a marriage based on a patriarchy or monarchy in which the husband rules like a king, I do assert that the current marriage model exploits our human weaknesses by _______________________, __________________________, __________________________, and _____________________________________________.

1C McMahon Commentary on “The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love” by Stephanie Coontz (130) in which McMahon gives a sample of a "A" thesis with mapping components. That McMahon both wrote and graded his own thesis maximizes his objectivity. 

 

To be sure, the marriage model of old, prescribed by religious dogma and making the husband the Absolute King, was a vile, exploitive model suffused with contempt against women and I am glad that we, as a culture, have washed our hands of it. But let us be clear: The modern marriage model, as adroitly chronicled by Stephanie Coontz in “The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love,” has its own set of particular dangers that makes the modern marriage rife with landmines, which are poised to blow up in our faces as we traipse across the marriage landscape. These landmines include the fact that modern couples, both wanting career fulfillment, are torn between their allegiances to their career and their allegiances to their spouse. Secondly, there is no longer the shame or stigma that results from betraying your spouse with infidelity. Today you can cheat on your spouse and sugar-coat your betrayal with psychoanalytic BS by saying, “I wasn’t really interested in the sex. You had been ignoring me, and what I did was a cry for help, a cry for love.”  Thirdly, living in cosmopolitan cities and having access to dating websites, we are inundated with too many choices. Our brains are not hard-wired to choose a mate among thousands. Imagine a man who can click on his mouse and see a thousand images of women on the Internet in a single hour, far more women than a caveman or a farmer would see in his entire lifetime. Having this many “choices” overwhelms us and compels us to constantly second-guess ourselves. And finally, as cogently stated by Stephanie Coontz, the foundation of the modern marriage is the fleeting transient emotion of adolescent infatuation. We must constantly beat the drums of romantic bliss and perform an ebullient orchestra to resplendent passion lest we disappoint our mate and ourselves. The expectation that our marriage contain the intensity of an adolescent obsession packaged in a Britney Spears pop song is an absurdity. Surely, raising our expectations to such skyscraper heights will result in our grave unhappiness and disappointment. To conclude, the old marriage model, a sexist and vile form of insanity, has been replaced by a new form of insanity—the emotional retardation that makes people equate a healthy marriage with a teenager’s hormone-soaked love fantasy.

 

 

1A Lesson for “I Do. Not.: Why I Won’t Marry” (60)

 

Part I. What arguments does Catherine Newman rely on to defend her position not to marry?

 

One. Marriage is a tool of the patriarchy, a man-ruled society that oppresses women. So if marriage is part of patriarchy, her logic goes, then marrying is cooperating with the patriarchy and an act of self-betrayal for women. See page 60. Is she not using an over simplification and an over generalization and perhaps even paranoid emotions over reason?

Two. Newman equates marriage with the trafficking of women because, as she says, men have “historically solidified their economic connections to other men.” Is this true today? See 60 and 61.

Three. She equates an expensive wedding with a dowry. Explain. 61. This is what we call a faulty comparison.

Four. Is Catherine Newman’s interpretation of the candle on page 61 fair to her argument? Could you call it a faulty comparison? Explain.

Five. For Newman, how would getting married be a betrayal against her gay friends? See page 61.

Six.  She is not sure about her sexuality. See page 61. This could be a legitimate argument and her general personality is not good for marriage, but she doesn’t have the courage or humility to face this head-on.

Seven. She does not believe in monogamy. See pages 62 and 63. Monogamy is rare but so is happiness and guess what? People in monogamous relationships are happier than those who are not.

Eight. She equates being in a committed relationship, sealed legally in marriage contract, as being “possessed” by another man. See page 63. One could argue that Newman is possessed by fear and that should be a bigger concern than being “possessed” in a relationship.

Nine. Michael is not her ideal partner, just some dude who capitulates to her neuroses and insecurities and this makes her feel good. That he doesn’t resort to obsessive romantic poetry or the “extremes of passion” makes him a suitable partner. This seems irrelevant to her argument about marriage. An irrelevance is called a non sequitur, which literally means “it does not follow.” See bottom of page 63.

Ten.  Not being married makes her feel more wanted because her partner chooses her every day as opposed to having to be with her under the dark shadow of a marriage contract. See page 64.

Eleven. Their having a child is a substitute for marriage. See page 64.

 

Part II. Reviewing Some Alleged Fallacies in Newman’s Essay

 

One. On pages 60 and 61, Newman equates modern marriage with marriages of hundreds and thousands of years ago, lumping all marriages, today’s and yesterday’s, as part of a “patriarchy” in which women are “trafficked” like property. This is an over simplification of marriage.

 

Two. Fallacy of hasty generalization based on a single anecdote on page 61 in which Newman wants us to believe that the symbolism of a Catholic wedding represents enslavement to the husband.

 

Three. Purposely misinterpreting the candle symbolism of the Catholic wedding described on page 61 in which Newman writes that the single candle represents the bride’s “old naughty self.” This is Newman’s language and false interpretation, which in critical thinking is called a “straw man.”

Four. Faulty logic: If some people use marriage as a bully club against the gay community, as Newman purports on page 61, then ALL people who marry are against gays.

Five. Fallacy of irrelevance or red herring: Newman confesses to having a previous relationship with a woman on page 61. What is the relevance? Perhaps that if she wants to go back to relating to women, it would not be fair if she married a man.

Also on page 63, Newman doesn’t want a man who obsesses over her, but this argument could be called a red herring or a non sequitur.

Six. For Newman, it appears that in marriage the commitment is too strong. In other words, it is so strong that it becomes a form of mutual possession. She feels threatened by that sense of possession whether or not being enslaved or possessed by one’s spouse is true or not. Such a condition is more psychological than anything. Legally, one is not “possessed,” not in modern times. It appears that Newman is paranoid and irrational in her definition of marriage, so of course she objects to it.

Seven. She and her boyfriend don’t need marriage because they are tied together by a child. Actually, lots of deadbeat dads bail on the mother and child, so Newman is a bit naïve to place so much faith in the child as a permanent bonding agent.

 

 

Part III. Writing Options:

Defend or refute one of the following thesis statements regarding Newman’s essay.

 

Thesis One

Newman’s position to not marry is a self-justifying hack job wrought with paranoia, over simplifications, Straw Man arguments, faulty comparisons, red herrings, and other lapses of logic so egregious that she comes off as an immature, selfish crank trying, feebly, to gloss over her irrational fear of marriage with pseudo intellectual arguments. 

 

Thesis Two.

In spite of some half-baked logic and familiar claims about the rarity of monogamy, Newman’s decision not to marry has little foundation in reason and logic. Instead, her wobbly arguments against marriage are merely pathetic rationalizations for her failed existence, which becomes more and more transparent as we read her unconvincing polemic. Instead of a convincing argument against marriage, what we are served is the failed life of the author, which consists of a woman imprisoned by sexual confusion, a control freak who finds a spineless man who will put up with her fear of love and commitment, a pseudo intellectual who hides behind specious academic arguments in order to justify her cowardly existence.

 

Thesis Three

 

Whoa. Let’s not be so hard on Newman as the writers above. While her argument contains some of the logical errors mentioned above and while she betrays certain insecurities, she makes some legitimate criticisms against marriage, most importantly the myth of monogamy. If we’re honest and look at the research on marriage and monogamy, we must conclude that marriage is a very precarious institution since the monogamy it rests upon is compromised by ____________________, ________________________, ____________________________, and __________________________________. 

 

Thesis Four.

Don’t try to distract us by focusing exclusively on the monogamy argument. Yes, Newman uses the rarity of monogamy as one of her anti-marriage claims, but that is only one-tenth of her argument. When you look at her arguments as a whole, you will have to agree that her exposition is an amateurish affair replete with _____________________, _____________________________, ______________________________, ___________________________________.

 

Thesis Five.

I’m sure there are some good, solid, convincing arguments against marriage. But Newman’s isn’t one of them. What purports to be a legitimate defense against her decision to not marry really becomes the irrational defense mechanisms of a frightened child. These defense mechanisms include __________________________, _______________________________, __________________________, and ______________________________________. 

 

Part I. What arguments does Catherine Newman rely on to defend her position not to marry?

 

One. Marriage is a tool of the patriarchy, a man-ruled society that oppresses women. So if marriage is part of patriarchy, her logic goes, then marrying is cooperating with the patriarchy and an act of self-betrayal for women. See page 60. Is she not using an over simplification and an over generalization and perhaps even paranoid emotions over reason?

Two. Newman equates marriage with the trafficking of women because, as she says, men have “historically solidified their economic connections to other men.” Is this true today? See 60 and 61.

Three. She equates an expensive wedding with a dowry. Explain. 61. This is what we call a faulty comparison.

Four. Is Catherine Newman’s interpretation of the candle on page 61 fair to her argument? Could you call it a faulty comparison? Explain.

Five. For Newman, how would getting married be a betrayal against her gay friends? See page 61.

Six.  She is not sure about her sexuality. See page 61. This could be a legitimate argument and her general personality is not good for marriage, but she doesn’t have the courage or humility to face this head-on.

Seven. She does not believe in monogamy. See pages 62 and 63. Monogamy is rare but so is happiness and guess what? People in monogamous relationships are happier than those who are not.

Eight. She equates being in a committed relationship, sealed legally in marriage contract, as being “possessed” by another man. See page 63. One could argue that Newman is possessed by fear and that should be a bigger concern than being “possessed” in a relationship.

Nine. Michael is not her ideal partner, just some dude who capitulates to her neuroses and insecurities and this makes her feel good. That he doesn’t resort to obsessive romantic poetry or the “extremes of passion” makes him a suitable partner. This seems irrelevant to her argument about marriage. An irrelevance is called a non sequitur, which literally means “it does not follow.” See bottom of page 63.

Ten.  Not being married makes her feel more wanted because her partner chooses her every day as opposed to having to be with her under the dark shadow of a marriage contract. See page 64.

Eleven. Their having a child is a substitute for marriage. See page 64.

 

Part II. Reviewing Some Alleged Fallacies in Newman’s Essay

 

One. On pages 60 and 61, Newman equates modern marriage with marriages of hundreds and thousands of years ago, lumping all marriages, today’s and yesterday’s, as part of a “patriarchy” in which women are “trafficked” like property. This is an over simplification of marriage.

 

Two. Fallacy of hasty generalization based on a single anecdote on page 61 in which Newman wants us to believe that the symbolism of a Catholic wedding represents enslavement to the husband.

 

Three. Purposely misinterpreting the candle symbolism of the Catholic wedding described on page 61 in which Newman writes that the single candle represents the bride’s “old naughty self.” This is Newman’s language and false interpretation, which in critical thinking is called a “straw man.”

Four. Faulty logic: If some people use marriage as a bully club against the gay community, as Newman purports on page 61, then ALL people who marry are against gays.

Five. Fallacy of irrelevance or red herring: Newman confesses to having a previous relationship with a woman on page 61. What is the relevance? Perhaps that if she wants to go back to relating to women, it would not be fair if she married a man.

Also on page 63, Newman doesn’t want a man who obsesses over her, but this argument could be called a red herring or a non sequitur.

Six. For Newman, it appears that in marriage the commitment is too strong. In other words, it is so strong that it becomes a form of mutual possession. She feels threatened by that sense of possession whether or not being enslaved or possessed by one’s spouse is true or not. Such a condition is more psychological than anything. Legally, one is not “possessed,” not in modern times. It appears that Newman is paranoid and irrational in her definition of marriage, so of course she objects to it.

Seven. She and her boyfriend don’t need marriage because they are tied together by a child. Actually, lots of deadbeat dads bail on the mother and child, so Newman is a bit naïve to place so much faith in the child as a permanent bonding agent.

 

 

Part III. Writing Options:

Defend or refute one of the following thesis statements regarding Newman’s essay.

 

Thesis One

Newman’s position to not marry is a self-justifying hack job wrought with paranoia, over simplifications, Straw Man arguments, faulty comparisons, red herrings, and other lapses of logic so egregious that she comes off as an immature, selfish crank trying, feebly, to gloss over her irrational fear of marriage with pseudo intellectual arguments. 

 

Thesis Two.

In spite of some half-baked logic and familiar claims about the rarity of monogamy, Newman’s decision not to marry has little foundation in reason and logic. Instead, her wobbly arguments against marriage are merely pathetic rationalizations for her failed existence, which becomes more and more transparent as we read her unconvincing polemic. Instead of a convincing argument against marriage, what we are served is the failed life of the author, which consists of a woman imprisoned by sexual confusion, a control freak who finds a spineless man who will put up with her fear of love and commitment, a pseudo intellectual who hides behind specious academic arguments in order to justify her cowardly existence.

 

Thesis Three

 

Whoa. Let’s not be so hard on Newman as the writers above. While her argument contains some of the logical errors mentioned above and while she betrays certain insecurities, she makes some legitimate criticisms against marriage, most importantly the myth of monogamy. If we’re honest and look at the research on marriage and monogamy, we must conclude that marriage is a very precarious institution since the monogamy it rests upon is compromised by ____________________, ________________________, ____________________________, and __________________________________. 

 

Thesis Four.

Don’t try to distract us by focusing exclusively on the monogamy argument. Yes, Newman uses the rarity of monogamy as one of her anti-marriage claims, but that is only one-tenth of her argument. When you look at her arguments as a whole, you will have to agree that her exposition is an amateurish affair replete with _____________________, _____________________________, ______________________________, ___________________________________.

 

Thesis Five.

I’m sure there are some good, solid, convincing arguments against marriage. But Newman’s isn’t one of them. What purports to be a legitimate defense against her decision to not marry really becomes the irrational defense mechanisms of a frightened child. These defense mechanisms include __________________________, _______________________________, __________________________, and ______________________________________. 

1C Complete Spring 2009 Reading and Writing Schedule

1C Spring 2009: Reading and Writing Schedule

 

2-17 Introduction

2-19 The Satisfactions of Housewifery and Motherhood/Paradise Lost 124-129

 

2-24 The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love130-142

2-26 The State of Our Unions 143-155

 

3-3 Debunking Myths About Marriages and Families 156-161

3-5 Many Women at Elite Colleges . . . and What Yale Women Want 170-178

 

3-10 Essay 1 Due

3-12 Essay 1 Due

 

3-17 A Third of Life 335-343

3-19 Improving Sleep 344-355

 

3-24 America’s Sleep-Deprived Teens . . . 356-361

3-26 When Worlds Collide . . . 362-370

 

3-31 How Sleep Debt Hurts College Students 385-394

4-2 Starting Time and School Life 395-400

 

4-7 Essay 2 Due

4-9 Essay 2 Due

 

4-21 Opinions and Social Pressure 206-212

4-23 Perils of Obedience 213-225

 

4-28 Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments in Obedience 226-232

4-30 The Stanford Prison Experiment 233-244

 

5-5 Disobedience as a Psychological Problem 245-250

5-7 Uncivil Disobedience 251-257

 

5-12 Essay 3 Due

5-14 Essay 3 Due

 

5-19 The Mall as Prison 286-293

5-21 The Mall as Sacred Space and The Mall as a Setting for Authentic Life 294-303

 

5-26 The Mall as Refuge 304-314

5-28 Mallaise: How to Know If You Have It 323-327

 

6-2 Consultations or early turn-in of Essay #4 in Office PE 4

6-4 Consultations or early turn-in of Essay #4 in Office PE 4

 

6-9 Essay 4 Due

6-11 Essay 4 Due

1C Lesson Plan: Terry Martin Hekker Is an Apologist for Marriage Before Being “Betrayed” by It (124-129)

">

 

Part One. Lexicon

 

1. Apologist, someone who defends a belief or practice by providing convincing arguments to support his or her position. Hekker is an apologist for the stay-at-home mom.
2. Obsolescence, the condition of no longer being viable or relevant. The condition of being extinct. The pager is obsolescent. Acid wash jeans are obsolescent. Puka shell necklaces are obsolescent. Some would say that the stay-at-home mom is obsolescent.
3. Anachronism, existing out of the appropriate time. For example, a stay-at-home mom was okay in the 1950s and 1960s, but not today.
4. Cautionary tale; a story about the rise and fall of someone that provides warning to those who might be tempted to follow a certain lifestyle or make certain choices. For example, the film Boogies Nights is a cautionary tale.
5. Comeuppance, punishment for having inflicted pain on others or for gloating over your personal glory.
6. Gloating, excessive, boastful pride that compels you to rub other people’s noses in your achievements.
7. The Great Betrayal: You commit your entire life to One Principle—be it marriage, a political cause, a boyfriend, a girlfriend, the idea of Divine Love, the idea of Pleasure As the Greatest Life Force, etc—and you realize that what you’ve centered your entire life on is a hollow joke, a myth, a mirage, an illusion, and even a Disgusting Back-Stabber that left you to you dumping ground of existence.
8. The Great Reversal. You think your life is moving toward one direction but really it is heading in the opposite direction, a life change that you don’t realize until it’s too late. Sometimes in life when you think you’re rising, you’re really falling.
9. Post-Betrayal Hangover: The sense of weariness, emptiness, and cynicism you feel after experiencing the Great Betrayal.
10. Nihilism: The belief that there is no meaning in life, that life is nothing but a pathetic joke and is not worthy of your attention or efforts. Nihilism is a condition many people fall into after experiencing the Great Betrayal.
11. Hedging Your Bets: The belief that you should not commit all of yourself to one thing, such as marriage, because in the event that the marriage fails you will have nothing. So what you do is “hedge your bets,” namely, you have a backup plan, Plan B, in the event that Plan A does not work out. For example, you might get your college degree so that if your role of housewife is taken from you when your husband abandons you for his secretary, you have sufficient credentials to get a good job in the workplace.
12. Single Mercenary: You treat marriage with suspicion because it exposes you to financial ruin, so you become a Fortress of One, building a financial empire on your own and treating your love interests as part-time companions, “necessary evils” to assuage your loneliness as you climb the corporate ladder. 

 

Part Two: Growing Cynicism Toward Marriage Results from the Immature Reasons People Get Married

 

1. Some people are so infantile in their orientation they get married because they want a Goody Box.
2. Some people get married so they can have a big wedding, be treated like movie stars, and get lots of presents.
3. Some people get married because their friends, brothers, and sisters are getting married and they fear they are being left behind.
4. Some people get married so they can get a divorce and finally breakup with their boyfriend or girlfriend whom they broken up with and reunited dozens upon dozens of times.
5. Some people get married because they see marriage as The Final Bastion of the Scoundrel or a sort of Witness Protection Program.
6. Some women are misguided in marrying the Go-with-the-Flow Guy.
7. Some people get married so their co-workers will think they are more mature.
8. Some people get married because they think marriage will miraculously transform their partner who is afflicted with serious character flaws, such as a penchant for cheating.

Part Three. The Foundation of Your Essay: Your Thesis

Definition: The best definition of a thesis I’ve come across can be found in Frank L. Cioffi’s   The Imaginative Argument: A Practical Manifesto for Writers in which he defines a thesis in the context of the argument essay: “It contains a formal statement of an argumentative position (a thesis), something that answers a vitally important question in an unexpected, insightful way.” To write a thesis that answers a “vitally important question” in a way that is “unexpected” and “insightful” is a very high standard indeed but to define the thesis as anything less would be to lie or to water down the truth. Students of writing (I consider myself to be among them) should know exactly how deep the water is before they dive in. Or put it this way: Would you want to enter a jiu-jitsu match if you didn’t know the strength and skill level of your opponent? 

 

Thesis Should Have Mapping Components: An effective thesis is a passionate, often contrarian, assertion that can be demonstrated with compelling examples, logic, data, and research.  Each compelling example is sometimes called a mapping component or mapping statement.

Example:

Driving SUVs is grossly immoral. The immorality of SUV ownership is rooted in the person’s need to bully and dominate others who are in smaller automobiles. Secondly, SUV drivers tend to be lazy, wanting the SUV to drive itself, while these inattentive drivers “chill” inside their luxurious SUV, which serves as a sort of living room or penthouse suite, and this of course imposes danger on other drivers. Third, SUV drivers are indifferent to the green house gas effect their bloated SUVs have on the atmosphere. And finally, SUV drivers are reinforcing America’s dependence on foreign oil, which is unpatriotic. In sum, the SUV driver tends to be a self-centered narcissist who embodies the most egregious traits of the Ugly American.

 

Looking at Thesis in the Context of Your Essay #1 Options from Chapter 5: 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the “love match.”

 Second Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the traditional marriage. 

 

Thesis should be college level, which means it should avoid the self-evident and obvious.

 

Examples of over simplistic thesis statements that address traditional marriage: 

Marriage requires commitment of two people.

Marriage requires that you give of yourself.

You can’t love your spouse until you love yourself first.

Marriage is all about stepping up to the plate and being an adult.

When a man gets married he has to put on his Big Boy Pants and be a real man.

None of the above thesis statements pass the “So What?” Factor. They are all too obvious. 

A strong thesis has a strong voice, a clear, powerful argument, and a structure that provides three to five mapping components. I usually suggest that students aim for four mapping components or statements. 

Three Anti-Marriage Thesis Statements 

While marriage had its purpose a generation ago, today marriage is an ill-advised farce and a foolish anachronism evidenced by _________________________, _________________________, ___________________________, and ________________________________.

 

Sadly, most Americans polled believe in marriage and aspire to be married someday. However, their dream is a misguided one based on an erroneous, and I daresay delusional, view of marriage. This grotesque marriage delusion is comprised of ___________________________, _____________________, _____________________, and _________________________.

 

Marriage is a beautiful idea, which is to say it sounds really good in theory. But the fact remains that marriage is not a theory. It is a condition defined by the quality of its parts. The parts in question are the moral qualities of the husband and wife. While some prospective spouses can implement marriage the way it is defined in theory—as the establishment of permanent love through self-sacrifice, compassion, and empathy—I am sad to report that the majority of Americans, emotionally and psychologically retarded from a culture that spawns rabid consumerism, petty vanity, and narcissistic selfishness, are incapable of implementing the Original Marriage Idea. Instead, what we see in the majority of cases is the Bastardization and Corruption of Marriage evidenced by _____________________, _______________________, ______________________, and ____________________________. 

 

Pro-Marriage Thesis Statement with 3 mapping statements, not components. 

Those who so insouciantly pooh-pooh marriage as a farcical irrelevance, as we see in the thesis examples above, reveal behind their thinly-veiled pseudo-intellectualism the need to rationalize their own woeful character defects. These defects include first the fear of intimacy and deeply felt connection which entails the inevitability of pain and suffering because we will all be ripped apart from those we love either through betrayal, sickness, or death.  Secondly, the anti-marriage crowd would have us believe that marriage is not viable so that they can justify their desire to indulge in hedonism, moving like romantic nomads from one partner to another as they use and manipulate people in order to cater to their own selfish whims. And finally, the anti-marriage crowd demands too much of marriage, arguing that because marriage is not dependable enough, we cannot trust it. But this is true of anything in life. If you demand that life give you absolute certainty, you can never live. Instead, you will retreat into the Womb of Unconsciousness where you will remain, intractably, a fetus fated to never be born. 

 

Above is Erik Carmen’s “Never Gonna Fall in Love Again,” a lugubrious, loathsome anthem to loneliness and self-pity. 

The A Game in McMahon’s Composition Classes: What Is a Champion A-Level Student?

 

Dear English 1A and 1C Students,

 

A lot of you are earnest about getting an A grade for many reasons, not the least of which you need your GPA to be as high as possible in order to get into your university of choice. 

Therefore, it is of paramount importance for you to understand the Three A Factors. All 3 factors must be fulfilled in order to get an A. I maintain these factors to separate A students from B and C students. 

Factor One: Turning in a 5-page essay on time, with college-level thesis, correct formatting, correct grammar, correct word choice, and well developed paragraphs (the body paragraphs are approximately are 120-150 words and connected with varied transitions). 

Factor Two: Showing up to class on time and consistently in order to maintain high class morale. According to Alexander H. Leighton, "morale is the capacity of a group of people to pull together persistently and consistently in pursuit of a common purpose." Maintaining this type of morale in the classroom is a top priority of every instructor, including me. 

Factor Three: Doing the assigned readings and showing that you’ve read the text by passing the surprise in-class writing exams. These exams cannot be made-up. Missing one will not hurt your grade, but missing two or three will. Passing these exams is a function of reading and consistent attendance, two factors that keep class atmosphere and group morale on a high level. 

Students who don’t show up and/or don’t do the readings constitute “dead weight” and drag the class down into apathy, boredom, and enervation (low energy). As such, they are inimical (harmful) to McMahon’s classroom objectives and therefore they cannot, even if they write A-grade essays, earn an A in McMahon’s class. 

A students in McMahon’s class “bring their A game,” to use a modern cliché, and fulfill all Three A Factors. 

McMahon Spring 2009 Syllabus English 1C

e-mail: jmcmahon@elcamino.edu; Office: PE4; extension 3673

Website for students:http://herculodge.typepad.com/breakthrough_writer/

 

 

This course focuses on the development of critical thinking skills and on the application of these skills to written argumentation. Students will examine logical reasoning and apply its principles when reading and writing analytic and evaluative essays about argumentative, persuasive, narrative and expressive works and topics.

 

Student Learning Outcomes:

At the end of English 1C, students should be able to:

 

1. Employ proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling in writing.

2. Employ standard MLA guidelines for formatting assignments and citation.

3. Identify the major components of an effective argument.

4. Write with clarity to communicate effectively.

5. Adapt writing for different styles or forms, including argumentative essays, web pages, and blogs, to name a few.

6. Respond critically to course material, using synthesis and analysis

7. Create effective argumentative texts using a variety of models such as refutation, concession, and critique.

8. Develop methods and strategies for analyzing and interpreting texts.

9. Utilize proper MLA citation and bibliographic form.

10. Identify and locate a variety of sources relevant to a research topic.

11. Utilize research materials to make and present an analytical argument.

12. Compose an argumentative essay supporting a claim about issues, argumentative prose, or literary interpretation.  The essay will show the student’s ability to support a thesis using analysis, elements of argumentation, and integration of materials and ideas.  The essay will be well organized, will follow proper MLA format, and will be technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling, and usage.

 

Required Texts: Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum Brief Edition, Third Edition by Laurence Behrens; Rules for Writers by Diana Hacker

 

Grading:

Four Research 225 for 900 subtotal

Four Surprise Closed-Book Reading Exams, 25 each, 100 subtotal

Grand Total: 1,000 points.

 

Policies:

 

You can’t make-up reading exams. Points are irretrievably lost.

 

Late Papers: Reduce one full grade ; no late papers accepted once new set of essays is due.

Research Papers should be approximately 1,200 words, 12 font, Times New Roman, page numbers, name, and essay title in upper right hand corner (headers in Microsoft View) and Works Cited should have minimum 3 sources and spacing using MLA format.

 

Revisions: You may revise ONE paper for 10-30 pts. depending on the quality of the rewrite. Revision must be turned in ONE WEEK after original due date.

 

Plagiarism Policy: If you plagiarize, steal previously written material and attempt to make it appear as if you wrote it, you will get ZERO points on the essay. For a rewrite, the HIGHEST POSSIBLE GRADE WILL BE A C MINUS, based on an A-level paper. A B paper will be a D, a C paper an F.

 

Attendance Policy: For 16-week semesters, students may be dropped after missing 6 classes for ANY REASON, including medical. For Summer and Winter sessions, students may be dropped after missing 4 classes for whatever reason, including medical.

 

Riding Policy: You cannot “ride” my class. A “rider” is a student who does nothing and tries to turn in papers all at once during the end of the semester. If by the third essay due date, you have turned in only one essay or none, I will drop you. I will be dropping “riders” on November 12 of this semester.

 

Etiquette Policy: If you’re text-messaging, receiving phone calls, privately conversing or studying for other courses during my class, you will be asked to leave the class.

 

Reading and Writing Schedule

 

2-17 Introduction

2-19 The Satisfactions of Housewifery and Motherhood/Paradise Lost 124-129

2-24 The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love130-142

2-26 The State of Our Unions 143-155

3-3 Debunking Myths About Marriages and Families 156-161

3-5 Many Women at Elite Colleges . . . and What Yale Women Want 170-178

3-10 Essay 1 Due

3-12 Essay 1 Due

3-17 A Third of Life 335-343

3-19 Improving Sleep 344-355

3-24 America’s Sleep-Deprived Teens . . . 356-361

3-26 When Worlds Collide . . . 362-370

3-31 How Sleep Debt Hurts College Students 385-394

4-2 Starting Time and School Life 395-400

4-7 Essay 2 Due

4-9 Essay 2 Due

4-21 Opinions and Social Pressure 206-212

4-23 Perils of Obedience 213-225

4-28 Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments in Obedience 226-232

4-30 The Stanford Prison Experiment 233-244

5-5 Disobedience as a Psychological Problem 245-250

5-7 Uncivil Disobedience 251-257

5-12 Essay 3 Due

5-14 Essay 3 Due

5-19 The Mall as Prison 286-293

5-21 The Mall as Sacred Space and The Mall as a Setting for Authentic Life 294-303

5-26 The Mall as Refuge 304-314

5-28 Mallaise: How to Know If You Have It 323-327

6-2 Essay 4 Due

6-4 Essay 4 Due

 

Essay Guidelines (points deducted for not following these instructions):

 

1. Essays should be typed, double-spaced, 5 pages, and use 12 font Times New Roman.

2. Essays should have headers in the upper right hand corner on every page.

3. Essays should have a minimum of 3 sources on an MLA Works Cited Page.

4. Essays should have a thesis paragraph with a STRONG THESIS  4 or 5 MAPPING STATEMENTS OR MAPPING COMPONENTS.

5. When you list your mapping statements or components, be sure to use CORRECT PARALLEL STRUCTURE.

5. Essays should be stapled in the upper left hand corner and should be free of food stains and such.

6. Ribbon should be fresh.

7. All your essays are research papers, which means about 80% is your writing and about 20% is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized from your research sources.

8. Paragraphs should be "meaty," a good 130-150 words.

9. You must use a variety of EFFECTIVE TRANSITIONS  between paragraphs.

10. You must attribute your sources in order to AVOID PLAGIARISM.

11. You must turn in your paper on time to avoid losing 30 points.

12. You cannot "rewrite" a paper if you're simply incorporating my corrections. So be sure to proofread your essay.

13. Essays are worth a maximum of 240 points. The preliminary assignment, thesis with Works Cited, is 10 points. The grand total point in the class is 1,000.

14. The 5-page essay outlines below are merely suggestions. You can structure your essay however you see fit.   

 

 

Writing Assignments

 

Chapter 5 Essay One Options:

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the “love match.”

 

Second Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the traditional marriage.

 

Chapter 8 Essay Two Options:

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 8, analyze the causes and effects of the modern sleep crisis, especially in a narrowly defined group such as college students or some other group.

 

Second Option: Based on selections from Chapter 8, analyze the function of sleep.

 

 

 

Chapter 6 Essay Three Options

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 6, defend or refute the idea of “noble disobedience.”

 

Second Option: Analyze the perils of disobedience in the context of a film, a book, or a current event.

 

Chapter 7 Essay Four Options

 

First Option: Analyze the following passage:

 

We shop because the products represent or symbolize powerful emotional needs: belonging, identity, status, reproductive success, creativity, and rebirth. If you are a marketer and you can’t link your product to one of these emotional longings, then you are finished.  These are the same symbols and emotional needs addressed by religion, so we can conclude that shopping has a pseudo-religious component to it.

 

 

Second Option: Choose a successful product like iPod, Mini Cooper, Diesel, etc., and research the way the fantasy it represents. Your thesis would look something like this:

 

Product X is promoting the fantasy of _______________ by a clever marketing campaign that positions Product X through _____________________, __________________________, ________________________, and ______________________________.

 

Third Option: Develop an essay based on the following thesis:

 

While the mall is often esteemed as the Shopper’s Holy Mecca of Capitalistic Ingenuity, there is a dark underbelly to the mall. As many selections from Chapter 7 show, the mall has pernicious, often insidious, effects on its patrons evidenced by ______________________________, ____________________________, _________________________________, _______________________________, and ___________________________________.

 

e-mail: jmcmahon@elcamino.edu; Office: PE4; extension 3673

Website for students:http://herculodge.typepad.com/breakthrough_writer/

 

 

This course focuses on the development of critical thinking skills and on the application of these skills to written argumentation. Students will examine logical reasoning and apply its principles when reading and writing analytic and evaluative essays about argumentative, persuasive, narrative and expressive works and topics.

 

Student Learning Outcomes:

At the end of English 1C, students should be able to:

 

1. Employ proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling in writing.

2. Employ standard MLA guidelines for formatting assignments and citation.

3. Identify the major components of an effective argument.

4. Write with clarity to communicate effectively.

5. Adapt writing for different styles or forms, including argumentative essays, web pages, and blogs, to name a few.

6. Respond critically to course material, using synthesis and analysis

7. Create effective argumentative texts using a variety of models such as refutation, concession, and critique.

8. Develop methods and strategies for analyzing and interpreting texts.

9. Utilize proper MLA citation and bibliographic form.

10. Identify and locate a variety of sources relevant to a research topic.

11. Utilize research materials to make and present an analytical argument.

12. Compose an argumentative essay supporting a claim about issues, argumentative prose, or literary interpretation.  The essay will show the student’s ability to support a thesis using analysis, elements of argumentation, and integration of materials and ideas.  The essay will be well organized, will follow proper MLA format, and will be technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling, and usage.

 

Required Texts: Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum Brief Edition, Third Edition by Laurence Behrens; Rules for Writers by Diana Hacker

 

Grading:

Four Research 225 for 900 subtotal

Four Surprise Closed-Book Reading Exams, 25 each, 100 subtotal

Grand Total: 1,000 points.

 

Policies:

 

You can’t make-up reading exams. Points are irretrievably lost.

 

Late Papers: Reduce one full grade ; no late papers accepted once new set of essays is due.

Research Papers should be approximately 1,200 words, 12 font, Times New Roman, page numbers, name, and essay title in upper right hand corner (headers in Microsoft View) and Works Cited should have minimum 3 sources and spacing using MLA format.

 

Revisions: You may revise ONE paper for 10-30 pts. depending on the quality of the rewrite. Revision must be turned in ONE WEEK after original due date.

 

Plagiarism Policy: If you plagiarize, steal previously written material and attempt to make it appear as if you wrote it, you will get ZERO points on the essay. For a rewrite, the HIGHEST POSSIBLE GRADE WILL BE A C MINUS, based on an A-level paper. A B paper will be a D, a C paper an F.

 

Attendance Policy: For 16-week semesters, students may be dropped after missing 6 classes for ANY REASON, including medical. For Summer and Winter sessions, students may be dropped after missing 4 classes for whatever reason, including medical.

 

Riding Policy: You cannot “ride” my class. A “rider” is a student who does nothing and tries to turn in papers all at once during the end of the semester. If by the third essay due date, you have turned in only one essay or none, I will drop you. I will be dropping “riders” on November 12 of this semester.

 

Etiquette Policy: If you’re text-messaging, receiving phone calls, privately conversing or studying for other courses during my class, you will be asked to leave the class.

 

Reading and Writing Schedule

 

2-17 Introduction

2-19 The Satisfactions of Housewifery and Motherhood/Paradise Lost 124-129

2-24 The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love130-142

2-26 The State of Our Unions 143-155

3-3 Debunking Myths About Marriages and Families 156-161

3-5 Many Women at Elite Colleges . . . and What Yale Women Want 170-178

3-10 Essay 1 Due

3-12 Essay 1 Due

3-17 A Third of Life 335-343

3-19 Improving Sleep 344-355

3-24 America’s Sleep-Deprived Teens . . . 356-361

3-26 When Worlds Collide . . . 362-370

3-31 How Sleep Debt Hurts College Students 385-394

4-2 Starting Time and School Life 395-400

4-7 Essay 2 Due

4-9 Essay 2 Due

4-21 Opinions and Social Pressure 206-212

4-23 Perils of Obedience 213-225

4-28 Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments in Obedience 226-232

4-30 The Stanford Prison Experiment 233-244

5-5 Disobedience as a Psychological Problem 245-250

5-7 Uncivil Disobedience 251-257

5-12 Essay 3 Due

5-14 Essay 3 Due

5-19 The Mall as Prison 286-293

5-21 The Mall as Sacred Space and The Mall as a Setting for Authentic Life 294-303

5-26 The Mall as Refuge 304-314

5-28 Mallaise: How to Know If You Have It 323-327

6-2 Essay 4 Due

6-4 Essay 4 Due

 

Essay Guidelines (points deducted for not following these instructions):

 

1. Essays should be typed, double-spaced, 5 pages, and use 12 font Times New Roman.

2. Essays should have headers in the upper right hand corner on every page.

3. Essays should have a minimum of 3 sources on an MLA Works Cited Page.

4. Essays should have a thesis paragraph with a STRONG THESIS  4 or 5 MAPPING STATEMENTS OR MAPPING COMPONENTS.

5. When you list your mapping statements or components, be sure to use CORRECT PARALLEL STRUCTURE.

5. Essays should be stapled in the upper left hand corner and should be free of food stains and such.

6. Ribbon should be fresh.

7. All your essays are research papers, which means about 80% is your writing and about 20% is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized from your research sources.

8. Paragraphs should be "meaty," a good 130-150 words.

9. You must use a variety of EFFECTIVE TRANSITIONS  between paragraphs.

10. You must attribute your sources in order to AVOID PLAGIARISM.

11. You must turn in your paper on time to avoid losing 30 points.

12. You cannot "rewrite" a paper if you're simply incorporating my corrections. So be sure to proofread your essay.

13. Essays are worth a maximum of 240 points. The preliminary assignment, thesis with Works Cited, is 10 points. The grand total point in the class is 1,000.

14. The 5-page essay outlines below are merely suggestions. You can structure your essay however you see fit.   

 

 

Writing Assignments

 

Chapter 5 Essay One Options:

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the “love match.”

 

Second Option: Based on selections from Chapter 5, defend or refute the traditional marriage.

 

Chapter 8 Essay Two Options:

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 8, analyze the causes and effects of the modern sleep crisis, especially in a narrowly defined group such as college students or some other group.

 

Second Option: Based on selections from Chapter 8, analyze the function of sleep.

 

 

 

Chapter 6 Essay Three Options

 

First Option: Based on selections from Chapter 6, defend or refute the idea of “noble disobedience.”

 

Second Option: Analyze the perils of disobedience in the context of a film, a book, or a current event.

 

Chapter 7 Essay Four Options

 

First Option: Analyze the following passage:

 

We shop because the products represent or symbolize powerful emotional needs: belonging, identity, status, reproductive success, creativity, and rebirth. If you are a marketer and you can’t link your product to one of these emotional longings, then you are finished.  These are the same symbols and emotional needs addressed by religion, so we can conclude that shopping has a pseudo-religious component to it.

 

 

Second Option: Choose a successful product like iPod, Mini Cooper, Diesel, etc., and research the way the fantasy it represents. Your thesis would look something like this:

 

Product X is promoting the fantasy of _______________ by a clever marketing campaign that positions Product X through _____________________, __________________________, ________________________, and ______________________________.

 

Third Option: Develop an essay based on the following thesis:

 

While the mall is often esteemed as the Shopper’s Holy Mecca of Capitalistic Ingenuity, there is a dark underbelly to the mall. As many selections from Chapter 7 show, the mall has pernicious, often insidious, effects on its patrons evidenced by ______________________________, ____________________________, _________________________________, _______________________________, and ___________________________________.

 

McMahon 1A Spring 2009 Syllabus February 18-June 10

Room H112; Office PE 4; Phone: 660-3673

e-mail: jmcmahon@elcamino.edu

Website for students: http://herculodge.typepad.com/breakthrough_writer/ 

This course is designed to strengthen students’ ability to read with understanding and discernment, to discuss assigned readings intelligently, and to write clearly. Emphasis will be on writing essays in which each paragraph relates to a controlling idea, has an introduction and a conclusion, and contains primary and secondary support. College-level reading material will be assigned to provide the stimulus for class discussion and writing assignments, including a required research paper. 

Student Learning Objectives: 

1. Compose a clear introductory paragraph relevant to the topic.

2. Compose a clearly defined thesis statement that limits and focuses the topic of the essay.

3. Organize information to be used in the development of one's own thesis.

4. Write logically developed, organized paragraphs that support the controlling idea or thesis.

5. Develop and use varied sentence patterns effectively.

6.  Use transitional words, phrases, and sentences to provide for coherence between and within paragraphs.

7. Choose and effectively use a rhetorical strategy appropriate to the topic.

8. Develop a conclusion that effectively closes the essay.

9. Paraphrase and summarize referenced material.

10. Incorporate direct quotes into one’s own exposition.

11. Use MLA documentation guidelines.

12. Avoid plagiarism.

13.Write an out-of-class writing task and find multiple sources related to a particular topic, write a research report, which shows the ability to support a thesis using analysis, to synthesize and integrate materials effectively from a variety of sources, and to cite sources in MLA format (including a works cited page). The report is organized, technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling and word use, and demonstrates thoughtful treatment of the topic.

 

Required Texts: Acting out Culture, edited by James Miller; Holes by Louis Sachar; Rules for Writers by Diana Hacker.

Grading: 

Four Research Papers 225 maximum points for 900 subtotal.

Four Surprise Closed-Book Reading Exams for 25 a piece, 100 subtotal.

Total Possible Points: 1,000 (A 900; B 800; C 700; D 600) 

Policies:

 

You cannot make-up surprise closed-book reading exams. If you miss one, you lose 25 points. The reading tests are designed to encourage consistent attendance and reading. A class with lousy attendance and “no readership” is a class low in morale.

 

Late Papers: Reduce one full grade ; no late papers accepted once new set of essays is due.

 

Research Papers should be approximately 1,000 words, 12 font, Times New Roman, page numbers, name, and essay title in upper right hand corner (headers in Microsoft View) and Works Cited should have minimum 3 sources and spacing using MLA format.

 

Revisions: You may revise one paper for 10-30 pts. depending on the quality of the rewrite. Revision must be turned in one week after original due date. 

Reading and Writing Schedule 

2-18 Introduction

2-23 I Do Not 60-65

2-25 Unspeakable Conversations 92-108

3-2 Watching Torture in Prime Time 109-113

3-4 Mate de Coca 235-248

3-9 Essay One Due

3-11 Essay One Due

3-16 Big Organic 174-196

3-18 Wages of Sin 192-203

3-23 Add Cake, Subtract Self-Esteem 217-230

3-35 Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz 278-287

3-30 The Consequences—Undoing Sanity 299-308

4-1 AWOL in America 358-367

4-6 Essay Two Due

4-8 Essay Two Due

4-20 Do the Right Thing 46-59

4-22 Cuteness 134-143

4-27 War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning 368-379

4-29 Love and War in Cyberspace 380-397

5-4 Baby Genius Edutainment Complex 450-471

5-6 Consultations

5-11 Essay Three Due

5-13 Essay Three Due

5-18 Holes 1-50

5-20 Holes 51-100

5-25 Holiday

5-27 Holes 101-end

6-1 Consultations

6-3 Consultations

6-8 Essay 4 Due

6-10 Essay 4 Due

All of your essays should be 4-5 pages with an additional Works Cited Page formatted in MLA and minimum of 3 research sources, including your text, my webiste, and other sources.

 

Essay One Options (choose only one): 

First Option: Refute or support Catherine Newman’s position on marriage in her essay “I Do Not.” 

Second Option: Refute or defend Peter Singer’s philosophical position on euthanasia and infanticide as it is presented in “Unspeakable Conversations” and other research sources. 

Third Option: Refute or defend the use of torture as an effective form of intelligence. See “Watching Torture in Prime Time” and other sources. 

Fourth Option: Refute or defend this thesis that addresses “Mate de Coca”:

Taras Grescoe’s essay convincingly shows that the “War on Drugs” is an absurdity wrought with contradictions, hypocrisy, cultural insensitivity, scientific humbug, and arbitrary notions of what constitutes health and pestilence to society. 

The mapping components would pertain to “contradictions,” “hypocrisy,” “cultural insensitivity,” scientific humbug,” and “arbitrary notions of what constitutes good health to society” on one hand and “pestilence to society” on the other. 

 

Essay Two Options

 

First Option: In the context of Michael Pollan’s essay “Big Organic” (174), analyze the fraud and deception the food industry uses to market foods that are allegedly “organic” and “natural.” 5-page outline: In 2 pages, summarize Pollan's major points. Then write a thesis. As my research and Michael Pollan's essay show, the idea of "organic" is a marketing fraud evidenced by _________________, _____________________, ___________________, and ______________________. Your last 3 pages would flesh out these mapping components.

Second Option: Write a research paper that argues that the obesity crisis is neither a sin (see “The Wages of Sin” 192) or an illness, but a complex problem that cannot be explained by a simple diagnosis. Your 6 mapping statements will explore 6 major causes of obesity. No doubt, a 5 or 6-page essay can’t address all 15 causes. That would require a book.

Third Option: In the context of Caroline Knapp’s essay, write a research paper that analyzes the causes of eating disorders.

Fourth Option: Choose a Writing Option in response to “Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz” on page 289.

Fifth Option: In the context of “The Consequences—Undoing Sanity,” analyze the psychological dangers of unemployment.

Sixth Option: Address a thesis that defends the right to go AWOL


A thesis against AWOL: The military will save itself a lot of grief if it stops enforcing its stringent AWOL policies.

A Variation

It is morally bankrupt for the military to enforce stringent AWOL policies resulting in keeping the soldiers in the military service against their will. One, it is immoral to force people to kill against their will. Second, the morale of the soldiers will be compromised if the eager fighters are forced to mingle with the reluctant ones because there won't be cohesiveness. Third, soldiers not willing or able to perform their assigned duties will put their comrades' lives in peril. And finally, our armed forces recruit many marginalized people. It is certainly conceivable that these people did not fully understand what they signed up for.

An Opposing or Contrarian View of AWOL

It is crucial that the military uphold its stringent AWOL policy. Failure to do so will result in a waste of tax money used to train lame duck soldiers. Secondly, lenience will inevitably create a two-tiered system whereby the rich use their leverage to pay their way out while the poor are stuck where they don't want to be. Third, good soldiers may feel emboldened on a whim to get out of their duty. In other words, lenience creates too much temptation for even the solid soldiers. And finally . . .

Essay 3 Options

First Option: Write a research paper that refutes or defends the biological or scientific basis for morality. See “Do the Right Thing” on page 46.

Second Option: Analyze war as an addiction in the context of “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” on page 368.

Third Option: Analyze the mental breakdown and general pathology of the computer addicts in “Love & War in Cyberspace” on page 380.

Fourth Option: Defend or refute the efficacy and salubriousness of the Baby Genius Edutainment Complex as described on pages 450-471.

Essay Four: 

Write a 4-page research paper that analyzes the 4 major causes that help transform Stanley from a frightened soul languishing in learned helplessness and nihilism to a magnanimous soul full of self-reliance, hope, and redemption.

 

November 

Room H112; Office PE 4; Phone: 660-3673

e-mail: jmcmahon@elcamino.edu

Website for students: http://herculodge.typepad.com/breakthrough_writer/ 

This course is designed to strengthen students’ ability to read with understanding and discernment, to discuss assigned readings intelligently, and to write clearly. Emphasis will be on writing essays in which each paragraph relates to a controlling idea, has an introduction and a conclusion, and contains primary and secondary support. College-level reading material will be assigned to provide the stimulus for class discussion and writing assignments, including a required research paper. 

Student Learning Objectives: 

1. Compose a clear introductory paragraph relevant to the topic.

2. Compose a clearly defined thesis statement that limits and focuses the topic of the essay.

3. Organize information to be used in the development of one's own thesis.

4. Write logically developed, organized paragraphs that support the controlling idea or thesis.

5. Develop and use varied sentence patterns effectively.

6.  Use transitional words, phrases, and sentences to provide for coherence between and within paragraphs.

7. Choose and effectively use a rhetorical strategy appropriate to the topic.

8. Develop a conclusion that effectively closes the essay.

9. Paraphrase and summarize referenced material.

10. Incorporate direct quotes into one’s own exposition.

11. Use MLA documentation guidelines.

12. Avoid plagiarism.

13.Write an out-of-class writing task and find multiple sources related to a particular topic, write a research report, which shows the ability to support a thesis using analysis, to synthesize and integrate materials effectively from a variety of sources, and to cite sources in MLA format (including a works cited page). The report is organized, technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling and word use, and demonstrates thoughtful treatment of the topic.

 

Required Texts: Acting out Culture, edited by James Miller; Holes by Louis Sachar; Rules for Writers by Diana Hacker.

Grading: 

Four Research Papers 225 maximum points for 900 subtotal.

Four Surprise Closed-Book Reading Exams for 25 a piece, 100 subtotal.

Total Possible Points: 1,000 (A 900; B 800; C 700; D 600) 

Policies:

 

You cannot make-up surprise closed-book reading exams. If you miss one, you lose 25 points. The reading tests are designed to encourage consistent attendance and reading. A class with lousy attendance and “no readership” is a class low in morale.

 

Late Papers: Reduce one full grade ; no late papers accepted once new set of essays is due.

 

Research Papers should be approximately 1,000 words, 12 font, Times New Roman, page numbers, name, and essay title in upper right hand corner (headers in Microsoft View) and Works Cited should have minimum 3 sources and spacing using MLA format.

 

Revisions: You may revise one paper for 10-30 pts. depending on the quality of the rewrite. Revision must be turned in one week after original due date. 

Reading and Writing Schedule 

2-18 Introduction

2-23 I Do Not 60-65

2-25 Unspeakable Conversations 92-108

3-2 Watching Torture in Prime Time 109-113

3-4 Mate de Coca 235-248

3-9 Essay One Due

3-11 Essay One Due

3-16 Big Organic 174-196

3-18 Wages of Sin 192-203

3-23 Add Cake, Subtract Self-Esteem 217-230

3-35 Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz 278-287

3-30 The Consequences—Undoing Sanity 299-308

4-1 AWOL in America 358-367

4-6 Essay Two Due

4-8 Essay Two Due

4-20 Do the Right Thing 46-59

4-22 Cuteness 134-143

4-27 War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning 368-379

4-29 Love and War in Cyberspace 380-397

5-4 Baby Genius Edutainment Complex 450-471

5-6 Consultations

5-11 Essay Three Due

5-13 Essay Three Due

5-18 Holes 1-50

5-20 Holes 51-100

5-25 Holiday

5-27 Holes 101-end

6-1 Consultations

6-3 Consultations

6-8 Essay 4 Due

6-10 Essay 4 Due

All of your essays should be 4-5 pages with an additional Works Cited Page formatted in MLA and minimum of 3 research sources, including your text, my webiste, and other sources.

 

Essay One Options (choose only one): 

First Option: Refute or support Catherine Newman’s position on marriage in her essay “I Do Not.” 

Second Option: Refute or defend Peter Singer’s philosophical position on euthanasia and infanticide as it is presented in “Unspeakable Conversations” and other research sources. 

Third Option: Refute or defend the use of torture as an effective form of intelligence. See “Watching Torture in Prime Time” and other sources. 

Fourth Option: Refute or defend this thesis that addresses “Mate de Coca”:

Taras Grescoe’s essay convincingly shows that the “War on Drugs” is an absurdity wrought with contradictions, hypocrisy, cultural insensitivity, scientific humbug, and arbitrary notions of what constitutes health and pestilence to society. 

The mapping components would pertain to “contradictions,” “hypocrisy,” “cultural insensitivity,” scientific humbug,” and “arbitrary notions of what constitutes good health to society” on one hand and “pestilence to society” on the other. 

 

Essay Two Options

 

First Option: In the context of Michael Pollan’s essay “Big Organic” (174), analyze the fraud and deception the food industry uses to market foods that are allegedly “organic” and “natural.” 5-page outline: In 2 pages, summarize Pollan's major points. Then write a thesis. As my research and Michael Pollan's essay show, the idea of "organic" is a marketing fraud evidenced by _________________, _____________________, ___________________, and ______________________. Your last 3 pages would flesh out these mapping components.

Second Option: Write a research paper that argues that the obesity crisis is neither a sin (see “The Wages of Sin” 192) or an illness, but a complex problem that cannot be explained by a simple diagnosis. Your 6 mapping statements will explore 6 major causes of obesity. No doubt, a 5 or 6-page essay can’t address all 15 causes. That would require a book.

Third Option: In the context of Caroline Knapp’s essay, write a research paper that analyzes the causes of eating disorders.

Fourth Option: Choose a Writing Option in response to “Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz” on page 289.

Fifth Option: In the context of “The Consequences—Undoing Sanity,” analyze the psychological dangers of unemployment.

Sixth Option: Address a thesis that defends the right to go AWOL


A thesis against AWOL: The military will save itself a lot of grief if it stops enforcing its stringent AWOL policies.

A Variation

It is morally bankrupt for the military to enforce stringent AWOL policies resulting in keeping the soldiers in the military service against their will. One, it is immoral to force people to kill against their will. Second, the morale of the soldiers will be compromised if the eager fighters are forced to mingle with the reluctant ones because there won't be cohesiveness. Third, soldiers not willing or able to perform their assigned duties will put their comrades' lives in peril. And finally, our armed forces recruit many marginalized people. It is certainly conceivable that these people did not fully understand what they signed up for.

An Opposing or Contrarian View of AWOL

It is crucial that the military uphold its stringent AWOL policy. Failure to do so will result in a waste of tax money used to train lame duck soldiers. Secondly, lenience will inevitably create a two-tiered system whereby the rich use their leverage to pay their way out while the poor are stuck where they don't want to be. Third, good soldiers may feel emboldened on a whim to get out of their duty. In other words, lenience creates too much temptation for even the solid soldiers. And finally . . .

Essay 3 Options

First Option: Write a research paper that refutes or defends the biological or scientific basis for morality. See “Do the Right Thing” on page 46.

Second Option: Analyze war as an addiction in the context of “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” on page 368.

Third Option: Analyze the mental breakdown and general pathology of the computer addicts in “Love & War in Cyberspace” on page 380.

Fourth Option: Defend or refute the efficacy and salubriousness of the Baby Genius Edutainment Complex as described on pages 450-471.

Essay Four: 

Write a 4-page research paper that analyzes the 4 major causes that help transform Stanley from a frightened soul languishing in learned helplessness and nihilism to a magnanimous soul full of self-reliance, hope, and redemption.

 

1A Lesson Plan for “AWOL in America: When Desertion Is the Only Option”

One: Lexicon

 

1. coercion
2. naiveté
3. conscientious objector : is an individual who, on religious, moral or ethical grounds, refuses to participate as a combatant in war
4. AWOL
5. Marginalized people: people with no education, resources, or support system who are apathetic, feeling no hope to improve their lives; consequently all their decisions are based on physical survival, nothing else.
6. Army’s manpower crisis (360) demand exceeds supply
7. Stop-loss orders (360) A commander must retain at least 85% of soldiers or he will have hell to pay.
8. Principle of Scarcity: Whenever there is a short supply of something, we lower our standards, food, mates, military, etc.
9. Docility, docile
10. Acquiescence, acquiesce, acquiescent 
11. Metamorphosis, drastic transformation for which there is often no return

 

Two. What 10 life lessons do we learn from this essay?

 

1. Morons and madmen reign in high places. Whenever you join an institution—any institution—don’t expect smart, competent, morally savory people to be on top. Expect the contrary to be true. Here you have a military system so desperate for recruits that is it yanking clueless people off the streets to fight a war that by all accounts is a catastrophic failure doomed to drain our country of all its resources and yet nearly impossible for us to leave. The Administration doesn’t even provide proper helmets, properly working gas masks, Hum-Vees and armor and parents are sending safety equipment to their children, paying out of their pockets.

 

 

2. Whenever there is a crisis, it is the clueless, helpless margins of society who get manipulated into be exploited for the uses of the higher-ups. Here we have the worse foreign policy decision every made in US history and smart people know not to get involved with it. So who gets into Iraq, mostly clueless people who don’t have the faintest idea of what they’re getting into. See page 361, top paragraph. See 361 bottom and 362 top.

 

 

3. When privileged and powerful people exploit you for their purposes, not only do the powerful not appreciate you for saving their butts, they insult you by not giving you any compensation. See page 361. Hordes of soldiers are calling hotlines for untreated injuries, mental illness, PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder, violence, suicide, etc. 60 Minutes had a story about a VA hospital with sewage leaking everywhere, rats, roaches.

 

 

4. Whenever there’s a screw up, the people on top always defer the pain and punishment to the helpless underlings who don’t have a clue of what’s going on. Rather than admit their mistakes and pull out, the Administration saves face by continuing a war that results in the deaths of thousands of people, soldiers from working class America and innocent Iraqis whose casualties number in the hundreds of thousands.

 

 

5. Bureaucrats do whatever they have to do to save their butts, usually at the expense of doing the right thing. See page 360, bottom paragraph

 

 

6. Don’t ever make a decision based on powerful emotional longing because more often than not your decision will be irrational, misguided, and work against your best interests. Jeremiah was raised by a single mother and hungered for a father figure and a positive role model of healthy masculinity. This hunger was so powerful that it compelled him to join the military even though his personality is at odds with military culture and he’s miserable. See 363 and 364 top.

 

 

7. Related to number 6, don’t ever make a decision without doing the extensive research first because if you screw up, no one is going to bail out. You need to rely on yourself to take care of your own self-interests and you had better protect your interests ferociously and thoroughly or a heavy price will be paid. People get married without knowing what the hell marriage entails other than some sentimental image they got from watching a Hugh Grant movie or listening to some crappy love song on the radio.

 

 

8. Do be an effective killing machine in the military, you have to put on a warrior’s mask that doesn’t come off easily—if ever at all—when you rejoin civilian life. See page 364 in which the sergeant says he joined the Army because he enjoyed killing and being an effective killing machine. Also see 366. We see that being an effective soldier is all about tapping into that vein of violence that exists in all of us. It’s necessary for war, to be sure, but how do you turn it off?

 

 

9. When you’re young, there is no shortage of people who are eager and willing to take advantage of your innocence and naiveté. See 362.

 

10. There is usually a complete disconnect between an institution taking appropriate action and maintaining its official policy. See page 365 in which Jeremiah is clearly having a nervous breakdown and is not useless to the military but presents a danger to others and himself, but the bureaucracy must maintain policy; doing the right thing in this circumstance is irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

 

Three: Qualities of a Good Thesis:

 

1. visceral, from the gut first, the brain second
2. address a relevant topic
3. avoid the obvious and self-evident
4. develop a thesis that is an answer to a compelling question
5. make sure the reader can find the thesis in your essay
6. make sure your thesis is one or two sentences and no more
7. make sure your thesis has enough substance to cover 5 pages
8. make sure there is research material to support your thesis
9. it’s often good to focus on a controversial topic, a 2-sided argument
10. it’s often good to take a contrarian position
11. has a strong voice
12. outlines your essay by being followed with mapping components or sentences.

 

 

 

Broad

 

Dobie is too harsh on the military

Going AWOL is a bad thing.

Sometimes going AWOL is okay.

Walden is a crazy place.

Walden shows us that people shouldn’t spend too much on the Internet.

 

 

Contrarian (Very good) :

 

While McMahon is eager to dismiss the cyber romances at Walden as a pathological exercise, his attack is both alarmist and inaccurate. First, he insults those of us who are intelligent enough to discern fraud and authenticity. Second, he is naïve to dismiss the importance of opening our romantic possibilities over the vast Internet landscape. Third, he is ignorant to belittle the importance of convenience a world with severe time constraints. And finally, McMahon sadly fails to recognize that the written word via e-mail or text messaging opens the window to another soul in ways that cannot be matched through other venues.

 

 

 

Students will write a thesis for today’s essay:

 

Specific

 

The military will enhance its strength and morality if it pardons those who want to quit because __________________, _________________, _________________, and _____________________.

 

Dobie’s argument that special cases should be pardoned for committing AWOL would pose certain dangers to the military, namely, ___________________, _________________, __________________, and _________________________.