Intermediate College Composition

I asked for some help, but so far this is what I have.

Instructions:

• Paragraph #1: Introduction (Your issue’s background and rhetorical situation, leading to an open-ended statement or question about your claim)
• Paragraph #2: Position #1 (A summary, incorporating at least one scholarly source, of a position in the debate)
• Paragraph #3: Position #2 (A summary, incorporating at least one scholarly source, of a second position in the debate)
• Paragraph #4: Conclusion (Wrap up the main idea of the paper and describe its significance)

My Essay:

     Modern culture went down like the Titanic in the late 1990s.  Things that were very special became unpopular as the 2000s crept around the corner.  Culture can be found significant in the late 1950s and early 1960s as the Late Boomers were born and went through childhood.  Adulthood for Baby Boomers can be seen as the 1980s and early 1990s.  Children of Early Boomers did not experience much love and are now grown up with culture sunk like the Titanic.  We should try to touch base on this issue.

     According to Gordon, a big influential factor of even the 1960s was concentrated from England (no page numbers specified in the ebook.)  This is an important issue because even today England has released a lot of its feelings via the U.S.  For example, the Beetles became popular in the 1960s, and even today kids are still dazed over them, in some way they can't seem to handle, as of yet.  Gordon also accredits the U.S. to folk music and mentions the strikingly acclaimed city of New Orleans.  These are all obvious suggestions as to the sentiment Gordon has concerning the 1960s.  Then, he ends the chapter on music with references to popular icons in classical music, like the late Pavarotti.  So, Europe and music are important factors into what gave people the expectations they had of people who were born by the beginnng of the 1960s.

     Schwartz says something big that changed the world in the 1990s was in the 1980s when computers were coming out (15.)  The 1990s are also known for the Cold War being fought off (64,) and war with the Middle East seemed to come to permeate the atmosphere.  Terrorism was another political term of the 2000s because of 9/11 in 2001.  George Bush Jr. often spoke into the mid-2000s of our children coming  home.  Schwartz also posted a picture of the Spice Girls for the chapter on 1997 (309,) which was a big year as it was when modern PCs with the internet hit, which looked more like the TV screen than a calculator or old Pac Man game.  The kids from the 1980s and 1990s were happily sent off to have their own lives via work (404,) if all went well, or to follow our dreams in college or from childhood and for some the ability to do "anything you set your mind to."  So, there is an obvious descent of culture, like we had conflicts to represent our heyday and a sending off in bittersweet-ness, in accordance to what our lives were like.

     There are things in life that are important that are affected in important times, all people being important too.  One thing is Europe in the face of racism in the US and the musical skills had by the US and obviously certain countries in Europe, even as early as the 1960s, which shaped the world as Baby Boomers grew up then.  The 1980s kindled interest in computers and the online world, and the 1990s itself was a war between culture clashes and the stress of technology.  The end was that Baby Boomers grew up and lost responsibility and that people who grew up in the 1990s were hopefully sent off with well wishes as they entered independence and adulthood.  The experience of going through the 1990s was a tumultuous sequence of entertainment and the comforts and glorification of technology, which mainly ended up leading to bittersweet-ness and nostalgia from the past.

     

References:

Gordon, Dee. The Little Book of the 1960s. No Location, No Publisher, 2011.

Schwartz, Richard Alan. The 1990s. New York, Facts on File, 2008.

Genreal Psychology

Post by Thursday classical conditioning and operant conditioning, including the difference between the two types of conditioning. What seems like a more influential consequence to you personally... Positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, or negative punishment?  Why?  Include a personal experience of your a conditioned response to a particular environmental trigger and tell us how you learned that response.


Conditioning - ^Special^ ^Needs^

Classical & Operant Conditioning

Classical conditioning is when multiple factors trigger a response in a living thing and become associated.

Operant conditioning is when outside factors are figured in the minds of living things in order that they make personal applications with it concerning something that matters in their life.

The Difference
The difference is that classical conditioning is more naturally *hypnotic and operant conditioning is more "handmade."  (*I realize in my 1st module review, I was told that conditioning of some sort, operant or dog salivating, was not hypnotic, but I was wondering again if it could be said it was in a natural way, instead.  I'm not sure if the class knows.)


My Punishment/Reinforcement Preference

To me, positive punishment seems the most appropriate.  You enter a person's life yourself sincerely and judge them honestly as a person, rather than
positive reinforcement messing around giving them distracting presents out of nowhere,
negative reinforcement taking away healthy/necessary challenges to build strength over for later,
or negative punishment taking away something special that they shouldn't have to give up for this.


My Experience

When I moved from the Fort Lauderdale (SE FL) area to Jacksonville (NE FL,) I was 5 years old.  I used to just stand there unable to think or concentrate, when we were given directions to put papers in certain shelves, I remember.  In preschool, I was very much at home and everything made sense.  I realized that each of these cities in East Coast Florida were very different.

Personal Evangelism

My Response to a Poster on the Assignment of Evangelizing Children

Organized Activities

You made me think more of when I went to youth ralleys in  junior high and high school.  I thought they were overly modern and a shock, but if everyone else wants that might as well enjoy what I can.

As kids, I remember we had field day, which was about teamwork and physical activity, also did it at Catholic schools.

I remember vacation Bible school, too, and that was great.  I was probably 11 years old.  We made a bottle with liquids that separate, red and off-white, and when you shake it it mixes together, representing the Red Sea I think.  I remember singing songs and the teachers couldn't sing, like "The Lord told Noah to build him an arky arky…"

Personal Evangelism

Assignment:

In your opinion and based on your reading and study, what are some of the key do's and do-not's of working with children?

My Work:

Resources for Children

The Start of My Understanding of Life

When I was about 3, I remember being in a religious or educational office and seeing a model of a baby in a womb, and I knew it was a fresh generation of kids who were cuter and fresher than mine.  It seemed like my life went down the drain.  Later on, I remember [omitted] flirting with [omitted] but with me being more impersonal, but I took it personally though do not believe it was anything to do with a difference of race than flat out prejudice, "out with the old and in with the new."  I think this was a beautiful experience and way of learning about life.  I would teach my children about sex in a good way since it's not the 1980s.

My First Religious Experience

My first memory of religion that made a lasting impression was the preschool teachers somehow acting like I would do what Jesus did someday, dying on a cross, if I was worth anything, like we all do it.  I was 3.  I told my family, and the preschool teacher acted all stuck up like she said she "hears through walls" and I juggled that thought.  No one cared I was scared and on the inside was feeling bad.  I guess I had to "put up with it," in addition to "solving my own problems."  I've told people to impress them but did not get much of a response, like they were unimpressed.  I saw on TV this year that in the old days Central Florida crucified a bunch of African Americans.  I would not recommend repeating this wayward experience.

School and Music

One of the biggest things in humanity is the creation of maybe more advanced school and music for the purpose of Christianity.  It still fascinates me.  A lot of art for people is religious, too.  I recommend this miracle.  I wanted to be a singer when I was 7, and my aunt gave me some Wee Sing books and tapes.  My mom always played them in the car, including when we went to pick up my dad from work.  I knew them all well.  One was religious.  A lot of people my age go all ditzy when they think of songs like, "Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the Lord, red and yellow, black and white..."  The Protestant church seems to have the best overall quality of literature, like those things we read in high school.  I liked the picture books and special Bibles for children.  The art was good, and I wanted to see which one I wanted to be.  I recommend doing things like this growing up.

Purity

Children have been acclaimed for their pure love, at least for Caucasians or Aryans etc.  It's like they're little angels, sweet and innocent, and people wonder about what could go wrong.  The text says we deserve death if we are not seen as 100% perfect, like if we accidentally do something.  Children need to know about how people discriminate this way.  Though the text says we die for sin, we are saved by Jesus.  Children like to talk a lot.  Sometimes, that's considered bad, and sometimes it's considered attractive! the same thing can be considered a life sin for some children and something that attracts people for other children.  I recommend that we remember about children in our lives, that children are special and we want everything to go a certain way.  Protestants sound good with religion.  My mom got down and did religion with me at home, too.

"Do's and Don't's"

Public Schools

We should not put children in religious schools necessarily because public schools are more like the real world and are more comfortable.  Though, traditionally, they looked down on you in Bible school for knowing you went to a public school, even if it was for money reasons.  Most Catholic schools are a waste in that they let the kids talk out of turn and don't teach well...

Traditions

- We should maybe try some of the rosary rather than doing it all in one sitting.  I did that at my church, and they seemed prejudiced and racist, a few years ago.

- Sure, we remember Jesus in the winter for Christmas and into the New Year.  Advent is a good opportunity to be religious, singing Christmas songs that include religious ones.  I recommend some children's religious songs, too.  I didn't get to perform it much on stage, but it's fun for the normal kids.

- We could discuss our favorite saints or verses in the Bible, but kids usually get interested in that themselves.

Remember the Easter Bunny!

🐇

General Psychology

Christina Barrett - February 22, 2019
PSY 201 N2 - General Psychology (Online) - Professor Gardner - Module Review #2
Mixed Race

I disagree that the book does not address mixed race and notice they avoid important values and processes that are important to mixed race.  One reason it is important is because the US seems to mostly have mixed race and it's the leading world power or used to be.  Scientists could try to "fix" mixed race babies with their technology from stem cell research.  What if we were all striving to be twins?  Twins strive to be different.  People parent different races differently, even mixed race families.  All humans adapt, and so that is also involved.  Evolution is always a possiblity.  Who knows how long it takes, in different ways, too?  People survive by natural selection, and people find mixed race people to be cleaned out, it sees.  Babies do have something with their mom but warm up to strangers after the newborn/infantile stage.  People like to mate different kinds of people, like if they want someone "tall, dark, and handsome" or "dumb and blonde."  People can't tap into the resources that other cultures possess, and it gets in the way of mixed race people.  For instance, rats can get smarter living in a maze.  We share genes, still, over the fascination with chimps possibly sharing a lot with humans more than prettier animals.  Chimps look like the opposite of the human ideal but still are fascination as gorillas, for example, or like walruses or sea manatees.  Gender differences pervade, but it may somewhat be cultural.  People are better off getting a social workout than being "alone in a crowd."  Sometimes, dark cultures have fair people, too, fairer even than some Northern Europeans.  We take time to mature and therefore need to have a chance to play to our strengths.  We mature in different ways.  Some people are diagnosed with mental disorders, and mixed race was the poster image for this.  Also, learning to feel good before puberty and then the following adolescence might be a way to be okay.  It would be interesting to see what other races feel, like how other animals feel.  We become adults and people start to discriminate unassuming people of mixed race, which could mean even Sourthern Europeans.  We age in different ways, too.  The Bible says, “You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material." Leviticus 19:19.  Even the Bible needs more explaining.  Maybe, everything in it isn't true, and it also says, "No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord." Deuteronomy 23:2.  Jesus changed the Old Testament arleady for us.  However, we also know we do not marry into the throne in the US.  We are allowed to marry who we want, but every race seems to have a problem and not match if it isn't white and Caucasian.  A lot of the US is probably becoming more mixed.  Southern Europeans are racist because they are upset they are a second separate race from Northern and Middle Europeans.  They try to exclude other races that are not all white and Caucasian, even if you used to be treated well.  People went ahead in fear and accepted Southern Europeans over Asians.  The Middle East has been labeled Caucasian, too, now.  It might be where all or most cultures come from, other than "black" African cultures.  Even Native American indians who either have European or Asian are accepted, and they are part Australoid I heard.  I also heard Polynesians and other islands probably are Asian and Australoid, and Indonesians are all Asian, Taiwanese.  It is hard to find for sure how old Europe is, other than at Wikipedia, and I've heard more than one thing.  The textbook probably does not see mixed race as an issue.  They act like it is going to come up eventually, but, like I've been explaining here, people usually don't make the best of it.  It's interesting half black half white people have such fair hair sometimes. Half Asians, however, usually possess strong Asian features to different amounts, sometimes look all Asian maybe.  Mixed Asians might be left out socially, in ways full Asians aren't.  People are probably stuck with why they don't accept mixed Asians like other mixed races.  I personally admire people mixed with more than one non-European race.  They often look more white, I think, than other mixes.  Mixed race, therefore, is not a sin.  The book hints at mixed race being important subconsciously.  People often say someting is racist if there are no African Americans in a movie or something, though.  Maybe, they need to talk about it with a psychologist/counselor.  One freedom people do not have is to be free racially somethow, but people can be racist and get away with it and things like threatening their well-being culturally in the US or Middle and Northern Europe.  I've seen dark non-Europeans get upset at whites/Europeans, usually African Americans, not so much bad from Middle Easterners, save for the militial concentration hovering there from the US while I was growing up and knew about as a preteen, onto adulthood.  The Bible also does not find it very important, maybe something exciting to play with.  I know Jewish people are strict on marriage, like from The Fiddler on the Roof.  So, mixed race is an even touchier topic than racism, as no one gives a care what happens to them.  It's always about pure non-white/Caucasian races when racism becomes important, but it becomes important for other people to make fun of mixed race people or bump them off if they are not perfect, like if they are a little sad or a little overweight or something.  It's too bad.  There is a forum called Stormfront that is a good outlet for people who care about how white they are.  Mixed race just never seems to come up.  It's hard on South Asians who look whiter than North Asians but maybe not as old of a culture.  If the textbook knew it was hard on mixed white / South Asians, it might make more sense.  So, who is the racial outcast?  Native American indians and Polynesians or mixed white South Asians?

Intermediate College Composition

Student's Post

Jacqueline D Hicks

The Toulmin argument was developed by Stephen Toulmin, a modern English philosopher.  It consists a six part model and has been useful to many people in explaining the essential parts of an argument. The first three parts are present in every argument they are the claim, the data, and the warrant. The other three parts are used as needed to strengthen the argument these parts are the backing, the rebuttal, and the qualifier. The claim itself is followed by the support which is information to back up the claim, the unspoken part of the argument, the assumption that the author hopes the audience shares is the warrant. The other three parts of the Toulmin are basically there to help the first three parts if needed, the backing supports the warrant if suppose the audience does not agree. The rebuttal is the unless part of the argument basically why or why not and the qualifier demonstrates the probability of the argument.

My Optional Reply

You're right, the 1st 3 parts sound like enough "from the horse's mouth."  I say so because you point out the last 3 are just for if people don't agree with your popular topic claims.

Student's Post

Tyler Nicholas Tice

Stephen Toulmin created a method of argument which many view as an informal method of reasoning. He created six parts which collectively make the Toulmin Model and consist of: the claim, data, warrant, backing, rebuttal and qualifier. The first three parts, claim, data and warrant, are existent in every argument. In proper writing formats, all three of these parts are typically seen within the first paragraph. The last three parts, the backing, rebuttal and qualifier, are used in the Toulmin Model to strengthen the claim, data and warrant. Having read To Kill a Mockingbird recently, the classic courtroom debates come to mind. Atticus Finch represents Tom Robinson by presenting his claim that Mr. Robinson is innocent of the charges made against him based on the data Mr. Finch possessed, along with the wit of jury persuasion he attempted to communicate. I’m sure that this scenario could be further broken down into a detailed example of all six parts of the Toulmin Model, but I think you all can understand the point. This model closely follows our psychological behavior in a compelling argument and makes logical sense why, when executed well, presenters using the Toulmin Model typically accomplish their goal.

My Optional Reply

I agree that you insinuate from that story I did in English I in 8th grade that it has shown everyone that you can adjust the facts to apply to appeal to white people too lazy to sift through the possible sincerity of African Americans over white/Caucasian people.

Intermediate College Composition

(I could not find as much on the Toulmin argument in the book and used 3 online resources, which had some overlapping construction.  I finally summed up the lacking information provided by the textbook, as well as the paragraph required.)

The point of the Toulmin argument is to take cacophony and jarring fights to turn into an effective argument divided into 6 specific parts.  Those parts are divided into 2, the 1st 3 laying out the debate and the last 3 forcing the audience to agree.

Triad #1

"laying it down the line"

The Claim

The claim is your point.

It could be one of 3 of the following:

1. a fact

2. "passing judgment"

3. making a declaration of what should be or happen

Grounds

The grounds people love to come out, state the facts that prove your claim and introduce the beginning of a debate.

It could be one of 3 of the following:

1. statistics or facts

2. a reliable source

3. deductions

Warrant

The warrant is stating relevant significances.

It can be one of the 4 following:

1. Ethos - the ethics, like in relation to how credible and esteemed a person is

2. Logos - more impersonal credibility, facts, that can also deal with people

3. Pathos - the feeling emphasis, to appeal to an argument

4. Values - just what it says, things that people believe to be popular

Triad #2

The Fight/Debate

Backing

It simply helps your argument by answering a popular question.

Qualifier

This part of the argument is sincerity, saying how far the argument goes but saying how far it doesn't have to go.

Rebuttal

The author finally addresses the opposing views in question.

The Textbook

Claim - Stating the main idea of the debate.

Support - Proof of the claim.

Warrant - Stating why it is true.

Type of Claim - Being more specific and realistic in accomplishing something.

Paragraph Understanding

     The Toulmin argument is a very effective way of delivering a debate, especially in the form of writing.  It consists of usually 6 parts: the claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal.  You state the made idea and back it up with facts and give the facts credibility by appealing to people.  You start off proving yourself in the 1st 3 parts, and by the 2nd 3 parts you start the "fight" or persuasive lecture/speech.  It may be confusing and unclear, but it is very amusing.