1. What's the Matter With Creationism? by: Katha Pollitt
2. Most of the problems we face today involve science. As a country we may not be up for these challenges. How could we when most of us think it's all the plan of some invisible man that lives in the clouds? If it's all god's plan, who are we to interfere? It's ridiculous that so many adults still believe in this. If we can't come to terms with such simple concept as evolution, we will not have the cognitive capacity to battle global warming or world hunger.
3. a. Consonance: Almost every scientist on earth would have to be
engaged in a fraud so complex and extensive it involved every field from
archaeology, paleontology, geology and genetics to biology, chemistry and
physics. Repetition of "ology" creates a vortex that draws the reader in.
b. Imagery: And yet this massive concatenation of lies and delusion
is so full of obvious holes that a pastor with a Bible-college degree or a
homeschooling parent with no degree at all can see right through it. This gives a vague picture for the reader to see this sentence in their mind to help drive it home.
c. Sarcasm: A flute discovered in southern Germany is 43,000
years old? Not bloody likely. Katha uses this to demonstrate how silly it all is.
d. Tone/Diction: The tone/diction Katha uses in this article is almost humor, it would be humor, if it what she was saying wasn't so damn tragic to us as a species and a country.
e. Analogy: He thinks questions like these primarily elicit
affirmations of identity, not literal convictions; declaring your belief in
creationism is another way of saying you’re a good Christian. Katha uses this because the two statements don't actually mean the same thing, but almost half of our population think they do.
4. I chose this piece because it didn't infuriate me from lack of common sense as the rest of my choices seemed to do. Most of the authors of these articles seem as though they didn't have any brothers or sisters, and got everything they ever whined for from their parents.
2 comments:
I enjoyed your reasoning of choosing this article over the others because "most of the authors of these articles seem as though they didn't have any brothers or sisters, and got everything they ever whined for from their parents."
I have to say, I entirely agree with this viewpoint. I did however believe that the article I did my rhetorical analysis on (http://www.salon.com/2011/11/10/the_science_of_objectification/singleton/) was in fact written much more objectively, and therefore, in my opinion, more appropriately, than a lot of these nagging, "whiny" opinion pieces. It would be interesting to read an article on why certain authors seem to find it necessary to beat information and their opinion into readers instead of simply stating the facts. Being a psychology major myself, I'm sure it would have a lot to do with what you mentioned in your original comment: parents spoiling the [insert expletive here] out of them.
I understand where you're coming from, and I can see this article as being just as nagging or biased as the rest of them. I like that it's fairly short and to the point though.
Post a Comment