Argumentation #3: Reality Bites

Not everyone is perfect. Being perfect isn't real. Should we wait for a super hero to come save this world and this messed up society or should we keep moving and do something about it? Our current president isn't perfect at all, we cannot expect perfection from someone in charge neither because no one is perfect. According to George Eliott, an English writer of the Victorian era she believes that the world should just move on and not waist their time waiting on someone that has perfection to save everyone.

Donald Trump isn't perfect he makes plenty of mistakes and that's part of being a human. Like flaws that exist in our political system now. Even though our system isn't the best they still have progressed. They cause many people to open up and stand up for what they believe in. For example they've caused black lives matter to become a larger empowerment and an inspiration to others more than it already was. It also caused the times up movement to start speaking up about sexual harassment. If Obama was still in office it wouldn't be known or as large. If we were to continue making mistakes and learning from them maybe the world will slowly become better but it does not take perfection to save this messed up world. No one is perfect.

Life isn't easy and you have to struggle through it.It doesn't matter how good you are this world is messed up and there's no time to wait for someone to save it. If we had life so easy and we could have everything and anything then what's the point in life? Why are you even living? Struggle in this world is what we take and learn from its who we are and what we want to be better then. It doesn't even matter if you think superman will someday save this world we live in because its not going to happen we have to continue moving forward and do it our selves.

Argumentation #2: Haunting

Emily Dickinson was an american poet. Although she lived with her well known family members who were all about the community she was dark and very isolated. Emily claims that haunting of the mind is far worse than any physical haunt. Which I disagree with because haunting comes from learning and experience it can't be something that you're born with or just naturally comes. Society has an influence on young generations and corrupts them at a young age. You cannot come out of the womb being having fears already society takes a toll on you.

When you come into this world you are innocent and don't expect any fear, you don't even know what it is. Let's say when you watch a scary movie you now have all of these paranormal things in your head and now you have a fear of whatever which was physically created not mentally. Before you watched that movie you knew nothing about it but the things society does puts things in your head to shape you. The mind doesn't make itself doesn't create its own fears it is influenced on what you physically do and how it effects you.

What if you are afraid of a killer or murderer? You wouldn't be afraid of them because you wouldn't know they were killers unless they influenced you physically. They can either show you on t.v shows or movies maybe you can even witness it yourself. If you become scared of what you see or hear that is because the haunting came from the outside. You aren't born automatically thinking that a person is a killer you have to be able to learn things like that.

Physical haunting doesn't come naturally it comes from influences. Being scared of something cannot be naturally absorbed. Haunting is a cause and effect thing. Something or someone would have to cause a haunting to have a physical effect on you.

Argumentation #1: Speak Hard Words

“Speak what you think today in hard words and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today.” This is said by Ralph Waldo Emerson. He was a poet, a lecturer and an essayist, and he led the transcendentalist movement during the middle of the nineteenth century. It means say what you have to say and say it with power and confidence. Also when you say something stick to it and don't change up. I support what he has to say but I also refute with what he has to say. Yes you can speak in hard words again and again but you may think differently in the future. I've learned from experience,and the holocaust.

The holocaust is one of the examples of not speaking hard words. There's a quote by Martin Niemoller which says "first they came for the socialist and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist... Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me." which is he didn't care for the others in the holocaust until it happened to him and he contradicted himself. He repeatedly said that they came for them one by one but after they came for him he changed his word. He said one thing with power and then changed it up when it happened to him.

My personal experience is when I was determined to earn straight A's for the semester. I was turning in all of my assignments doing my best in classes, studying for tests. I really wanted to do better that semester. Later on towards the end I stopped studying, stopped understanding, that all eventually ended to some of my grades not being A's. I spoke hard words with confidence in the beginning and I later on didn't stick to what I said and I contradicted myself.

One day you may stick to something you believe in and another you may not think the same and contradict yourself. You may say everything with power and passion but there might be a time where you don't think the same. I'm saying this from my personal experience.

Assertion Analysis #10: City Upon a Hill

Puritans came to America to find and practice religious freedom. Sometime in the 1500's England had broken away from a roman catholic church. When that was done they built a new church and they were all forced to follow the church and the religious beliefs coming from there, they had to follow the church. The puritans believed in one's participation in the sacraments can't effect one's salvation. John Winthorp says that we should be like a city upon a hill, that everyone and everything is watching us all the time. He says because of that if we do wrong with God or we do not worship him he will not help us or do any good towards us. Once they do something wrong everyone will start criticizing them and speaking bad upon the Puritans. Some techniques and devices Winthorp uses are syntax and pathos to make his audience fear into them and scare them. But he also uses a whole sentence to not allow his audience to stop and think about what he is saying and ask questions but this is his form of writing. He's a puritan himself but he's speaking to everybody he wants to give them knowledge and make sure they follow him and don't do wrong. Him not leaving any room for the audience to think builds up more fear. Other speakers or influencers use this type of writing to also make them feel like they have power and to get a point across with out any questioning. That's how he tries to get his point across.

Assertion Analysis #8: Wooden Leg

Wooden leg was from a tribe called Northern Cheyenne and he was a warrior. He was not only called wooden leg others called him Eats from his hand. He's known from fighting at the Battle of Little Bighorn and also from walking long distances. He talks about how caring the Native Americans are towards the earth and nature. They like to move around and through nature not in an orderly fashion way. "It may be cut off, but it should not be uprooted." It's like saying you can take the girl out of the hood but you can't take the hood out of the girl, there is always going to be hood in her. Which in his words is that the trees and grass he refers to having spirits can be cut but you'll still have your roots but if you don't have anymore roots and you get cut there's no coming back from that you cannot grow anymore. Some devices that are being used are imagery and metaphors. He uses imagery by saying "the trees and grass have spirits." Which causes us to imagine grass and trees literally having spirits. By saying Native culture may or may not go on in the future is how he uses the metaphoric device.

Assertion Analysis #7: Cheif Joseph

The native americans culture is very uplifting. Native american culture is brought down generations by languages and stories they have to be passed down. Native americans culture is them always sticking together and having traditions, languages, and ceremonies these are what makes the native culture who they are. A chief named Joseph is from a band or tribe named Wal-lam-wat-kain. He wrote a quote about the struggle of being in the tribe and the type of things that he has done and sacrificed for that tribe. Chief Joseph says that he’s tired of his people getting killed and he’s just sick and tired of fighting and he wants it to end. His children from the tribe are running away and getting lost without any blankets, food or shelter. Because he is the leader of the tribe or band it’s his duty to care for his kids and look for them because none of them should be left behind. Natives culture doesn’t involve spreading out and leaving each other behind they’re a community. He’s tired of people dying and he wants it to all stop and he just can’t take it anymore so he eventually gives up and fights no more. Some devices that he used are seriousness, anaphoras, and he’s constantly making an anologies in this quote. He’s not being satiric because people are dying and that’s not something to joke about. His people are starving and cold and he won’t go down without a fight but eventually he became sick and tired of fighting for them all the time, he gets tired of looking for them and making sure they’re okay but he’s tired so he says “hear me, my Chief’s! I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever.“ Key word foever that means he is done.

Assertion Analysis #6: John Lame Deer

Culture is a very important thing for Native Americans because of their language and it is what keeps them united. Language is what also makes them happy and it's what creates new generations. John Lame Deer is a Lakota holy man, a memeber of the Heyoka society and was the grandson of the head man. He acknowledges that natives were too uncivilized. Lame Deer says that we weren't civilized until the white people came to put some sense in us like prisons. They didn't have any laws, locks,keys there was no thieves and when someone was in need they would provide for them but now that the white came they became civilized. They became civilized because now humans are being judged by their wealth, Now they have delinquents,and now they cheat each other. Deer uses satiric terms throughout the paragraph, for example he says "We had no written laws laid down, no lawyers, no politicians, therefore we were not able to cheat and swindle one another." He says that sarcasticly because he really means that with out all of the laws, prisions and things the white people brought they were equal and they didn't judge each other. But now that they're now "civilized" they have been torn apart.