November 24, 2009
What Happens to the Self on Black Friday?
I remember the excitement of searching through advertisements and finding the best deals for Black Friday when I was a kid. My mother, sisters, and I would sit down and map out the options: what we wanted from each store, what time each store opened, and where the stores were in relation to each other. We would then make a strategic plan of where we would go in what order. The last Black Friday that we all went shopping as a family, I remember laughing with my sister, when the woman at the cash register sighed and said, “It’s been a long day.” It was 10 AM.
Since then, my mother has given up on Black Fridays. She was willing to go to the stores at 7 or 8 AM. She was reluctant to continue the family tradition when the sales started at 6 AM, and now things are just ridiculous. Many stores open at 4 or 5 AM, but the lines start way before that time. I braved Black Friday with one of my friends last year. We were surprised to find a huge line that wrapped around Best Buy when we arrived at 5 AM. Some of the people had been waiting there since midnight, when Best Buy employees handed out special passes to get the most desired items.
After hearing reports of people getting trampled to death at Walmart, I am also starting to wonder if the deals are worth it this year. I always went shopping just because I thought it was fun and exciting to get some of the good deals. However, my mother put it in perspective for me last year. I came home complaining about the rudeness of the other shoppers. People were pushing each other to get to the new movies for just $10 (on sale from $15). Do people really need to save $5 (or $20 if they were getting the 4 movie limit) so much that they lose sense of how they are acting?
I think that the way shoppers act on Black Friday relates back to identity. In particular, I thought about Goffman’s theory on the self. As a reminder to blog readers in my class, Goffman asserted that the self is circumstantial. The self that we “present” depends upon the current social situation. Goffman uses the term “script” to describe his idea of the variable self we present. In psychology, this term is taken up in much the same way. Scripts are one particular type of a schema, by which I mean a learned, internal representation of the world. An individual’s “scripts” are event schemas, as they represent the individual’s acquired beliefs about what normally happens in a given situation. For example, an individual could hold a script about a “first date.” This might include going to dinner, going to a movie, holding hands at the movie, etc.
The culturally dominant conceptualization of the Black Friday shopping event is one of rude, crazy people running around everywhere doing everything they can to get good deals. Thus, many individuals hold this script about how people behave on Black Friday. A person is likely to act on that script because he or she sees that mode of action as the “normal thing to do.”
Scripts vary across individuals. I always used to think of shopping on Black Friday as a fun, family activity. Maybe, that’s why I am less likely to act like “the crazy holiday shopper” commonly portrayed in the media. Perhaps other individuals can try to change the norm by acting polite and more calm. Maybe these actions would change the common script of Black Friday shopping. Another alternative is to opt out of Black Friday shopping like my mom and go the online shopping route!
Posted by ajargy at 06:43 PM | Comments (0)
November 19, 2009
What's At Stake? See for Yourself.
You have just seen the faces of eight men who lost their life to Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) and psychopathy. The first seven men were murdered by the last man pictured- Jeffrey Dahmer.
When one individual suffers from ASPD and/or psychopathy, the lives of many individuals are affected. The pictures shown above represent just one tragic example.
In my presentation, I want to try to give a sense of urgency to the issue. Perhaps the use of photos of victims will be useful. My group members felt that this would be a persuasive way to show the importance of preventing ASPD. Audience members tend to wonder "what is at stake?" when they evaluate arguments. I want it to be clear that lives are at stake.
In a way, the use of images such of as these constitutes an audience. I can go around telling everyone that "prevention of ASPD and psychopathy is very important," yet certain individuals have more power to bring about the prevention of ASPD. These individuals are researchers studying ASPD and other psychopathology. These researchers have the potential to identify the mechanisms in which an individual develops an antisocial or psychopathic self.
Logically then, I will be using this particular group of professionals as my audience in my presentation. I will say that I am speaking at The American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting. I will speak in the section about new research. This event is the perfect opportunity to present my argument that researchers must examine the interaction of sociological and biological risk factors when studying ASPD. In much of the research I read, the focus is still on other type of factor or the other. However, I propose that we cannot separate the two factors if we want to truly understand how ASPD and psychopathy develop.
I have come to this conclusion from the research I did at the beginning of the semester for my inquiry paper. I will include some of that information in my presentation, so that the audience members understand how I have developed my argument. I also plan to include an example that shows how this idea of "interaction" works in practice when conducting research; it if important that researchers understand what I am asking them to do and how to incorporate this type of information into a study they may have already started.
Overall, I am still developing my presentation. If you have any ideas, I would really appreciate your comments!
Posted by ajargy at 05:49 PM | Comments (2)
November 16, 2009
Tips for Writing In the Sciences
In this blog, I would like to discuss the article The Science of Scientific Writing. My English teacher posted this article as a resource for students who will be doing writing in the sciences during their careers. I read this article, and I think that it has some important key points for me and many others in this class.
In this article, the authors first admits that scientific writing is often difficult to read. However, they argue that just because the scientific material and concepts are complex, the writer can still present the material clearly. The authors argue that this clarity in expression does not just make the writing “sound better;” rather, it improves the quality of thought that the readers will achieve from the piece.
The authors suggest that scientific writers must present their argument with the reader in mind by thinking about the content and the reader’s expectations. This tip is not only useful to scientific writing, but rather it is useful for all fields. In this article, the writers explain that the readers interpret the piece as they read it. They give several tips for making the writer’s intended interpretations easier for readers to achieve. For example, they suggest dividing the information clearly into sections such as introduction, procedure, results, and discussion. This format is common in almost all of the articles that I read in both the hard sciences and the social sciences.
To summarize this article, I will cite this tip that the authors gave in large font: “Information is interpreted more easily and more uniformly if it is placed where most readers expect to find it.” They give many examples of how to carry out this tip. For example, they explain that the grammatical subject of a sentence should be close in structure to its verb. In addition, the authors explain how to use “the stress position” of a sentence to the writer’s advantage, meaning that the writer should put the most important material at points of synaptic closure. With a new understanding of stress positions, the authors offer their definition of a sentence that is “too long.” They state that “a sentence is too long when it has more viable candidates for stress positions than there are stress positions available.”
The authors also define the “topic position” of the sentence. They use this topic position, along with the stress position to describe the basic structure of a good sentence. A good sentence begins with the “backward-linking” old information in the topic position. The new information that should be emphasized appears in the stress position. This structure is the same theme/new format that we discussed in our English class already. Thus, this type of sentence structure is important for all types of writing. The authors of this article also suggest that the readers should be able to tell “whose story the passage it is” in a work. By putting the person, thing, or concept “whose story it is” in the topic position, writers can follow this tip.
Another important point in this article is that the readers expect the action of a sentence “to be articulated by the verb.” We have also discussed this point in our English class. For example, these authors explain that the use of passive voice causes the writer to lose control of the reader’s interpretive act. As the readers guess who is doing the action, the writer loses argumentative power.
The authors continually emphasis the distinction between simplification and clarification. They suggest that all writers can work to improve their clarity without “watering down” the scientific concepts in their work. Overall, this article was useful for laying out the interpretive clues readers derive from structures. Using this knowledge, writers can gain more control of the reader’s interpretation and more effectively communicate their message.
Posted by ajargy at 03:08 PM | Comments (1)
November 11, 2009
Let Me Point You In The Right Direction...
Today in my English class, we discussed CONSTITUTIVE RHETORIC: THE CASE OF THE PEUPLE QUEBECOIS by Maurice Charland. This article is relevant to the persuasive presentations we will be giving in a few weeks, as it deals with persuasion. Specifically, Charland cites the work of Kenneth Burke and Louis Althusser.
According to Burke, “identification” is a process that comes before persuasion. In other words, it is necessary that audience members identify with the views of the speaker if they are to enact what they are being asked to enact. Burke feels that the word “persuasion” is inappropriate, as it implies that individuals are free to change their actions. However, it is more the process of identification that causes us to change. Further, this identification often occurs instantly and unconsciously. Individuals see or hear arguments and may not even realize that they have identified with the argument. This process can be applied to the advertisements we brought into class on Monday. A magazine reader may spontaneously identify with the values in an ad. For example, a magazine reader may want to be “cool” and have a fun lifestyle like that of Ashton Kutcher. Because Ashton is holding a camera, an individual may want to later purchase the camera. The person may not even realize that it was their identification with the values in the ad that led them to take that action.
Burke also suggests that we cannot just forget the groups and knowledge structures that the audience members already subscribe to. That is, we must not assume each audience member is a blank slate. This point is very important for our presentations in class. We must consider our audience carefully and try to appeal to the ideologies they already hold.
In the article, the author explains Althusser’s “constitution of the subject.” Our teacher explained this process as calling upon your audience. Although the individual and their ideologies already exist, we must draw out the aspects of the audience that will change their actions. This part of the article reminds me of the argumentative essay we read earlier in the class about racial profiling. In this paper, the author writes specifically to conservatives about the negatives of racial profiling. In this essay, the writer made assumptions about values of the audience members. The author did not attempt to change these values; he highlighted the values that were relevant to his argument. By doing so, the author is saying to his readers “you are already an individual who believes racial profiling is wrong, and I am just showing you how.”
In the article, Charland uses the example of The White Paper. This document encouraged individuals in Quebec to seek independence from Canada. This paper redefined the residents of Quebec as a different type of people, who were not really Canadians; they were the kind of people that warrant a separate country. Interestingly, others who opposed this movement argued that no Quebec people existed. I was surprised to read that this argument was made through this naming of people.
I believe that the key point of the article we read is summarized in this quote: “What is significant in constitutive rhetoric is that it positions the reader towards political, social, and economic action in the material world and it is in this positioning that its ideological character becomes significant.” Overall then, it seems like getting someone to act is as easy as getting the individual to think that you are pointing them in the right direction. I will have to keep this in mind when designing my presentation.
Posted by ajargy at 09:35 PM | Comments (1)
November 09, 2009
An Example of An Attention-Grabbing Blog
I have been closely following the blogs of many of my peers in my English class. For this blog, I would like to talk about the elements of Lauren’s blog that stand out to me as effective and attention-grabbing.
When I first looked at Lauren’s blog, I noticed the large title “Blogging my way to identity…” This large title draws the attentions of readers. The title positions the blog as an ongoing process; Lauren is blogging to learn more about her identity. She is making the blog something of her own, rather than just another requirement in a class. I even think that other people who are not in our English class would be drawn to Lauren’s blog by her main heading. When I looked back at my blog, my title just says “ajargy’s blog.” After analyzing Lauren’s blog, I think that I will change my main heading to something a little more enticing.
Lauren’s individual blog titles are also quite attention-grabbing. Many of the titles are questions, such as “Hitler: Can he convince you?” and “Halloween: Slutty Nurse, Slutty Cop or Just Plain Slut?” These titles make the readers wonder how Lauren is going to answer. They also directly communicate with the audience; with these types of titles, Lauren is directly asking her blog readers “What do you think?” Another aspect of Lauren’s titles is that they are generally short and effective. For instance, “Don’t tell me what to believe” is a succinct title that draws the attention of readers. It makes the audience question “Who told her to believe something, and what did they tell her to believe?” In addition, Lauren’s titles often use attention-grabbing words, such as “Hitler,” “feminist,” “slut,” and “cancer.” Someone who came across Lauren’s blog on the Internet would surely be drawn into reading some of these posts.
Stylistically, Lauren spaces her paragraphs effectively. Without the spacing, the blogs would appear lengthier. The spacing makes the blog look manageable to read. Also, the paragraphs are divided in a way that helps the reader understand where Lauren is going with the blog. For example, in “Hilter: Can he convince you?” Lauren starts the body paragraphs with signifiers of what she is going to discuss. For example, paragraph three starts with “The context,” and the next paragraphs start with “The Man” and “The Propaganda.” The use of these words adds style and clarity to Lauren’s blog.
Overall, Lauren’s blog is effective in grabbing the attention of readers. She uses interesting titles and effective spacing of paragraphs to draw the reader into conversation with her. I will definitely be keeping up with her posts this semester!
Posted by ajargy at 02:19 PM | Comments (1)
November 05, 2009
Tiffany & Co. Keys: The Key to Happiness?
I was looking through some of the advertisements in my magazines and I found one that is persuasive to me. The advertisement is from the November 2009 issue of Vogue. The advertisement is for “Tiffany Keys.” The keys are a new line of charms that Tiffany & Co. has been promoting a lot recently.
The advertisement is spread across two pages. This fact in itself implies that the keys are valuable and important. When you are flipping pages in the magazine, you will definitely see the keys. The advertisement mainly consists of pictures of the key charms. The readers see 10 keys, of different shapes, colors, and sizes. Some of the keys are silver; some are gold, and others are platinum. Some of the keys are made almost completely of diamonds, while others have a few diamond accents or no diamonds at all. Two of the keys have “Tiffany & Co.” etched right into them. All of this variation suggests that the keys are unique and there is one for everyone. In addition, the keys are relatively large. They are all shown bigger than they actually are in reality. This blown-up view allows the readers to see them clearly and admire the detailed ornamentation.
In the corner of the advertisement, a block of space is devoted to the words “Tiffany & Co.,” which are written in bold, capital letters. The words are in a square with the traditional Tiffany blue color. This part of the ad reminds viewers that these keys are part of Tiffany’s tradition of producing the “finest” jewelry; also, if you purchase one of the keys, it will be delivered in one of those cute Tiffany blue boxes with the white bow.
In addition to these visuals, there some verbal arguments are provided. In the top part of the left page the ad reads: “Tiffany Keys: An intriguing invitation. A revealing discovery. A promise of adventure. A whispered romance. A question answered. A secret kept.” This little verbal argument reads like a poem. It flows smoothly and sounds elegant. All of phases included are associated with keys’ functional use. For example, when I hear “a revealing discovery” and think about keys, I imagine using a key to open a treasure chest. The words do more than just describe the function of a real key, though. They argue “this is what this Tiffany key can do for you!” For example, maybe if you buy a Tiffany key, you will have “a whispered romance.” All of the phrases are very whimsical and fantasy-like. Tiffany is sure promising a lot if you buy one of their keys!
Finally, Tiffany lists their number and website in very small print on the side of the page. I think that this ad is somewhat persuasive. The words on the page are strong and memorable. Also, one must consider the rhetorical context of this argument. The ad is placed in Vogue, so readers think that buying a key will make them fashionable and trendy. Also, the fact that the keys are enlarged and placed against a white background suggests that they are beautiful enough to stand alone; Tiffany doesn’t want to show their keys on models, who would draw attention away from the jewelry. Overall, the ad makes me want to buy a Tiffany key, until I actually go on their website and look at the prices anyway.
Now that I have figured out how to include photos, here is the ad for your viewing pleasure:
Posted by ajargy at 11:00 PM | Comments (2)
Triumph of the Will and Visual Arguments
This week in my English class, we watched Triumph of the Will. This movie highlighted the progress of the National Socialist Party in Germany. In class we analyzed the movie, and identified some of the key claims.
One of the claims in the movie was that Germans should be proud of Germany. The film makes this argument through both verbal and visual evidence. For example, the audience sees flags waving and other patriotic symbols. There is a lot of celebration going on, so the audience sees smiling, laughing faces and fireworks. Women in traditional German clothing celebrate the harvest. In terms of visuals, representatives argue that it takes a long time to make something great, but they are well on their way.
This brings me to the next main claim: that the German people are bringing Germany into a “new era.” This was explicitly stated in the film. In addition, Hilter tells the men who emerge from the youth camps that they need to be “peace-loving,” yet “strong.” They have to be brave and self-sacrificing. These are all admirable qualities. This argument is made through visuals as well. For example, the aerial shot of the peaceful city at the beginning of the film is very powerful in bringing about this message. This shot was the first of its kind; no one had yet filmed an airplane from another plane. Thus, I’m sure this ground-breaking shot was even more persuasive to people at the time. This shot serves as another argument that progress is being made in Germany. The audience also sees the extreme organization in Germany, both in the youth camps and in the “soliders” that emerge from them.
A final important claim in the movie was that Hitler is a loved and trusted leader who is unifying the people of Germany. The audience sees masses of people flocking after Hilter and saluting him. The people are somewhat hysterical. When Hilter came in, it reminded me of people screaming over The Beatles, which is exactly what my English teacher also said it reminded her of. The audience also sees the unity in the youth camps, where the boys are horsing around, playing games, working together, eating together, and even washing each other’s backs. These visual arguments are quite persuasive.
Overall, the film uses several argumentative elements. It relies on the audience’s belief system about what is good. Generally, people see progress, jobs, and food as good. As I mentioned, the people are described in terms of qualities most admire, such as peace-loving, brave, self-sacrificing, etc. The film also uses comparison, when one representative says that great things take time. They have been working for a long time and will continue to work to make Germany great. Finally, the film uses cause and effect, by arguing that The Nationalist Socialist Party is causing all of the progress, increased jobs, happiness, and celebration that the audience sees in the movie.
The movie is persuasive both in its visual and verbal arguments. To me, the visual arguments were more powerful. It is easy to say that “the boys in the youth camps are like families,” but to see the boys washing each other’s backs and playing together happily is much more convincing. In my first year writing class, we talked a lot about visual arguments. In this class, we discussed how people believe things more that they actually see themselves. People think that images are less biased and altered. People tend to believe that you can “say” anything you want, but photos or video recordings are hard evidence; most individuals think about the writers behind the words in an essay, but fail to take into account the photographer behind the image. One must think about all the ways the photos can be altered, and the fact that the photos were also subjectively set up by an individual. I’m sure we will discuss this in the new few weeks in my current English class as well.
Posted by ajargy at 12:24 PM | Comments (1)
October 29, 2009
The Interaction of Biological and Societal Theories to Explain Psychopathy
When I first started writing about psychopathy, I felt that that social factors and biological factors influenced development of the psychopathic self. From my previous psychology courses, I have learned a lot about different types of risk factors for all types of psychological problems. The risk factors are typically divided into three groups- social or environmental, psychological, and biological. All of my professors emphasized the importance of looking at all of these factors.
I started thinking about the development of the psychopathic from the points of view of Lemert, Pfuhl, and Becker cited in The Self We Live By. All of these theorists claim that the deviant self arises through social interaction. Briefly, Becker’s labeling theory explains that a deviant person is first labeled deviant and then develops deviant motivations. Pfuhl explains that we internalize the viewpoint of others and have self-feelings in response to other’s reactions. The deviant internalizes the negative view of himself or herself that others project. Lemert explains that everyday rule breaking is primary deviance, whereas an individual who has internalized the motivations and role of a deviant is a secondary deviant. The secondary deviant forms due to negative societal reactions to the primary deviance.
When I first read these theories, I felt that they were useful. However, I felt that they were leaving out a big part of the story. I began to research some of the biological theories on psychopathic self formation. These theories talked about brain abnormalities and differences in temperament, which are innate aspects of personality that can be identified during infancy or childhood. Again, I felt that these theories alone could not explain the development of the psychopathic self.
At this point, I kept my initial view that social factors and biological factors together could explain psychopathic self development. After more research, I changed my view a little bit. I decided that social and biological risk factors interact to produce the psychopathic self. When trying to explain psychopathy, one cannot just add together the biological and the social risk factors. The interaction of these pieces is key.
I was not able to find many studies about the interaction of these factors in regards to psychopathy. I read one article that explained that a certain gene interacted with maternal rejection to predict depression among jail inmates. This study was interesting because it showed the importance of interaction.
In my convincing paper, I plan to argue that we need to do more of these types of studies to look for explanations for psychopathy. Perhaps there are important interactions between biological and societal risk factors that we are missing because we have either chosen to look at both pieces separately, or even just one piece.
Posted by ajargy at 02:57 PM | Comments (0)
October 27, 2009
Refuting Counterarguments
In this blog, I would like to examine some of the counterarguments I could possibly use in my convincing paper. I have revised my thesis somewhat, so I will restate it again.
My thesis will now be something like this: The environment of an individual interacts with the person’s inborn characteristics to produce a deviant identity. It takes a specific interaction of these factors to produce a psychopath. Although we will likely never find a relationship as simple as A +B = C, we need to do more research to identify the contributing factors and their interactions to produce the psychopath. With an increased understand of what factors lead to psychopathy, we can identify at risk children and develop preventative psychology treatment for them.
I spent a lot of time researching on the American Medical Association’s (AMA) website. I found a lot of information about the benefits of preventing illness before it begins at all, which is known as primary prevention. The AMA also discusses the positive aspects of stopping or reducing the effects of a disease that is starting to develop, which known as secondary prevention. This research is relevant to my topic, as individuals with psychopathy also suffer from Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD).
Just to give some background here, the American Psychiatric Assocation (APA) defines ASPD as “a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others." The diagnosis of ASPD is given to adults who fit this pattern of behavior, as indicated by three or more of the following symptoms: (1) noncompliance with social norms as indicated by repeatedly performing illegal acts, (2) deceitfulness characterized by lying or manipulation and coning of others, (3) impulsivity, (4) irritability and tendency to use aggression, (5) disregard for the safety of self or others, (6) irresponsibility, and (7) lack of remorse in the face of wrong-doing to others. As I mentioned, because ASPD is a medical illness, we can formulate steps to prevent it similar to other illnesses.
The AMA lists some of the barriers to implementation of prevention strategies. I believe that these barriers are similar to many of the counterarguments I could expect to hear. Below I list two of these arguments and the information that could be used to refute them. I am still working on sources for these arguements and deciding which counterarguments are must important to use in my paper.
1) According to the AMA there is “tension regarding causing unnecessary harm among healthy individuals.” For example, educating children about the negative results of drug use is also just educating children about drugs. In my case, children who are at risk for psychopathy would receive preventative treatment. Some may argue that this treatment could stigmatize the children, especially if the child’s peers were aware of the treatment. This could lead to a decrease in self esteem and increased social isolation for the children being treated – both of which could actually increase the likelihood of developing psychopathy. I would refute this claim by arguing that the preventative treatment could be confidential. In addition, educating children about how to form positive peer relationships, how to display warmth, and how to decrease their impulsivity (all of which might be components in a possible preventative treatment) would be positive for all children, even those who are completely not at risk for developing psychopathy.
2) The AMA states that another barrier to preventative treatment is “uncertainty of the effectiveness of preventive interventions generally and uncertainty of the relative effectiveness of offering different preventive services.” I would argue that once developed, preventative treatments should be tested extensively in various populations. After this testing, policy makers could implement the most effective treatments. Then, there would be little uncertainty of effectiveness.
Many of you reading my blog are also likely members of my intended audience for my next paper. Again, I welcome suggestions for my paper! Can you see any holes in my argument? Do you disagree with my argument or know of a reason someone else might? I’d appreciate your feedback!
Posted by ajargy at 02:07 PM | Comments (1)
