AUTOBOTS…….UNITE!! (ENG-4UE)

News Article #1

January 20, 2009

 Written by: Stuart Gendron

            On December 11, 2008 at around 1:30 PM a debate took place in Mr.Murrays ENG-4UE class. The topic of this debate was “Miller’s definition of modern tragedy is appropriate for modern ages”, and it was being judged by Seth Epps, Colton Bissonette, and Logan Lubuk. The affirmative side included Justin Sweeney Cadieux, Ben Cousins, and Dawson Lybbert. The negative side was concluded of Stephanie Boucher, Stephanie MacDonald and Rebecca Ritchie.

            It started off with the judge’s laying down the rules, and while there were a handful of good ones, there was one in particular which was a tad odd. The rule was that the debater must open up their argument with “Argument, engage” and stretch their arm outward, pointing towards their opponent of choice. This rule must also be used for rebuttals, where in place of ‘argument’, ‘rebuttal’ would be used.

            Then the debate started off with the affirmative side giving their first argument. It started off with a few good points from Justin Sweeney, and then was slowly concluded by a ‘blonde joke’ that was launched off by no other then Ben Cousins. The debate then started to heat up as the negative side took their stand, and fired a very long speech towards the affirmative side. After this, things got ugly. Insults were hurled across the room from every direction, until it took a nasty turn and feminist jokes were mixed in. At this point, you could feel the tension through out the room.

            After a while of screaming and insults, the judges came to a decision and declared the negative team the winners. This choice could be seen a mile away, as the affirmative side wasn’t to prepared with valid information, but more prepared with jokes.

Throughout the play “Hamlet”, one would find it hard to believe that Gertrude had just lost her husband on account of the non-existence of mourning. The play starts off 2 months after the death of old Hamlet, and already Gertrude has found somebody to replace him. It only took 2 months and she’s already found someone. To me this sounds a bit skeptical. I mean, usually one mourns after the loss of a loved one. But if Gertrude was able to replace him that fast, and skip all the mourning, then how faithful could she have been? Perhaps Gertrude was unfaithful to old Hamlet and therefore he needed to be taken out of the picture in order for Gertrude and Claudius to be together. Perhaps she wasn’t the perfect queen that old Hamlet thought she was. Perhaps instead of being the Queen of Denmark she was the Queen of Whore-Ville? Or maybe instead of there something being rotten in the state of Denmark, there was something rotten in thy underpants of thy Queen? All jokes aside though, there is much evidence to prove that the Queen did not care for the death of old Hamlet. There is no evidence of her mourning throughout the play. Another piece is that when Hamlet put on that special show for everyone, the Queen didn’t seem bothered by it at all, even the death scene didn’t bother her. You think she would have picked up the hints maybe?

Throughout the play ‘Hamlet’, Hamlet decides half way through the play to start acting ‘insane’. He does this so that he can get closer to Claudius, and in the end finish him. This tactic works in his advantage numerous ways. It allows him to interact with those around him, including his mother, Claudius, and Ophelia, and he can get away with anything he wants. He can vent his anger and make all the personal attacks he wants without getting frowned upon. Most just think that his mental health is caused by mourning, which also works in his favor. He builds a shield up and allows himself to work behind the scenes and plan his plot to avenge his father’s death.

Thesis: Even though Hamlet may seem insane, he his only acting insane to fulfill his wishes to his father, which is kill Claudius.

Reason 1: It allows him to talk to people in a way that would otherwise seem disrespectful.

Example: During the play that he set up, he takes jabs at his mother, but she lets it continue due to the state she thinks he’s in.

            Example: He vents his anger out towards Gertrude and Claudius

Reason 2: He has full understanding of what’s happening around him.

Example: During the play, he carefully watches the reaction of his mother and Claudius for any weird movements.

            Example: He is able to have people killed

Example: He is able to plan the death of Claudius and chooses the perfect timing.

Reason 3: It’s easy for one to act insane, but hard for someone insane to act sane.

Example: It’s very easy to act insane, especially if it allows you to go unnoticed.

There she be.

(Click to enlarge)

Pleonasm

Definition

• Pleonasm is the use of more words then is needed for the explanation of an idea.
• Form of redundancy, which has the definition of exceeding what is necessary.
• Also relates to rhetorical tautology, which is where the same thing is said more then once, but in different words.
  • Examples: “black darkness”, “cold ice”, “burning fire”

Examples

• “Sorry can you repeat that again?”
• “I forgot my PIN number again for the ATM machine.”

Examples from Literature

• “The most unkindest cut of all.”

(William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar)

Misleading Vividness

(Duco vividness)

What is it?

It’s a logical fallacy where large amounts of detail are used to describe something to get someone to see it as a problem and possibly change their mind. Usually these details point towards more the negative side. They can also be a small amount of particular events that seem bad enough when all put together that they outweigh the statistical evidence.

Why is it fallacious?

This fallacy can be bad because someone can easily find bad facts about something and cover up the truth with them due to the strong impressions that these examples can leave on the human mind. Someone will learn that car accidents are scary better if they experience it first hand, rather then from statistics or videos. Just because a particular event is dramatic and has happened once, doesn’t mean it is more likely to occur, especially when compared to statistics.

How is it good?

            This fallacy can be good as it can prevent one from doing something that is dangerous. If one plans to go diving with sharks, but has heard stories before about people being eaten alive then they will get the impression that this activity is dangerous. However, when they compare it to statistics, which say that only 1 in 1000 get injured in this activity they will rely more on the stories they heard and think the worse and decide not to go, thus saving them from what could be a very dramatic situation.

Syllogism

• Dramatic/Vivid event (known as ‘X’) occurs
• Therefore, more events like event ‘X’ are likely to occur

Examples

• 1) Alberto is talking to Jerno and tells him that he plans to visit Alaska in a week. Jerno tells him about the time he went down there and how he was kidnapped when he was ice skating. He told him that the people raped him, shanked him in the right and left thigh, kicked his gonads repeatedly for 2 hours, slapped him around, lit his hair on fire and then proceeded to kill his entire family in front of him. Alberto cannot believe that this has happened to his friend and decides to never step foot in Alaska, ever.
• 2) Yurko is visiting Best Buy and is asking for help on buying a computer. He asks the sales associate if Toshiba is a good brand to buy the computer from. The sales associate says he heard a story where there was a malfunction with a Toshiba computer and a CD was sent shooting out of the tray where it proceeded to decapitate someone. Yurko knows that even though this happened, it’s very unlikely to happen again. The sales associate told Yurko that he has never bought anything from Toshiba ever since that has happened.

Example from the Media

…..

Here is my long awaited test essay for the Wizard of Oz.

essay-test-the-wizard-of-oz-stuart-gendron

So far i’ve been piled with homework and have been unable to finish most of it. Now, because of how lazy i was, i must spend my weekend doing such homework. Sucks, but thats what i get for slacking off. Monday i present my logical fallocie, and then the monday after that i present something else. Both things seem easy enough and i should have no problems with them.

Farewell