DOCSLIB.ORG

Repor T Resumes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

REPOR TRESUMES ED 015 902 24 TE 000 262 PERSUASION. RHETORIC CURRICULUM V, TEACHER AND STUDENT VERSIONS. BY- KITZHACER. ALBERT R. OREGON UNIV., EUGENE REPORT NUMBER CFP-H-I49-69 REPORT NUMBER ER-5-0366-69 CONTRAC1 oEc-5-10-319 ECRS PRICEMF-$0.50 HC-$4.60 113F. DESCRIPTORS- *COMPOSITION (LITERARY), *CURRICULUM GUIDES, *ENGLISH CURRICULUM. ENGLISH INSTRUCTION. *RHETORIC, CURRICULUM RESEARCH, GRACE 11, INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS. LOGIC, SECONDARY EDUCATION. SPEAKING, STUDY GUTDES, TEACHING GUIDES, WRITING, PROJECT ENGLISH, OREGON CURRICULUM STUDY CENTER. EUGENE. THIS 11TH -GRACE RHETORIC UNIT PRESENTS THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN CHOOSING THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND PERSUASIVE WAY OF ARTICULATING AN IDEA. LESSON 1 OF THE UNIT, 'SOUND REASONS.' EXPLAINS DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE LOGICAL PROOFS. LESSON 2, 'WHAT'S THE EVIDENCE,' ATTEMPTS TO HELP THE STUDENT UNDERSTAND THE USES OF EVIDENCE AND THE PROBLEMS OF USING IT AND SETS UP EVALUATIVE TECHNIQUES FOR DIFFERENT KINDS OF EVIDENCE. LESSON 3. "THE POWER TO MOVE.' CONSIDERS THE PROPER USE OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL OR EMOTIONAL APPEAL TO ACCOMPLISH DESIRABLE ENDS. AND LESSON 4, 'WHO SAYS SO,' ELABORATES THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH PERSONAL PROOF IS AN EFFECTIVE PERSUASIVE INSTRUMENT. THE STUDENT VERSION CONTAINS INTRODUCTORY EXPLANATIONS OF MATERIALS. COMMENTARIES AND EXERCISES ON TEXTS AND PROBLEM SITUATIONS. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS, AND SPEAKING AND WRITING ASSIGNMENTS. THE TEACHER VERSION CONTAINS INSTRUCTIONAL AIDS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR ASSIGNMENTS AND PRESENTATION OF MATERIALS. A TEST DESIGNED TO ACCOMPANY THE UNIT IS APPENDED. SEE ALSO ED 010 129 THROUGH ED 010 160, ED 010 803 THROUGH EC J10 832. TE 000 195 THROUGH TE 000 220, AND TE 000 227 THROUGH TE 000 249. (CL) OREGON CURRICULUM STUDY CENTER PERSUASION Rhetoric Curriculum V Teacher Version The project reported hereinwas supported through the Cooperative Research Program of the Officeof Education, U. S. Departmentof Health, Education,and Welfare. , -",..":--9401107-"""r","-,47-7Por-"7:5PMW:e00101 I OREGON CURRICULUM STUDY CENTER U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT.POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STAII DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY. PERSUASION Rhetoric Curriculum V Teacher Version "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE TIOS COPYRIGliTED MATERIAL HASBEEN GRAkTED BY dElf2/11 TO ERIC AND OR6AitIZATIONSOPERATING UNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE U.S.OFFICE OF EDUCATION. FURTHER REPRODUCTIONOUTSIDE THE ERIC SYSTEM REOUIRES PERMISSIONOF THE COPYRIGHT OWNER." The project reported herein was supported through the Cooperative Research Program of the Office of Education, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Teacher Version PERSUASION The concentration in rhetoricso far this year, first on developing an honest opinion, thenon understanding the audience, should (if there isany- thing to Kenneth Burke's theory of logicalprogression) lead the student to the vital question of how to bring thetwo together. However fully he under- stands and honestly he believes in hisidea, however intelligently he has analyzed his audience, he still hasthe problem of how to present the idea in the most effectiveway- -or, in the words of Aristotle's translators he must find the availablemeans of persuasion. The problem is forecast in the introductionwith E. E. Cummings's letter to a student.It represents the ideal writing situationanacknowledged expert giving a solicited opinion toa receptive audience, no doubt hoping for the words of wisdom by return mail.Even in such an ideal situation the writer must, for reasons ofhonesty, express unwelcome ideas about the difficulty of writing. His nobody-but-yourselftheme shows a warm understanding of the desires of youth;he has judged his audience well in offering both challenge and the rewardof individual achievement. This example leads into themore usual situation of the writer-speaker whose expert opinion has not been solicited.The hypothetical instance given the student for analysis- -a debate over a class partyis much closer to his own experience, sincehe must advance and support views in conflict with the desires ofother members of the group. The example suggests the full range of persuasive methods- psychological, and personal proofs- -though none of these technical terms are introduced, It also directs attention to the first procedureof defining the terms. QUESTIONS TO DISCUSS 1. Among the suggested arguments.all three of the first groupare likely to be effective if the majority favorsswimming, if full participation of the class is desirable, and ifa swimming party would draw larger attendance. In some situations,none of these might be true. 2. The arguments ofease in arrangements are all logical, if true. The second (b) would require investigation;lighting the pool and providing lifeguard service might entail unexpectedexpense. 3. Anticipating opposing arguments is alwaysimportant. The tradition argument is often strong, but since it is chieflypsychological it is vulner- able to logic. Citing thesuccess of other schools should be effective with peer-conscious groups. 4, The question of who presentsan opinion takes the student into the concept of personal proof. Class officersmight carry weight if they speak somewhat officially as reflecting sentimentsexpressed to them, or appear as particularly judicious because of their experiencewith decision- -2- making, Anew student may beopen to challenge mores of the group unlesshe strikes the class as unacquainted with the fresh ideas. The as able to contribute suspicion of personalmotives behindadvocacy is immediately damaging,though sometimes persuasive. The frankly confessingbias is non-dancer might confesshis bias asrepresenting a segment of class opinion.The good dancerwho supports the party has a possibleadvantage if he emphasizes swimming judgment of what is that his view is basedon best for all; theargument is particularlystrong if the speaker showsthat it goes againsthis own preference. The questions atthe end of thestudent introductionsum up the methods of persuasion tobe elaborated in thelessons of the unit. to emphasize thatthe methods It is important turn is a matter of are not really separate;studying each in focusing the emphasison one part of a totalprocess. Lesson 1: SoundReasons This lesson takes up logical proofs, bothinductive and deductive.It opens with the reminderthat the writeror speaker must anticipate reservations of theaudience and the the mental presented. The questions they raiseas the idea is writer-speakerassumes the responsibilityfor satisfying the audience thatthe views expressedare based on soundreasons, Check Your Assume4sLs In the tenth graderhetoric the students to the deductive examined assumptionsas basic or enthymemic reasoningprocesses; assumptions formthe premises, andsome agreementon fundamental assumptionsis essential for anyconcurrence on conclusionsfrom inferential reasoning. The opening paragraphsfrom one of Adolph an example of the importance Hitler's speechesprovide make the oint; of assumptions.Any speech of Hitler'swould this onewas presented in February1938, before the German Reichstag on the fifthanniversary of the the immediate National Socialist State.Though audience was theGerman parliament andthe German-speaking radio audience,Hitler was actuallyaddressing an interested policies of theGerman dictator world, for the gerous to the welfare of were already known to be potentiallydan- other nations. TheEnglish translation ofthe text of the speech appearedin the New York papers, Times, as wellas in many other QUESTIONS TODISCUSS 1,Hitler asks theaudience to believe thatthe foreignpress, or "a certain portion" ofit, was both ignorantand arrogant; that itflcoded the New Reich with dishoneststatements and unfoundedmalicious criticisms; that it unfairly judgedan innocent "mode ri people.Whether newsmen considered themselves apostles is not clear in the syntax, but this charge i is possiblf: to construe from the words. Hitler suppressed the news reports, he says, to protect the successful work of his government from criminals and insane opponents who disturb the mission. All criticism, he asks the reader to believe, is insane, dishonest, Bolshevist, revolutionary terror- ism, reactionary dreaming, or idle malice, motivated by hatred or super- ciliousness. The attitude of foreign nations is based on hate, arrogance, or possibly envy in jealous and lazy countries unwilling to work themselvee., 2.Hitler's statements depend upon these assumptions: that foreign nations are enemies without integrity, jealous of Germany's success; that the press is entirely dishonest; that any criticism is detrimental to the state and is rightfully repressed (all critics are criminals or traitors); that his will is the criterion of justice. 3.Hitler has offered no evidence of exemplary Nazi discipline, strength, and restraint; he simply makes the assertion,In fact, he produces no evidence in support of any of his charges.In 1938 he might have been able to find evidence that the German wage system had some advantages, and that foreign nations experienced crises, but certainly not that they had olul crises.(Some of the severest crises he himself occasioned). His only real evidence is that Germany has achieved some prosperity and recovered from a material co/lapse, and that it has become a great steel state. But the success of a program does not establish the rightness of it, nor the justice of silencing
Recommended publications
  • Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This

    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This

    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Cohen, Benedict S.: Files Folder Title: Robert Bork – White House Study, Joseph Biden Critique (3 of 3) Box: CFOA 1339 To see more digitized collections visit: https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digitized-textual-material To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/white-house-inventories Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/research- support/citation-guide National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ ERRORS ANO OMISSIONS IN THE "RESPONSE PREPARED TO WHITE HOUSE ANALYSIS OF JUDGE BORK'S RECORD" September 8, 1987 HIGHLIGHTS ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN THE "RESPONSE PREPARED TO WHITE HOUSE ANALYSIS OF JUDGE BORK'S RECORD" On Thursday, September 3, Senator Biden issued a report prepared at his request reviewing Judge Bork's record. The report criticized an earlier White House document performing a similar review on the ground that it "contain[ed] a number of inaccuracies" and that "the picture it paint[ed] of Judge Bork is a distortion of his record." It claimed that it would undertake "to depict Judge Bork's record more fully and accurately." In fact, however, the Biden Report is a highly partisan and incomplete portrayal of the nominee. If it were a brief filed on the question, its misleading assertions and omissions go far enough beyond the limits of zealous advocacy to warrant Rule 11 sanctions. It contains at least 81 clear distortions and mischaracterizations. Among the most significant: o The Report claims that Judge Bork's perfect record of nonreversal by the Supreme Court in the more than 400 majority opinions he has written or joined is "uninformative" -- flippantly dismissing the clearest, most extensive, and most recent evidence of Judge Bork's views.
  • Accountability and the Promise of Performance: in Search of The

    Accountability and the Promise of Performance: in Search of The

    Accountability and the Promise of Performance: In Search of the Mechanisms Melvin J. Dubnick Professor of Political Science & Public Administration Rutgers University – Newark & Visiting Professor Institute of Governance, Public Policy and Social Research Queen’s University, Belfast [email protected] Prepared for delivery at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, Philadelphia, PA & Conference of the European Group of Public Administration (EGPA) September 3-6, 2003, Lisbon, Portugal ver: 8/29/03 Self-evident truths are frequently invoked when scholars and policymakers propose political reforms. We often hear: "It is obvious that X is true, therefore we need to do Y." The implication of this assertion is that common sense dictates our understanding of the problem and the solution. But is it really the case that X is true? And is Y really the best response? The fact that something is widely believed does not make it correct. (Ostrom 2000) Introduction: The Promise of Performance Among the pervasive notions characterizing contemporary public administration rhetoric and scholarship is the idea of accountability as the solution to a wide range of problems. According to proponents of accountability-centered reforms, enhanced accountability will (among other things) result in · greater transparency and openness in a world threatened by the powerful forces of hierarchy and bureaucratization (the promise of democracy) (O'Donnell 1998; Schedler, Diamond, and Plattner 1999); · access to impartial arenas where abuses of authority can be challenged and judged (the promise of justice) (Borneman 1997; Miller 1998; Ambos 2000); · pressures and oversight that will promote appropriate behavior on the part of public officials (the promise of ethical behavior) (Gray and Jenkins 1993; Anechiarico and Jacobs 1994; Morgan and Reynolds 1997; Dubnick 2003c); and · improvements in the quality of government services (the promise of performance).
  • Chapter 4: Answers and Comments

    Chapter 4: Answers and Comments

    Chapter 4: Answers and Comments Answers: I. True or False 1. See textbook. 2. False. One of the most common mistakes. The focus should be even if the premise is true, the reasoning is weak. 3. See textbook. 4. True. We could criticize the truth of the premise as well, but this would not be relevant to the focus of a fallacy of relevance. 5. True. There is nothing inherently wrong with loyalty as a behavior or an emotion. The point is there should be good reasons, which we have thought about, for our loyalty commitments. 6. FALSE! Two Wrongs is a fallacy of relevance, so the focus is not on the truth of the premise. The focus should be on the reasoning. Usually the premise is true, but irrelevant to why either item compared should be considered good. 7. See textbook. 8. False. The name-calling is always in the premise. 9. False. In our age many in-group appeals are aimed at sub-cultural groups. People who believe they are more intelligent than most, more cool, more modern, etc. 10. True. 11. True. For a complete argument analysis, these two points must be made. 12. False. It was used as an example for structuring arguments. It will be covered in Chapter 5. We will see that it is a fallacy of relevance and it always has a premise that is relevant to the conclusion. 13. False. There could be very good reasons for a particular act of loyalty. 14. True. In this chapter there will be situations where the difference between one label and another is inconsequential.
  • Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I

    Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I

    Essential Logic Ronald C. Pine Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I All effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare necessities and then must be expressed in a few stereotyped formulas. Adolf Hitler Until the habit of thinking is well formed, facing the situation to discover the facts requires an effort. For the mind tends to dislike what is unpleasant and so to sheer off from an adequate notice of that which is especially annoying. John Dewey, How We Think Introduction In everyday speech you may have heard someone refer to a commonly accepted belief as a fallacy. What is usually meant is that the belief is false, although widely accepted. In logic, a fallacy refers to logically weak argument appeal (not a belief or statement) that is widely used and successful. Here is our definition: A logical fallacy is an argument that is usually psychologically persuasive but logically weak. By this definition we mean that fallacious arguments work in getting many people to accept conclusions, that they make bad arguments appear good even though a little commonsense reflection will reveal that people ought not to accept the conclusions of these arguments as strongly supported. Although logicians distinguish between formal and informal fallacies, our focus in this chapter and the next one will be on traditional informal fallacies.1 For our purposes, we can think of these fallacies as "informal" because they are most often found in the everyday exchanges of ideas, such as newspaper editorials, letters to the editor, political speeches, advertisements, conversational disagreements between people in social networking sites and Internet discussion boards, and so on.
  • Britain in Psychological Distress: the EU Referendum and the Psychological Operations of the Two Opposing Sides

    Britain in Psychological Distress: the EU Referendum and the Psychological Operations of the Two Opposing Sides

    SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, HUMANITIES AND ARTS DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN STUDIES MASTER’S DEGREE OF INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Britain in psychological distress: The EU referendum and the psychological operations of the two opposing sides By: Eleni Mokka Professor: Spyridon Litsas MIPA Thessaloniki, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary ……………………………………………………………………………… 5 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………. 6 CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS ………….. 7 A. Definition and Analysis …………………………………………………………… 7 B. Propaganda: Techniques involving Language Manipulation …………………….. 11 1. Basic Propaganda Devices ……………………………………………………... 11 2. Logical Fallacies ……………………………………………………………….. 20 C. Propaganda: Non-Verbal Techniques …………………………………………… 25 1. Opinion Polls …………………………………………………………………… 25 2. Statistics ………………………………………………………………………… 32 CHAPTER TWO: BRITAIN‟S EU REFERENDUM ………………………………. 34 A. Euroscepticism in Britain since 70‟s ……………………………………………... 34 B. Brexit vs. Bremain: Methods, Techniques and Rhetoric …………………………. 43 1. Membership, Designation and Campaigns‟ Strategy …………………………… 44 1.a. „Leave‟ Campaign …………………………………………………………… 44 1.b. „Remain‟ Campaign …………………………………………………………. 50 1.c. Labour In for Britain ………………………………………………………… 52 1.d. Conservatives for Britain ……………………………………………………. 52 2. The Deal ………………………………………………………………………… 55 3. Project Fear …………………………………………………………………..…. 57 4. Trade and Security; Barack Obama‟s visit ……………………………………... 59 3 5. Budget and Economic Arguments ……………………………………………… 62 6. Ad Hominem
  • Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 820920 Motion To

    Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 820920 Motion To

    . - . .- . ...-A 00CMETED USHRC 0)I I4 AN :54 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WI..E5f, t Tr ' - NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ' BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD , __ _ In the Matter of ) ) Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY ) (Proposed Renewal of Facility OF CALIFORNIA ) License Number R-71) ) (UCLA Research Reactor) ) October 8, 1982 ) , UNIVERSITY'S RESPONSE TO CBG'S MOTION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 ! DONALD L. REIDHAAR GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HELWICK 590 University Hall 2200 University Avenue Berkeley, California 94720 Telephone: (415) 642-2822 Attorneys for Applicant- ! THE REGERTS OF THE UNIVCRSITY .._ OF CALIFORNIA 8210150456 821008 PDR ADOCK 05000142 O PDR ' .. - - . I. INTRODUCTION In its Order dated September 28, 1982 the Board suspended the schedule for responses to summary disposition motions and directed the parties to respond to CBG's " Motion __ to Summarily Dismiss Staff and Applicant Motions for Summary Disposition, or Alternative Relief as to Same," (the Motion) ' dated September 20, 1982. The parties were also directed to respond to the City of Santa Monica's ' letter of September 20, | 1982 requesting an entension of time to respond to the summary i disposition motions. The Board requested that the parties' responses be received by October 8, 1982. I -- University objects to all manner of specific relief requested by CBG in its Motion as unwarranted under the Commission's Rules of Practice ' considered in light of the particular circumstances of this proceeding. Properly construed the Commission's rules preclude the summary dismissal of the Staff and University motions since those motions have not been 'subinitted shortly before a hearing that is set to commence or t which has commenced, but instead according to the schedule specifically set by the Board for the filing of such motions.
  • The Battle Over the Burden of Proof: a Report from the Trenches University of Pittsburgh Law Review

    The Battle Over the Burden of Proof: a Report from the Trenches University of Pittsburgh Law Review

    UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW Vol. 79 ● Fall 2017 THE BATTLE OVER THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A REPORT FROM THE TRENCHES Michael D. Cicchini ISSN 0041-9915 (print) 1942-8405 (online) ● DOI 10.5195/lawreview.2017.525 http://lawreview.law.pitt.edu This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. This site is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D- Scribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. THE BATTLE OVER THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A REPORT FROM THE TRENCHES Michael D. Cicchini* Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................ 63 I. The Burden of Proof Jury Instruction ............................................................ 64 A. The Trouble with Truth-Based Instructions .......................................... 65 B. A Simple Thought Experiment ............................................................. 67 C. The Empirical Studies ........................................................................... 68 D. A Seemingly Simple Request ................................................................ 70 II. Prosecutor Arguments Regarding the Studies ............................................... 71 A. The Participants Who Voted “Guilty” Could Have Been Right............ 71 B. Actual Jurors Are Needed to Test a Jury Instruction............................. 72 C. The Studies
  • Turning Sexual Science Into News: Sex Research and the Media

    Turning Sexual Science Into News: Sex Research and the Media

    Sex Research and the Media -- 1 Turning Sexual Science into News: Sex Research and the Media Kimberly R. McBride, Ph.D.1,2, Stephanie A. Sanders, Ph.D.2,3, Erick Janssen, Ph.D.2,4,Maria Elizabeth Grabe, Ph.D.5 , Jennifer Bass, M.P.H.2, Johnny V. Sparks, Ph.D.6,Trevor R. Brown, Ph.D.7, Julia R. Heiman, Ph.D.2,4,8 1 Section of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana 2 The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 3 Department of Gender Studies, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 4 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 5 Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 6 Department of Telecommunication, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 7 School of Journalism, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 8 To whom correspondence should be addressed at The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Morrison Hall 313, 1165 East Third Street, Bloomington, Indiana 47405-3700; email [email protected] Keywords: SEX RESEARCH; SEXUALITY; MEDIA; JOURNALISM; MEDIA TRAINING Sex Research and the Media -- 2 Abstract In this article we report on the findings of a two-part project investigating contemporary issues in sexuality researchers’ interaction with journalists. The goal of the project was to explore best practices and suggest curricular and training initiatives for sexuality researchers and journalists that would enhance the accurate dissemination of sexuality research findings in the media. We present the findings of a survey of a convenience sample of 94 sexuality researchers about their experiences and concerns regarding media coverage and a summary of the main themes that emerged from an invitational conference of sexuality researchers and journalists.
  • Daughter of Babylon

    Daughter of Babylon

    www.hwarmstrong.com Preface & Introduction 1. The Mystery of The Church 2. Where Is The True Church? 3. Which Old Testament Laws Are In Force Today? 4. A World Held Captive 5. Elijah Shall Truly Come 6.The Church They Couldn't Destroy 7. Is Christ Divided? 8. And He Gave Some Apostles 9. Sardis...Thou Livest, and Art Dead 10. Ye Shall Know Them By Their Fruit 11. This Generation Shall Not Pass Away 12. The Third Angels Message 13. The Former and Latter Rain 14. Contending For The Faith Once Delivered 15. I Will Build My Church 16. The Church of Brotherly Love 17. The Daughter of Babylon Conclusion Bibliography The American Waldensian Society Letter Seventh Day Baptist Historical Society Letter Pearls From The Past: Research Reveals The Plain Truth (page 1) Pearls From The Past: Research Reveals The Plain Truth (page 2) Pearls From The Past: The Plain Truth Responds The Remnant Of Israel PT Article: Now It Can Be Told! PT Article: Hitler Did Not Die PT Article: USA Riding to Total Collapse in 20 Short Years (Feb 1956) PT Article: Amazing 2000 Year History Of The Church Of God Preface In 1993, I finished the first edition of DAUGHTER OF BABYLON with the hope that it might help a few people sort out the confusion and anguish that had been created in them by their membership in the Worldwide Church of God. How can I be so certain that there are so many people who have been confused by the Worldwide Church of God? Because I too was a dedicated member of that group for a very long time.
  • Public Speaking in the Church Notes WESTERN REFORMED SEMINARY, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON DR

    Public Speaking in the Church Notes WESTERN REFORMED SEMINARY, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON DR

    Public Speaking in the Church Notes WESTERN REFORMED SEMINARY, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON DR. LEONARD W. PINE, PROFESSOR FALL 2020 BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE SPEAKERS 1. The effective speaker is a person whose character, knowledge, and judgement command respect. 2. The effective speaker has a message to deliver, has a definite purpose in giving that message, and is consumed with the necessity of getting that message across and accomplishing that purpose. 3. The effective speaker realizes that the primary purpose of speech is the communication of ideas and feelings in order to get a desired response. 4. The effective speaker analyzes and adjusts to every speaking situation. 5. The effective speaker chooses topics which are significant and appropriate. 6. The effective speaker reads and listens with discernment. (Neither blindly accepting the ideas of others, nor stubbornly refusing to consider opinions opposed to his own.) 7. The effective Speaker secures facts and opinions through sound research and careful thought so that his speech, both on and off the platform, may be worthy of the listener's time. 8. The effective speaker selects and organizes materials so that they form a unified and coherent whole. 9. The effective speaker uses language that is clear, direct, appropriate, and vivid. 10. The effective speaker makes his delivery vital and keeps it free from distracting elements. THE PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION I. Defining Communication "The process of sending and receiving information that results in the receiver's accurate comprehension of the intended message." II. Characteristics of Communication A. Dynamic Neither a chain reaction not a static event, but an ongoing process/experience.
  • Think Critically (Pdf)

    Think Critically (Pdf)

    Think Critically! Level: High school and Higher Education (16-20) Author: Nicole Fournier-Sylvester Overview An important strategy for addressing hate speech is to work with youth to develop and apply critical thinking skills to the social media platforms that they engage with every day. By equipping young people with the skills to recognize propaganda and manipulation techniques they will become better positioned to evaluate arguments and engage in meaningful discussions. Based on the insights of college and university teachers who have used www.newsactivist.com to this end, the following exercises, rubrics and examples of interventions provide concrete strategies to develop the critical thinking skills of students through online discussions. The integrated comment boxes are meant to encourage feedback and an exchange of ideas and resources between teachers who share this commitment. Learning Objectives To recognize errors in reasoning, propaganda and manipulation techniques as presented in social media To assess the credibility of online sources To apply critical thinking skills in online discussions on social and political issues by engaging in systematic questioning and ongoing reflection Duration The following guidelines are meant to be flexible and adaptable to a variety of learning settings. Although teachers/facilitators are encouraged to tailor content based on their contexts, the sequencing of the units should be maintained. Ideally, learners should be able to commit to two hours a week to complete readings and exercises
  • Appendix 1 a Great Big List of Fallacies

    Appendix 1 a Great Big List of Fallacies

    Why Brilliant People Believe Nonsense Appendix 1 A Great Big List of Fallacies To avoid falling for the "Intrinsic Value of Senseless Hard Work Fallacy" (see also "Reinventing the Wheel"), I began with Wikipedia's helpful divisions, list, and descriptions as a base (since Wikipedia articles aren't subject to copyright restrictions), but felt free to add new fallacies, and tweak a bit here and there if I felt further explanation was needed. If you don't understand a fallacy from the brief description below, consider Googling the name of the fallacy, or finding an article dedicated to the fallacy in Wikipedia. Consider the list representative rather than exhaustive. Informal fallacies These arguments are fallacious for reasons other than their structure or form (formal = the "form" of the argument). Thus, informal fallacies typically require an examination of the argument's content. • Argument from (personal) incredulity (aka - divine fallacy, appeal to common sense) – I cannot imagine how this could be true, therefore it must be false. • Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed so extensively that nobody cares to discuss it anymore. • Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. • Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct. • Argumentum verbosium – See proof by verbosity, below. • (Shifting the) burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false. • Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – when the reasoner begins with (or assumes) what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion.