Lanham's Argument

I think that Lanham's argument of the philosopher vs. the rhetorician is a plausible one. I agree with the idea that the internet has changed the way we teach and gather information. When Lanham states that he " continue[s] to think that it is the convergence of technology, the arts and letters, and the democratizing of higher education that poses our paramount cultural and educational explanandum" I feel that he is saying that the internet has taken education to a more improved and desireable level. Information is much easier to obtain therefore making it more simple to write papers with multiple points of views.
However, the rise of the internet in the classroom also presents students with more of a possiblility of finding incorrect information and using it for their papers. When a book/magazine/journal enters the library, it is understood that the source is credible and somewhat trustworthy because it is written by someone that is qualified on that subject. The internet is an entirely different world in itself, and just like the real world, there is an evil side to the internet and the faulty information that it could bring to students and therefore transfer into their composititons.
I think that excercises such as blogging would be useful just to get students to start ideas for writing and to have a place to discuss things with fellow classmates, however, there has to be so much monitoring that I'm afraid that teaching a composition class entirely based on internet could be harmful.

MY OBJECT

I have no clue what object I want to choose for my rhetorical analysis. I have thought of many ideas--my brother has a Jack Daniels poster that I saw this weekend that has the date it was established and all that good stuff...but I don't think that is enough info for a paper! I also thought about the tv, a digital camera...
I was in target today and bought some dish detergent that was safe for the environment (go green!) and I thought, "hey, I can use this as my object" but, I don't know if that is ok either because I am uncertain of the claims/data/warrant that would apply. Obviously I need to schedule a meeting with Kevin because I am lost and now that I have written this, I am a little stressed out. I am probably making it out to be more difficult than it is, atleast I hope!

I had to edit my blog b/c I forgot to add that humanism sounds like it could be a wonderful way to live, but I am not a believer that we will ever live in a humanistic society.

LOGOS, ETHOS, PATHOS

I am one of the few students in this class who is not going into teaching after graduation. Up until last semester, my plan was to teach high school English, but instead I am going to grad school for Psychology. Even though I am not going to be teaching composition (atleast not in the near future, I assume anything is possible down the road) this class has given me tools that I can apply to grad school and hopefully to my clients when I am done with licensure, etc.
First off, any writing that is done with the goal of satisfying logos, ethos, and pathos is already to a good start. Many of the writers in the 15th and 16th century appealed to these same standards. It sucks your reader in and allows them to connect with you and your topic in an effortless way. This will help me when I am a psychologist because I have to be able to have a strong connection with my clients, and this will be impossible without the use of strong rhetoric.
I feel that logos, ethos, and pathos are a way that I can validate buying something that is a little too expensive or something I really don't need. For example, I am ADDICTED to buying designer jeans...it's my thing. Some girls have an addiction to shoes, purses, or jewlery, but I love to spend money on cute jeans (DON'T JUDGE ME!) Anyway, whenever my mom asks me where and how much my jeans were I automatically point out that they have a warranty or that it is a special denim that won't stretch/rip holes ---just to prove to my mom that there actually was some logic behind buying the jeans. Whenever I am doing this, I am simply pointing out the logos, ethos, and pathos that the jean company sold to me to validate the ridiculously high price....and it works all too well.