Graff takes a logical approach to defending his opinion on the age old battle of “street smarts versus book smarts” in the article “Hidden Intellectualism”. Through several historical and personal examples, he strongly delivers an argument that schools have been discounting students who may not think academically. In reality the students who can relate articles from sources like Vouge and Sports Illustrated to life may be the ones who will truly be successful. Throughout his writing, he uses many devices to sway the audience’s opinions in the direction of his. Through Graff’s rhetorical writing strategies, he opens reader’s eyes to the fact that any subject can be intellectual when observed “through academic eyes”.
The organization of an
…show more content…
Graff uses the example that he never loved reading books, but he did love sports magazines. He claims that reading what was interesting to him made him more comfortable with textbooks and academic readings. When students look at the subjects they are interested in with an intellectual focus they often can bridge relations between the subjects and the real …show more content…
“”Hidden Intellectualism” brings up the story of Marilyn Monroe and Joe DeMaggio. Although the two were married, they eventually divorce and Monroe marries author and playwright, Arthur Miller. The author uses this allusion as “the symbolic triumph of geek over jock”. Another allusion in the article is the mention of Elvis Presley supporting Adlai over Ike in the presidential election on 1956. He says “I don’t dig the intellectual bit”,“but I’m telling you, man, he knows his stuff.” These examples could be used as strong evidence that the author’s opinion is correct or may be used as a source to create credibility. Many readers would consider the use of history and facts as proof that the author did research and knows his
Gerald Graff expresses his concern in “Hidden Intellectualism” about how the education system does not accurately measure true intelligence. If the education system used each individual’s interests, Graff argues, the individual would be much more intrigued in the subject matter; therefore, increasing his or her knowledge. Throughout the article, Graff also draws on his love of sports to support his argument, saying that it includes elements of grammar, methodologies, and debate. He believes this proves that interests can replace traditional teaching. Graff contends one’s interest will create a community with others throughout the nation who share the same interests. While it is important to pursue your interests, there
Jared Diamond makes a great and compelling argument about how inequality across the entire globe originated. The main components that were agreeing with this argument were guns germs and steel. Guns meaning the advancement in weaponry, military warfare and military sophistication. Germs meaning the harmful disease and other foul illness that wiped out humans throughout History. Then the third and final point steel, which was about the advancement in societies and the complex sophistication with their technology, which lead to building great architecture and devices that were completely impactful.
The next piece of data used is from Harvard. Harvard is known as a home of scholars and highly intelligent individuals. Fridman challenges this connotation by citing the “rampant anti-intellectualism” within the college. This data and the backing that follows has a profound effect on the reader. If even the highest point in America’s intellectual scene has been poisoned by this stigma then the implication is that nowhere is safe for those seeking unbridles
In “Hidden Intellectualism” by Gerald Graff, the author speaks about how schools should use students’ interests to develop their rhetorical and analytical skills. He spends a majority of his essay on telling his own experience of being sport loving and relating it to his anti-intellectual youth. He explains that through his love for sports, he developed rhetoric and began to analyze like an intellectual. Once he finishes his own story, he calls the schools to action advising them to not only allow students to use their interest as writing topics, but instead to teach the students on how to implement those compelling interests and present them in a scholarly way. In perspective, Graff’s argument becomes weak with his poor use of ethos, in which he solely focuses on his own anecdote but, through the same means he is able to build his pathos and in the last few paragraphs, with his use of logic he prevents his argument from becoming dismissible.
In his closing remarks, Graff once again makes a slight stumble. He begins his final paragraph with, “If I am right, then schools and colleges are missing an opportunity when they do not encourage students to take their nonacademic interests as objects of academic study” (386). Using the words “If I am right” shows uncertainty and might hurt his credibility with some readers. Luckily, Graff’s argument and credibility remains intact. Since, the reader will most likely pause and reaffirm, to themselves, that Graff is indeed right.
The average human would think that going to school and getting an education are the two key items needed to make it in life. Another common belief is, the higher someone goes with their education, the more successful they ought to be. Some may even question if school really makes anyone smarter or not. In order to analyze it, there needs to be recognition of ethos, which is the writer 's appeal to their own credibility, followed by pathos that appeals to the writer’s mind and emotions, and lastly, logos that is a writer’s appeal to logical reasoning. While using the three appeals, I will be analyzing “Against School” an essay written by John Taylor Gatto that gives a glimpse of what modern day schooling is like, and if it actually help kids
Graff also gives his childhood experience as an example of himself successfully becoming more intellectual due to his passion with sports. Thence, Graff suggests schools to encourage students to exercise their personal interests in an intellectual serious way, and by doing that, it will help students to apply their unique intelligence into academic effort.
College has always been a process that introduces students to academic challenges that are not present during high school. So when my professor assigned Gerald Graff's essay, "Hidden Intellectualism", I thought this was his thesis. “Missing the opportunity to tap into such street smarts and channel them into good academic work." (Graff 142) I thought that this was his thesis because it explains the main idea of the essay but I assumed its purpose because of where it’s placed. I am so used to reading an essay in high school where the thesis is located right in the first paragraph. So naturally that is where I look for it. However, with more reading I knew that the following is the thesis, not only because it discusses the main topic, but because it clearly shows what the author was making his argument about. "But [students] would be more prone to take on intellectual identities if we encouraged them to do so at first on subjects that interest them rather than the ones that interest us". (Graff 199) Your thesis is one of the major aspects of a good college paper because it shows exactly what the main claim of the entire paper is going to be about. Three main points to take out of a thesis is, is it your main claim or big idea that directly answers a question about the assignment of the paper. Is it written with the reader in mind with a road map they could follow along easily and lastly when you do go back through revising and reflecting does it makes your thesis clearer.
Authors have many strategies when it comes to winning over their readers and on some occasions may even target their opponents, to make them look bad, in an attempt to make themselves look better. In the articles by Steve Greenberg and Michael Weinreb we will look at the way authors constrict articles to get readers to side with opinion by appealing to a person through logos, pathos, ethos, and the use of rhetorical devices. Greenberg use of a logical fallacy, using a rhetorical device against his friend, and his own use of rhetorical devices in order to convince reader through by ethos of how awful his friend and cardinal fans are, while Weinreb focuses on logos, a logical fallacy, and rhetorical devices to strengthen
...c achievement over physical prowess”. Rhetorical questioning and Anaphora both help Fridman prove his point because they directly stress the need for anti- intellectual values to be fought and academic achievement and intellectual ability be highlighted.
Graff begins by talking about the educational system, and why it flawed in many ways, but in particular, one: Todays schools overlook the intellectual potential of street smart students, and how shaping lessons to work more readily with how people actually learn, we could develop into something capable of competing with the world. In schools, students are forced to recite and remember dull and subject heavy works in order to prepare them for the future, and for higher education. “We associate the educated life, the life of the mind, too narrowly and exclusively with subjects and texts that we consider inherently weighty and academic. We assume that it’s possible to wax intellectual about Plato, Shakespeare, the French Revolution, and nuclear fission, but not about cars, dating, fashion, sports, TV, or video games.” (Graff, 198-199) In everyday life, students are able to learn and teach themselves something new everyday. It is those students, the “young person who is impressively “street smart” but does poorly in school” (Graff, 198), that we are sweeping away from education and forcing to seek life in places that are generally less successful than those who attend a college or university.
When Gerald Graff was younger he and his friends would have various debates about sports including what team had the best pitcher in baseball. Graff pointed out that while having these arguments with his friends, they would have evidence to support their thoughts whether it be using statistics to find batting averages or using their argumentative abilities in general to support their opinion. This proves that even people who do not do the best in school are capable of brilliant things, the school system just needs to encourage students to use their hobbies to enhance their academics. Instead of dividing the different forms of intelligence, book and street smarts could merge and grow into a more detailed educational system that can help not just with academics, but with life itself. While it is good to know proper grammar, knowing about dating, sports, or cars can actually get people farther than anticipated in life. Graff thought that in the school system, street smarts is perceived as less than compared to “book smarts” which are encouraged in school. If the two forms of intelligence were to merge instead of separate, the educational system can transform into something
Success. Seven letters, two syllables, and essentially, the goal of almost every person to walk the planet. The interesting thing about success is that it isn’t a set in stone goal, but an ideology. With each person, success is redefined, argued, and tried. Success comes in different forms and levels, but at the end of the day every person who has been deemed successful mentions one word: failure. Yet, it isn’t failure in of itself that produces success, but the determination and desire to work through it. Failure can only indoctrinate when an individual decides to work past it and improve from it. Often, however, the strenuous process of failure and grit is glamorized, and the true factors that play into success are forgotten. For example,
Secondly, street smart students don’t get equal opportunity in schools and colleges to prove themselves. In the article, author says that “In competition, points were scored not by making arguments, but by a show of information or vast reading, by grade-grubbing, or other forms of one-upmanship,” which explains that many street smart students make arguments in academic competitions and they don’t get enough points for their arguments to win a competition, where book smart students provide only the information from books and readings to win those competitions.
Co-author of “They Say/I Say” handbook, Gerald Graff, analyzes in his essay “Hidden Intellectualism” that “street smarts” can be used for more efficient learning and can be a valuable tool to train students to “get hooked on reading and writing” (Graff 204). Graff’s purpose is to portray to his audience that knowing more about cars, TV, fashion, and etc. than “academic work” is not the detriment to the learning process that colleges and schools can see it to be (198). This knowledge can be an important teaching assistant and can facilitate the grasping of new concepts and help to prepare students to expand their interests and write with better quality in the future. Graff clarifies his reasoning by indicating, “Give me the student anytime who writes a sharply argued, sociologically acute analysis of an issue in Source over the student who writes a life-less explication of Hamlet or Socrates’ Apology” (205). Graff adopts a jovial tone to lure in his readers and describe how this overlooked intelligence can spark a passion in students to become interested in formal and academic topics. He uses ethos, pathos, and logos to establish his credibility, appeal emotionally to his readers, and appeal to logic by makes claims, providing evidence, and backing his statements up with reasoning.