In David Foster Wallace’s graduation speech, This Is Water, he uses logical and emotional appeals to discuss the importance of critical thinking. Wallace uses the term “conscious” to signal critical thinkers, while those who do not think critically are referred to as “unconscious.” Wallace’s main argument is that a person has the choice to think critically and should do so every day. Wallace’s analysis of consciousness and unconsciousness focusses too heavily on the logical and emotional appeals and ignores the possible ethical arguments that support the development of conscious societies, such as activism. In doing so, Wallace favours the self-interested members of the audience and alienates those who favour altruism, limiting the scope of his argument. In This is Water, Wallace effectively uses logical reasoning and the parable of the religious man and the atheist man to explain how consciousness is a choice, not an unalterable state. To do this, Wallace states that in many cases, “A huge percentage of the stuff that I tend to be automatically certain of is, it turns out, totally wrong and deluded.” Using logical reasoning, Wallace’s own admission reminds his audience that they are also often wrong, as, logically, humans are not perfect and make periodic mistakes. Once he establishes that people can be wrong, he returns to the parable of the two men and claims “…the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people, given those people's two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience.” This idea is familiar to his educated audience, as he claims it is one of the primary foundations of a liberal arts education. Thus, Wallace uses his audienc... ... middle of paper ... ... pedagogical arguments, such as teaching a person how to critically think, to ignore the ethics of their dogma and focus on superficial emotional appeals and easily understood logical appeals. By ignoring ethics in pedagogical arguments, the argument becomes less about teaching and more about explaining a certain viewpoint, focussing less on whether this is the right viewpoint and more on the author’s personal reasons supporting it. Second, in This is Water specifically, analysing this speech causes the writer to not only become a critical thinker like Wallace wanted, but also extend Wallace’s arguments in directions that he failed to properly explore, like activism. Works Cited Foster Wallace, David. "Plain old untrendy troubles and emotions.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 20 Sept. 2008. Web. 6 Feb. 2014. .
In 1960 American Journalist and Politician, Clare Boothe Luce delivered a speech to Journalists at the Women's National Press CLub, criticizing the American Press in favor of public demand for sensational stories. Luce prepares her audience for her message through the use of a critical tone.
How many Americans recognize the man on the back of the one hundred dollar bill? Do you know who he is and why he is on the back of that bill? If you said George Washington then you are right! It is said that when one begins something that others will follow behind you and in George Washington's case that is correct. George Washington paved the way for many other presidents that followed after him up until the one we currently have today. Without our first president we would not have our current president. George Washington made huge contributions and achievements to our country that still stand today.
In his essay, “Deciderization; 2007,” David Foster Wallace Argues: Part of our emergency is that it’s so tempting to do this sort of thing now, to retreat to narrow arrogance, pre-formed positions, rigid filter, the ‘moral clarity’ of the immature. The alternative is dealing with massive, high- entropy amounts of info and ambiguity and conflict and flux; its continually discovering new areas of personal ignorance and delusion. In sum, to really try to be informed and literate today is to feel stupid nearly all the time, and to need help. That’s about as clear as I can put it. What Wallace is trying to say that the people of today’s world are either Objective or subjective and nothing in between; therefore, the objective type of people are all
I found Wallace’s Tense Present article quite confusing. It was hard to read and it took me a lot of time to get to the end. This was probably because the audience of this article is intended to be adults of high education and academics; or someone intelligent enough that wanted to analyze the origin of words, when to use them, and why. Anyway, as I read along, I came across some things, which I thought made no sense, others that I agreed to and finally others that I did not agree with.
It is common for human beings, as a race, to fall into the comforts of routine – living each day similar to days before and days to come. Unfortunately, it is often too late before one even realizes that they have fallen into this mundane way of living in which each day is completed rather than lived, as explained by David Foster Wallace in “This Is Water”. This commencement speech warned graduating students of the dangers of submitting to our “default settings” of unconscious decisions and beliefs (Wallace 234). However, this dangerous way of living is no new disability of today’s human race. Socrates warned the people of his time: “A life unaware is a life not worth living” and who is to say he wasn’t completely right? A topic of long debate also includes the kind of influence that consciously-controlled thoughts can have on the physical body. A year after Wallace’s speech, neurobiologist Helen Pilcher, published “The New Witch Doctor: How Belief Can Kill”, which explains the influence of the mind and individual beliefs on the quality of one’s life. Together, both authors illustrate how detrimental a life lived unaware of one’s own thoughts and beliefs can be on the body and spirit. And though it is easy to live by
The speech is arranged into short paragraphs, providing an example in almost every one. Everyone is familiar with commencement speeches. They are usually used to congratulate a group of people and tend to be looking towards the future. Instead of congratulating the students at Kenyon College, Wallace challenges them. The essay opens with a metaphor about two young fish that do not realize what water is, setting the tone for the rest of the speech. Wallace proceeds to describe how completely oblivious society is to the world around us, just like the fish. Wallace supports this claim through examples within the speech. His use of examples rather than facts or statistics weakens his claim. If more facts or statistics were used his claim would become more convincing. His rationalization come in the form of the short stories that illustrate the choices people make in their everyday lives. He...
...old, xenophobic white men don’t want just anyone off the street joining them for intellectual discussions over Sunday tea . This is why Wallace advocates for students in high school and college to learn SWE; if students are able to present themselves in a more erudite and intellectual manner by using SWE, it can provide them with more opportunities to ascend the “social ladder” as they will have a stronger foundation for academic and professional success. Using SWE will not guarantee that a student will become a doctor or a lawyer, however, they will have the opportunity to expand their education and achieve that ranking if they wish.
Wallace was fighting for his concrete beliefs and ideals. Although it was sparked by the murder of his wife and father. He was prepared to be a martyr, although all he really wanted was to have a family and a farm. He was willing to give his life for the future of his country, which says something about his character. He was finally betrayed again and handed over to the throne to be tortured and killed.
The film covers the life of William Wallace from the time he is a small boy, when
Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing written by; Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle, Eighth Edition, published April, 2007 by Bedford/St. Martin’s, is a textbook about writing and critical thinking. In the first chapter of Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing, “Thinking Critically, Challenging Cultural Myths”, the Authors begin by setting a relatable scene of what it’s like for a college student. How a new found independence can be overwhelming, especially with regards to critical thinking, showing that what we have learned, needs to be re-evaluated and that an open mind in essential. "What Is Critical Thinking" In this section of the chapter the editors explain what it means to be a critical thinker. They explain that critical thinking is not just studying dates and facts, but rather taking those facts and examining them. The editors then proceed by explaining how having an open mind, and taking others' perspectives into account when formulating our own opinions on what the author is trying to say to us is important. A critical thinker takes all aspects into account and reflects on personal experience as well. The editors also point out that different cultural experiences bring different opinions. They suggest that we need to become active learners, continuously questioning the meaning behind everything, testing not only the theories of others but also our own experiences and analyzing the text rather than going for the obvious. They show that thinking outside the box is the epitome of critical thinking. Basically, we need to step outside our comfort zones and what we have always been taught. The editors also suggest that we need to re-evaluate our per...
The philosopher is presenting complex image with many aspects to illustrate relatively simple problem which makes his writing appealing only to narrow circle of people usually enough educated to find an absolute truth by themselves. His style is too complicated to be appropriate for masses; complicated vocabulary and syntax that is not used anymore. Plato’s relating to the real problem right in the end of his work giving no time to think about it throughout his argument. Basically what he is doing is explaining the problem and then presenting it. In the end he just leaves the reader all alone without further explanation. David Foster Wallace has also tried to convince people that there is something more to the world that can be seen. However, Wallace’s Commencement Speech is very different from Plato’s allegory. I his speech Wallace is presenting his ideas in a simple manner by short stories that anyone can relate to and because of this it makes him more convincing and persuasive. Right in the beginning of the speech he relates to the main topic by story about fishes that allows his audience to think about the main problem along his speech. This move is undoubtedly more effective because it lets audience focus and contemplate on what is important, on what relates to the main topic during whole
In this essay I am going to compare the similarities and differences between the Terry Eagleton book and the David Wallace’s commencement address. This articles both different and aimed at a different audience, offers an interesting similarity in some aspects and differences in other to one another. The main ideas that we will be looking at are how love and happiness conflict with one another; and how we need to learn what to worship through the meaning of experiences. Then I will relate these concepts to my personal thoughts of how these concepts can be interpreted.
As Frye (1986) quotes, “the vast majority of things we hear today are prejudices and clichés, simply verbal formulas that have no thought behind them but are put up as a pretence of thinking”. This is still incredibly true today. Prejudice is defined as “a negative feeling toward a group based on faulty generalization…something we think and feel” (Bergen, 154-155). With no concept of how to critically evaluate one’s prejudices, there will be no change in problematic thinking. Thus, in order to address society’s and one’s own prejudices, critical thinking must be incorporated, which can be fostered by a diverse
White, Fred D., and Simone J. Billings. The Well-crafted Argument: Across the Curriculum. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2013. Print.
Douglas n walton-dialogue theory for critical thinking,Department of Philosophy University of Winnipeg Winnipeg, Canada 1989)