Sat, Sept 26th

Good Evening,

After looking over the Logical Fallacy list this afternoon, I realize the list is a bit extensive to memorize by Tuesday. In addition, I discovered the AP Lang test does not require you know all of the term. Please focus on the following terms for your test. I apologize for any confusion.

Begging The Question
Non Sequitur Arguments
Post Hoc
Faulty Analogies
Hasty Generalizations
Red Herrings
Ignoring the Question
Opposing the Straw Man
Ad Hominem

Sept 25, 2015

Argumentative Fallacies

Arguments can be bad for one of several reasons: They can  fail when the conclusion does not properly follow from the premises.

Baptists are often politically conservative. (premise)

Republicans are often politically conservative. (premise)

Therefore Baptists are often Republicans. (conclusion)

This sort of argument can be extremely seductive, but logically it does not work. Consider another argument that has exactly the same form:

John Elway is a great quarterback. (premise)

Michael Vick is a great quarterback. (premise)

Therefore, Michael Vick is really John Elway. (conclusion)

Both arguments are invalid, for even if their premises are true, their conclusions can still be false. Many logical fallacies are of just this sort: They offer reasons that fail to support their conclusions.

Finally, some arguments are bad,  not because they make false claims or because they commit some logical error, but rather because they are booby traps for unsuspecting readers.

Dr. Roy Spencer, who is a prominent climate scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville and winner of NASA’s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement, doesn’t think that humans are causing global warming (premise). So humans are probably not causing global warming (conclusion).

Formally speaking, there is nothing fallacious about this argument. It appeals to authority, but Dr. Spencer is fairly clearly an appropriate authority on the matter of global warming. So as far as it goes, this is a good argument. The problem, however is that the argument leaves out an important bit of information, namely that the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community is that global warming is being caused by humans. But by suppressing important evidence, the argument is potentially a booby-trap for unwary readers. 


In preparation for your Fallacy Test on Tuesday watch the following clips. Although the speaker is a fast talker, I think the explanations of the fallacies will be helpful.

Five Fallacies | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qb-h0sXkH4

Even More Fallacies! | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybOvddwpJAg

PS: If a fallacious term is described on the Youtube video and NOT listed on the hand-out, don't worry about it, :)

Hang in there,
Mrs. Cales

Sept 18th, 2015

Please type your answers to the following questions and bring to class on Tuesday, 22.

Prologue 
1, What does Oedipus want to know from the Elder?
2. According to the priest, what is happening throughout Thebes?
3. What does the priest want Oedipus to do?
4. According to Creon, what is the problem in finding witnesses or getting to the root of the problem? 5. What is Oedipus' attitude about "breaking this plague"?

 Ode of Entry 
1. According to the Chorus, what are conditions in the city?
2. For what do they pray?

First Episode 
1. What is ironic about Oedipus' claim that he is "stranger to the story"?
2. What penalties does Oedipus decree on the guilty party?
3. What is ironic about Oedipus' statement "his marriage bed my bed of seed"?
4. According to the chorus, what divine being knows the truth about who the killer is?
5. How does Oedipus treat Tiresias at first?
6. What accusation does Oedipus hurl at Tiresias?
7. Explain Tiresias statement: "These very gibes you mouth at me will soon be hurled by every mouth at you."
8. What seems to emerge as one of Oedipus' character flaws?

Second Choral Ode 
1. How does the Chorus feel about the possibility of Oedipus' guilt?

Second Episode 
1. How does Creon react to the accused charges against him?
2. How does Oedipus link Creon and Tiresias to the crime? Why?
3. How does Jocasta soothe both men’s anger?

Sept 17th, 2015

Hello APers!

So sorry, no homework due tomorrow other than bringing a copy of Oedipus Rex and being prepared to share your SOAPSTONE article with the class

I promise to make it up to you and give you homework over the weekend :)

Friday, Sept 11

Today we will learn a useful  tool for analyzing writing:

Students need to recognize that any good composition, whether written, spoken, or drawn, is carefully planned. This composition has integral parts that work together in a complex and subtle arrangement to produce meaning. Originally conceived as a method for dissecting the work of professional writers, SOAPSTone provides a concrete strategy to help students identify and use these central components as a basis for their own writing. 

SOAPSTone (Speaker, Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject, Tone) is an acronym for a series of questions that students must first ask themselves, and then answer, as they begin to plan their compositions

Speaker
Who is the speaker who produced this piece? What is the their background and why are they making the points they are making? Is there a bias in what was written? You must be able to cite evidence from the text that supports your answer.

Occasion
What is the Occasion? In other words, the time and place of the piece. What promoted the author to write this piece? How do you know from the text? What event led to its publication or development? It is particularly important that students understand the context that encouraged the writing to happen.

Audience
Who is the Audience? This refers to the group of readers to whom this piece is directed. The audience may be one person, a small group or a large group; it may be a certain person or a certain people. What assumptions can you make about the audience? Is it mixed racial/sexgroup? What social class? What political party? Who was the document created for and how do you know? Are there any words or phrases that are unusual or different? Does the speaker use language the specific for a unique audience? Does the speaker evoke God? Nation? Liberty? History? Hell? How do you know? Why is the speaker using this type of language?

Purpose
What is the purpose? Meaning, the reason behind the text. In what ways does he convey this message? How would you perceive the speaker giving this speech? What is the document saying? What is the emotional state of the speaker? How is the speaker trying to spark a reaction in the audience? What words or phrases show the speaker’s tone? How is the document supposed to make you feel? This helps you examine the argument or it's logic.

Subject
What is the subject of the document? The general topic, content, and ideas contained in the text.How do you know this? How has the subject been selected and presented? And presented by the author?

Tone
What is the tone of the poem? What is the poet's attitude?

Homework: Study for Vocab quiz (Lessons two and three) which you will take on Tuesday, Sep 15th.

Sept 4, 2015

Vocab Quiz lesson 1 today.

A Doll's House

We will discuss gender in relation to the play:

Naturally the temptation is to read A Doll's House as an early cry for feminism. The famously introvated Henrik once remarked, "the strongest man in the world is he who stands most alone." that statement could equally apply to Nora. Though long considered one of the world's first feminists, Ibsen didn't create her with the intention of writing a "feminist" play). Instead he felt A Doll's House was a play about self-liberation, rather than specifically female liberation; and so her "I must stand quite alone, if I am to understand myself and everything about me."
(A Curtain Up Review)

Homework:
In preparation for your in-class-essay on Tuesday, outline or plan a three paragraph response to one from each of  the following sections. Two prompts will be on the test, one from each of two of the sections.You can bring a copy of the play to the test.

Section A:
1. Many Ibsen critics argue that A Doll’s House is not a feminist play, and is more about asserting self, regardless of gender. Yet Joan Templeton, in her afterword to the Signet Classics edition of Ibsen: Four Major Plays Volume I, disagrees, asserting that “Make (Nora) a man, and the play becomes not only ludicrous, but impossible.” What do you think? Is A Doll’s House a play about feminism or humanism?
2. Compare the relationship of Mrs. Linde and Krogstad with that of Nora and Torvald.
Section B:
1. Examine and analyze the symbolism of Nora's costume and the tarantella dance.
2, Consider the character of Torvald Helmer. Is Torvald an antagonist? A misogynist? Or could Torvald be just as much a victim of nineteenth century societal norms as Nora?
Section C:
1. The staging of the final scene Mabou Mines production is quite shocking. How is this ending more powerful for modern audiences than the original stage directions?
2. At the end of the play, Nora slams the door to the “doll house” and walks away. Yet she leaves Torvald with hope for “the greatest miracle.” Why did Ibsen write an "ambiguous" ending? Cite evidence from Nora’s and Torvald’s closing speeches to indicate what you believe to be the ultimate ending to this drama.

Also, bring AP workbook.