No Class Questions

Question 1
My dad and I always argue about his girlfriend. She is really bossy and she picks certain people that she likes on certain days but then usually the next day she picks a new person. If I was the person she liked one day then she will be my enemy the next. She is really selfish and gets upset when my dad and I do things without her and she also gets upset if she is not allowed to be the center of any family argument that we might have between one of my siblings and me or my dad and me. She will get herself into the argument someone by either being a huge bitch (sorry it’s really the only thing that describes her) or by creating a bigger argument with whomever I was originally arguing with. In this case we hold conflicting global values because we do not agree that an argument should stay between father and daughter, or between a sister and a sister—if that is where it began and all others should stay out of it unless they are affected. She holds the belief that if she if is around an argument she is automatically part of it, where I hold the belief that everyone should stay out of it unless it is their fight to fight. I hope this is clear. Possibly it comes down to the fact that she is not a member of the family and therefore she does not have the authority to act as if she were, while she believes that she should have that power. We have conflicting ideas about this, and I assume that this is a globally held belief that a new girlfriend should not put herself into family matters.
Question 2
This argument that “Sproul Hall is to students rights as Mississippi is to civil rights” is similar to the idea in paragraph eleven that the university is “in the world but not of the world” because Sproul Hall is intended to support student rights and be a place where students are able to have their ideas heard, but they are taking away the students rights. The students are trying to express themselves but their freedom is being taken away by not being allowed to protest. Therefore the students can be part of the university but not agreeing with the things the university is trying to accomplish. Savio is trying to advocate for students’ rights and this allusion adds to his claim by bringing a new way of understanding how these students feel to the table. If I were the university administrator I would feel as though he was calling me a hypocrite and I would feel as though things needed to change in order for the students to feel as though they belong in the university.
Question 3
He uses cause because he needs to bring himself back from something that could possibly damage his character. I think he details his history in order for the audience to see that he does not believe in some one the things accused of him and he has the past to prove it. This same strategy could be applied to Savio’s article if he would have given a little bit more about himself and how he has been commited to the things he is giving his speech about in the past. That makes it seem like he will continue to fight for these things, as he is currently doing when he gives the speech, until they have been righted.