Question 1
My mom and I used to argue about a friend that I was very close to. He was someone who got himself into trouble often and my mom didn’t think that I should be associated with him. However, he had always been loyal and respectful to me and I was not going to budge when it came to our friendship. According to Kaufers levels I would have to say that this ranked at level four. My mom and I disagreed on what was more important when in came to judging friends. For her, having a good reputation and staying out of trouble was more important than my value on being a loyal and trustworthy friend. We were able to resolve the issue because she agreed that as long as I wasn’t participating in the same behavior as my friend, she could learn to accept him.
Question 2
Mario Savio’s speech argues for students to have the right to speak their minds on campus. According to Savio, the university doesn’t allow students to express their political views and it is unwilling to move with the changes taking place in the country. The analogy of Sproul Hall to Mississippi is related to the statement of “in the world, but not of the world” because like those against the civil rights movement in Mississippi, the administrators at Berkeley are resisting change. By saying that the university is in the world, but not of it is implying that although it exists, it is not an active part of a growing and changing world. The university would rather silence its students than hear their opposing ideals. If I were the administrator, I would try to allow the students a chance to have a voice, but also make them aware that there are rules that the university is obligated to follow.
Question 3
Through discussing the history of this country as well as his own history, Obama is making himself relatable to every American in one way or another. He says he is the son of a black and a white and has family from every race and hue. This is somehow connecting him racially to every person in this country. He also talks about being a grandson to a veteran and a woman who knows what it is like to have a husband away at war. This helps him relate to a country full of voters who are in the military or loved ones who have or are fighting. By using history and the stasis of cause, Obama is connecting himself to voters and building his credibility as someone who is living the American dream. The history he gives establishes him as more than simply a black American. It allows him to take the issue with Reverend Wright and turn it from an issue of black race or white race and make it an issue of the human race as a whole. This strategy could help Wells and Savio because it can make them more relatable to all audience members, not just a single race.
4 comments:
Your conflict in Question 1 is a great example of Kaufer's level 4. It reminds me of so many arguements I have had with my parents about who I choose to hang around with and why I choose to do so, and the values we do and dont' share. You also go on to state the problem was resolved by neither one of you necessarily changing your values, but learning to manage your conflicting values in a way that does not interfere with your relationship. I feel this sort of 'ending' would be ideal in most conflicts of this nature.
I liked the approach that you took when you mentioned how the civil rights movement in Mississippi related to the students' rights at Sproul Hall. Instead of saying how the civil rights movement changed America's viewpoints for the better, you focused on how those that were against civil rights resisted the change, and that those at Sproul Hall were doing so as well. I wonder though, how focusing on the idea of resistance would help the students convince the administrators that there needed to be change? Wouldn't it seem that if the rest of America rejected the civil rights movement that it would be okay for the administrators to reject the idea of students' rights as well? How would this approach help to further the students' argument?
I would contend that Wells did use the stasis of cause rather effectively. By explaining the origins of lynching she creates the ethos of being an educated rational person rather than an emotional woman. With this ethos she is able to become highly credible to a larger audience.
your first response answers the question i asked in a previous comment: "is there an alternative besides "agreeing to disagree" when policy conflicts concerning values are involved. I guess compromise is certainly a solution to those conflicts.
Post a Comment