TOW #12: IRB- A Breifer History of Time by: Stephen Hawking

How does our universe really work? Where did we really come from and where are we going? The answer is actually more complex than you would think, according to Stephen Hawking, world renowned theoretical physicist, and author of A Breifer History of Time. In A Breifer History of Time, Stephen Hawking offers a simple explanation to the common person about complex theories about our universe. He is able to dumb these complex theories down for us through the use diagrams and analogy, which help the reader to understand.

Although usually scholarly works offer no more than one bland diagram, Hawking takes another route in A Breifer History of Time. For example, when explaining the Relativity of Distance, it is hard to illustrate the idea with only the use of words. Therefore, Hawking includes pictures to go along with his written examples so the reader can comprehend the topic more. There is a picture with a person on a train bouncing a ping pong ball. To them, it looks like the ball moved only a couple inches from hand to table to hand, but to an observer outside, it looks like the ball moved forty feet because the ball was on the train moving as well (I could not find the actual picture online). These pictures are rhetorical devices because they are used to forward Hawking’s purpose, which is to educate the general public on important scientific theories; and through these pictures, the reader is able to comprehend them.

Not only do pictures aid in reader comprehension, but in addition to that, Hawking includes well crafted analogies. Intellegently crafted either before or after the introduction of a new theory, these analogies also help the reader to comprehend complex theories. For example, in the “Curved Space” chapter, when discussing uniform gravitational fields, Hawking compared gravity from a uniform field and gravity from acceleration to an elevator. He says that when “you are accelerating, everything that happens inside the elevator will unfold exactly as it would if the elevator was not moving at all but at rest in a uniform gravitational field” (Hawking 45). Although this complex theory, the principle of equivalence, is hard to explain with the scientific terms, the analogy to the elevator connects the principle to something the common person can conceptualize. Therefore, Hawking is able to make sense and teach his readers.

So far, Hawking has achieved his purpose with a great amount of craft, because as a reader I am able to understand theories probably way over my head when he offers visuals and analogies, for me, the common peasant (compared to Hawking’s intelligence) to understand.

(Source)

[Not Hawking's picture of the principle of equivalence, or relativity of distance, but the only picture form the book online]

TOW #11: Why pro-lifers keep fighting abortion by: Helen Alvaré and Meg McDonnell

When I came across the article “Why pro-lifers keep fighting abortion,” and I saw it was written by two obviously educated and high-profile people, Helen Alvaré and Meg McDonnell one of whom is even a professor of law at George Mason University, I expected an academic argument about the debate on abortion with considerable substance. To my disappointment, this article depicted “pro-lifers” to be simpleton and the article’s purpose does not even have a platform.

The article aims to convey reasons why the pro-life argument has survived, and at the same time give people who are pro-life confidence in their views. However, in the beginning, Alvaré and McDonnell make a fatal mistake. They begin with, “pro-choice Americans must wonder from time to time what keeps pro-lifers going,” (para. 1). Beginning an article with a highly arguable statement like that plants the seed of doubt in a reader’s mind right away. Not only that, but their reasoning for their purpose relies mainly upon the assumption that pro-choice has been beating pro-life for “40 years since Roe v. Wade,” (para. 1). This is also an assumption. If the abortion battle had been won by the pro-choice side, then “pro-lifers” would be a minority with a very bleak future. This is what Alvaré and McDonnell attempt to illustrate with this assumption, but it just is not true. The abortion debate is still very prevalent and neither side has dominated. Although there are laws that legalize abortions, many states are passing preventative pro-life laws. For example, in Virginia, it is illegal to get an abortion unless the woman views an ultrasound of the unborn baby and then decides to go through with the abortion. This is very much a victory for people who are pro-life because it prevents a significant amount of abortions.

Aside from the premise of the views in the article which fuel the purpose being refutable, the rest of the arguments in this article are spotty, and never offer any facts. The few fact that are thrown in are stated plainly without a source and highly questionable. So, even if the article was not based on a refutable idea, the lack of facts and reliable information to support their arguments would crush any shot Alvaré and McDonnell had at proving their purpose regardless.

(Source)

TOW #10: Comic by Gary Larson

(Source)

“The Far Side” is a comic series by Gary Larson that covers and comments on everything from political issues to people’s everyday grievances. This particular snippet is about the worst scenarios that can happen to an Apple computer user and to a PC computer user. In the comic, the top section is “Hell for Apple users” and there is a man standing naked (censored) in front of the devil, who says to him: “Welcome to Hell. Here’s your PC”. This is understandable considering Apple computer users would not like to have a PC because they chose Apple in the first place. In the bottom section of the comic though, is the same scenario, except it is “Hell for PC users” the kicker is that instead of the devil saying “Welcome to Hell. Here’s your Apple,” he says “Welcome to Hell. Here’s your PC”.

Larson wrote this comic to highlight the fact that even PC users hate PCs, and thus comment on how PCs are far inferior to Apple computer (implying it is because of various functional problems with PCs). Larson is able to do this through the obvious, satirical humor. The main device he uses to get across this humor is juxtaposition. The juxtaposition of the two scenarios works well because visually the pictures of the two different “hells” are right next to each other. Also, the devil is saying the same thing in both of the comics and there is the same caption with it: “Hell for PC/Apple users”. The constants in the comic just make the single difference (or lack of differences) stand out more. Thus, Larson is able to cut right to the point and make his purpose extremely obvious by the clear juxtaposition that helps to build satirical humor.

IRB #2 Into: A Briefer History of Time by: Stephen Hawking

In my quest for a new IRB this marking period, I was hunting through my father's library. Nestled between dusty stacks of books, I found A Briefer History of Time by: Stephen Hawking. And here's where you get to finally meet Julie in her primitive nerd form. Before I even opened to the first page, I saw the words "string theory" and "quantum gravity" and knew this was the book for me.

Like a kid in a candy store, I flipped through the pages excitedly. I saw that the book was exactly what the title says it is, and more. It aims to cover topics like the big bang, Newton's laws, the theory of relativity, curved space, the expanding of the universe, wormholes, and much more! Now, you're probably thinking, "Wow, I really didn't know Julie was such a freak, I'll note that for future reference in class," but really, I am so pumped to read this book. Not only is it by Stephen Hawking, arguably the best scientific mind of the century, but this book will force me to think on an abstract level, and will teach me so much.

I hope to take away simply a lot more knowledge from this book. These are topics that I know the basic premises of, but want to know more about in depth. Also, I believe actively reading books on scientific topics will help me to get ahead in the field that I want to go into. I also just think science is really interesting and hope that this IRB, although a school assignment, can be entertaining as well.

(Source)

TOW #9: 96.3 by: Delaney Doran

As I sat down to write this week’s TOW, a neglected copy of the Trojan Times sat staring at me on my desk. Sadly, the average Wiss student does not pay much attention to these monthly papers, so, I felt bad, and picked it up. Interestingly enough, the paper actually has a plethora of article types, humorous and informative alike. On the front page of the November issue is Delaney Doran, a senior this year, with her article “96.3”.

“96.3” highlights how Wissahickon scored a 96.3 on the PA School Performance Profile assessment. Doran first tells the reader what the Performance Profile assessment is, and what it is made up of. Then, she talks about why Wissahickon deserves this honor. Her purpose is to let the average Wiss student know that their school is not the “ratchet” or “ghetto” school that they might hear about in the hallways. She aims to point out that Wissahickon is actually a great place to get an education.

To help her reach the students, Doran begins with a strong introduction, highlighting Wissahickon’s strengths as a school with strong diction. Doran points out Wissahickon’s “stellar visual and musical arts programs” (para. 1). This appeals to those students reading the article who are musical, and get “props”. Not only that, but the word “stellar” has a strong connotation, but types of student can understand this word. If Doran had used a more advanced word, many may not have known the meaning and either been confused, or decide to stop reading. Doran also points out the “outstanding” teachers and sports teams that “continually compete at regional and state levels” (para. 1). The majority of her article then uses facts to illustrate how this recognition was given and what it means. To bring her point full circle, Doran closes her article with a humorous but resounding ending. She says that she wants to congratulate the teachers of Wiss for their “A” (para. 6). Using the play on words, Doran is able to connect to students and teachers alike with this reference to grading. Therefore, Doran proves her point that Wissahickon is in fact a great place to get an education through strong diction, hard facts, and a funny but effective ending.

(Source)

TOW #8: Outliers (IRB pt 2) by Malcolm Gladwell

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book, Outliers, his purpose is to analyze factors that make people successful. He does this effectively through not only the facts and anecdotes I have previously pointed out, but he also uses dialogue and rhetorical questions  in the second half of his book.

When Gladwell highlighted why Korean flights crash so much more than any other flights, he pointed to lack of communication. To illustrate this effectively for the reader, he adds dialogue. “Klotz: One-five-zero maintaining two thousand Avianca zero-five-two heavy. The captain is clearly on the edge of panic. Caviedes: Advise him we don’t have fuel...Klotz: Climb and maintain three thousand and, ah, we’re running out of fuel, sir” (199). By using a direct dialogue from the cockpit of a flight that crashed, Gladwell is able to dissect the conversation directly for real-world evidence. This makes his argument stronger by appealing to logos, and when dialogue like this is paired with facts and figures about the number of crashes, there is an irrefutable correlation that the reader can see between lack of communication and plane crashes.

Not only does dialogue strengthen Gladwell’s arguments, but his rhetorical questions relate his purpose to the reader in an engaging way. At the end of the section that explains the link between growing rice in asian culture to how asian kids are much better at math on average than anyone in the world, Gladwell ends the section with a question. “...it’s hard not to wonder how many other cultural legacies have an impact on our twenty-first-century intellectual tasks. What if coming from a culture shaped by the demands of growing rice also makes you better at math? Could the rice paddy make a difference in the classroom?” (232). This use of a rhetorical question engages the reader because it prompts them to think on their own.

Though these rhetorical devices and more, Gladwell achieves his purpose in effectively analyzing the factors that make people successful. However, in doing so Gladwell actually discourages people from success. All the facts and supporting evidence he uses supports his theory that success comes from one’s cultural background, not the hard work of the individual. Only one chapter, “The 10,000 Hours Rule” supports the fact that with hard work comes success. Thus, making Gladwell’s book interesting, but quite upsetting to someone who is not from the cultures highlighted with his data. As for me, I’m Jewish. Does that mean I’ll become a doctor or a lawyer because my great-grandfather wasn’t like the irish farmers and worked in the manufacturing business? No, and Gladwell cannot tell me differently. I’m set to prove him wrong.

(Source)

TOW #7: Education Reform: Not Complicated--but Seriously Difficult by: David M. Steiner

The first marking period of my junior year is coming to a close, and I’ll have to admit--my grades aren’t all they could be. However, my courses are vigorous to say the least. I take three AP’s: English, U.S. History, and Biology and the rest honors. My electives aren’t so easy either, Research Methodology is a course that calls for a self-structured research project where the teacher is really just there to guide you and help you if you run into trouble. David Steiner, founding director of the CUNY Institute for Education Policy at Roosevelt House, writer for the Huffington Post, and the author of Education Reform: Not Complicated--but Seriously Difficult, writes an article that calls the average American citizen to action.

Steiner aims to get citizens to care more about the education system. He emphasizes that courses need more vigor (to which I was hyperventilating just thinking about), better teachers, more funding, and higher expectations. Throughout the article, Steiner references a book published on international education practices by Amanda Ripley. First, he cites the main things that work when implemented in an education system, such as “demanding and coherent criteria” (Steiner). Then, Steiner uses this analysis of foreign education systems to parallel our own. He says, quite bluntly, “if all U.S. schools applied the rigor and attention to their academic offerings that our high schools apply to their highest-profile sports programs, our students would come far closer to matching their demographic peers in high performing countries” (Steiner). Not only that, but Steiner utilizes the pronoun “we” so as not to seem to critical. Instead of seeming like he blames other people, or our government directly, the use of “we” makes Steiner seem like he is self-analyzing. The word “we” suggests he is reflecting on his own choices and makes the article seem less accusatory.

As a student reading this article, a lot of its effectiveness was because of personal preference. At first, when I read that Steiner wanted more academic vigor, I felt nauseous. However, I understand that I am a driven student taking college-level courses who is involved in extracurriculars as well. After reading the article, I understood who Steiner was trying to target. It’s the students and teachers of the regular level classes not even necessarily at schools like mine, but at schools in worse areas. Steiner points out that the U.S. does not have a good idea of what we want high school graduates to actually know and be able to do skill-wise. In result, as a whole, the students of America are not up to par. After reading this article, I can agree with that. It all comes down to how much we as Americans care about our educations.

(Source)