| الصراحة راحة's profile~ الصراحة راحة ~BlogListsNetwork |  Tools  Help |
|
|
July 03 ... كيف الحرف يكون له شكل السكينWhen I need some inspiration and cheer in life, I often turn to Arabic poetry. Some light reading of modern political poetry by writers like Nizar Qabbani, Mahmoud Darwish, and Ahmad Matar refreshes me completely...
I know there is much hype surrounding these poets for 'watering down Arabic poetry', 'straying from the true principles on which Arabic poetry is based', 'taking credit for being good poets even though they have no talent and couldn't write a proper Qaseedah even if they tried' etc etc...I know it and I don't agree with it.
Why? Because these writers never declared themselves to be anything near equal to the great Arabian poets who write traditional-style Arabic verse, following all the intricate rules of Arabic poetry. Why then do critics say the things they do when the writers don't proclaim themselves to be 'up there with the Great Ones' in the first place? Doesn't make sense to me.
Of course, some of these writers' subject matter is of some concern to me...most of Nizar Qabbani's love/romance poetry, for example, is nothing short of disgusting, almost pornographic. I just don't read this stuff because it doesn't interest me anyway. It is the political poems full of red-hot anger and rebellion against the unjust systems that rule our lives, the searingly blunt statements about the pathetic 'Arab situation' and what brought about that situation, the glimpses of hope they offer once in a while (!) ... this is what interests me, captures my attention and shakes me to the bone.. then inspires me to do something...even if it's just to think a little deeper about some issue relevant to us...
Although very cliche, it is true that the pen can be stronger than the sword.. ! Sometimes, the pen is the sword..
Some very random chunks taken out of some of my favorite pieces ...
شعراءَ الأرضِ المحتلّهْ
....
نتعلّمُ (منكم) كيفَ يكونُ الشعرْ .. فلدينا .. قد ماتَ الشعراءُ ، وماتَ الشعرْ .. الشعرُ لدينا درويشٌ .. يترنّحُ في حلقاتِ الذكرْ والشاعرُ يعملُ حوذياً لأميرِ القصرْ .. الشاعرُ مخصيُّ الشفتينِ .. بهذا العصرْ يمسحُ للحاكمِ معطفهُ ، ويصبُّ لهُ أقداحَ الخمرْ الشاعرُ مخصيُّ الكلماتِ .. وما أشقى خصيانَ الفكرْ ...
- نزار قباني: شعراء الأرض المحتلة
--------------
لم يبقَ في إسبانيه منّا، ومن عصورنا الثمانيه غيرُ الذي يبقى من الخمرِ، بجوف الآنيه.. وأعينٍ كبيرةٍ.. كبيرةٍ ما زال في سوادها ينامُ ليلُ الباديه.. لم يبقَ من قرطبةٍ سوى دموعُ المئذناتِ الباكيه سوى عبيرِ الورود، والنارنج والأضاليه.. لم يبق من ولاّدةٍ ومن حكايا حُبها.. قافيةٌ ولا بقايا قافيه..
- نزار قباني: أحزان في الأندلس
----------------
قال لزوجه: اسكتي.
و قال لابنه: انكتم
.صوتكما يجعلني مشوش التفكير.
لا تنبسا بكلمةٍ
أريد أن أكتب عن حرية التعبير
أحمد مطر: مسألة مبدأ
----------------------
PS: I am in the process of writing my post "Islam, Culture, and National Liberation". Might take a while but hang in there...
June 19 Fun Fact of the Day! Three course meals and cameras.A fun fact of the day, copied from this article :
"The ancient Greeks thought our eyes emitted rays, like a laser, which enabled us to see. The first person to realise that light enters the eye, rather than leaving it, was the 10th-century Muslim mathematician, astronomer and physicist Ibn al-Haitham. He invented the first pin-hole camera after noticing the way light came through a hole in window shutters. The smaller the hole, the better the picture, he worked out, and set up the first Camera Obscura (from the Arab word qamara for a dark or private room). He is also credited with being the first man to shift physics from a philosophical activity to an experimental one."
Awesome :-).
Prospective blog posts:
- Islam, Culture, and National Liberation
- Culture Voids
- Problem with the UAE, contd.
May 09 HydratesUnfaithful to my previously-posted promise not to blog during finals, I decided I absolutely HAD to do this: Lookee here:   Very cool pictures of methane hydrates.. wouldn't you agree (it's ice that is burning)? With these pictures I am paying tribute to the fact that I am officially finished with Geology 1005. yayz. booyah rocks. Ick.
As for the below-pictures: My hydrates. Oh yeah.    and so on..... Wonder if I get advertising money for these pictures? November 23 Marxism, Dependency Theory, and Free TradeAny political science/international relations/political economics freaks around here? No? Just me? Well, since I haven't got time to write about anything, I decided to show ya'll what I came up with for my most recent IR assignment..And by the way, I don't want people copy-pasting bits of it for any pirate-type uses. I'm serious. I'm not accusing anyone of anything; I am certainly not accusing any of you of being interested in Marxist perspectives on free trade *
Marxism, Dependency Theory, and Free Trade
In this paper, I will discuss the issue of free trade from a Marxist perspective, by analyzing and critiquing “*censored*,” an article that advocates a liberal policy of free trade. First I will discuss the general concerns that Marxism would bring to the issue of trade and economic activity in general, and then I will go on to examine some of the assumptions inherent in the article that are problematic for Marxism. This will lead to a brief discussion of an alternative way of viewing the issue of free trade, namely, from a dependency theory Marxist perspective. Marxists would have some common concerns about the issue of free trade, and economic activity in general, that diverge from the views of the author of the article, Claude Barfield. First, Barfield seems to see that economics should influence politics, but doesn’t always do; Marxists would argue that economics and politics cannot be separated, and that in fact, economics always shapes politics and political behavior (Gilpin in Art and Jervis, 285). For Marxists, the mode of production determines the superstructure of political relations (Linklater in course pack); all international events occur within structures of a global capitalist system that influence those events significantly (Hobden and Jones in Baylis and Smith, 227). Second, Barfield, like most Liberals, focuses on individual firms and consumers as the main actors in international relations, while Marxists view state and government choices as reflecting the preferences of those who own the means of production, namely, the dominant capitalist class (Woods in Baylis and Smith, 333). Third, Marxists would differ with Barfield on what the purpose of economic activity is. Barfield takes a traditionally liberal perspective on free trade by deeming the purpose of economic activity to be the maximization of global welfare. Contrarily, Marxists would view the purpose of all economic activity as being the maximization of class interests (Gilpin, 286). When taking into consideration these general concerns that Marxism has about the issue of trade and economics in general, it follows that Claude Barfield’s article contains various assumptions that would be problematic for Marxists when discussing free trade. Barfield’s main argument is that “the future of free trade is bright,” and that there should be optimism about the future of free trade, and specifically about “the prospects that domestic markets will become more contestable and competition among firms across countries will intensify.” Barfield assumes that free trade and the liberalization of markets will bring about various global benefits, including an increase in world income, fuller employment, and overall economic stability. Barfield also assumes that reducing barriers to trade and liberalizing markets will attract foreign direct investment in less developed countries, which will help develop the economies of those countries and their informational infrastructures (Barfield). These assumptions are problematic for Marxists, who assume that capitalism is the driving force of the world economy, and would view “free” trade and activities such as foreign direct investment as occurring solely to maximize the interests of the capitalist class, those who own the means of production. Therefore, free trade as advocated by Liberals like Barfield is not really ‘free’ in the sense that it is open to all and could benefit all; rather trade is practiced selectively and discriminatorily (Finnegan in Art and Jervis, 382), aiming to suit the commercial interests of the dominant capitalist class. The international economy is an imperial or hierarchical system (Keohane in Art and Jervis, 306), in which the dominant power organizes trade and money “in order to advance its own economic and political interests” (Gilpin, 289); hence one group’s gain is another’s loss, and economic interactions are a zero-sum game (Gilpin, 285). In addition, this alternative viewpoint that Marxists would offer on free trade puts forth very different implications for global economic activity than those advanced by Liberals like Claude Barfield. Marxists would not agree with Liberals that free trade and the liberalization of markets would lead to overall global wellbeing; rather, “free trade” contributes to the growing divide between the core and periphery, where the periphery becomes increasingly dependent on the core, to the core’s benefit. Marxists call this idea dependency theory, claiming that underdevelopment and poverty in the periphery is the result of economic, social, and political structures within countries which have been greatly affected by their international economic relations (Linklater in course pack). Of course, “the global capitalist order within which these societies have emerged is, after all, a global capitalist order which reflects the interests of those who own the means of production” (Woods in Baylis and Smith, 333). Dependency theorists employ discomfiting evidence to support their claims that the effects of global capitalism are to ensure that the wealthy continue to prosper at the expense of the poor and powerless; that the relative prosperity of the few is dependent on the impoverishment of the many (Hobden and Jones, 227). For example, Bruce Scott explains how a recent World Development Report shows that real per capita incomes for the richest one-third of countries rose by an annual 1.9 percent between 1970 and 1995, whereas the middle third went up by only 0.7 percent and the bottom third showed no increase at all. Also, rich countries that have shown annual increases of 2.5 percent in average real incomes account for about 60 percent of the world GDP but only 15 percent of world population (Scott, 313). Roughly one billion people earn less than $1 a day, and the total wealth of the world’s 358 billionaires is equal to the combined incomes of the poorest 45 percent of the world’s population (Scott, 322, and Hobden and Jones, 227). Though there are many limitations to the dependency theory and Marxist perspectives on free trade, international relations, and economic activity in general, Marxism does offer an interesting outlook on the role of economics and commercial interests in shaping world politics. © November 16 So Frickin' Mad*takes out a gun and shoots everyone in sight*
I am SO frickin mad..... at myself. I just got my Econ midterm back with the most horrible grade ever. And the worst thing is that the mistakes I made were THE STUPIDEST mistakes, unimaginably STUPID, abominably STUPID, preposterously STUPID, maddeningly STUPID. I CANNOT believe it.
Imagine mistaking the letter Q for a 0 . IMAGINE HOW STUPID THAT IS. I CANNOT BELIEVE I MISTOOK THE LETTER Q FOR A 0. *screams in horror at self's utmost stupidity*...wallahi I feel like shooting myself. I KNEW the information, I had the concepts correct, but it was a problem of reading too fast. IMAGINE THAT. Because I read the question too fast, I misread some numbers and letters, and ended up solving the whole frickin question wrong. Ya rabbi ya rabbi ya rabbi...
And to make matters worse, I am so mad at the question regarding (dis)economies of scale BECAUSE my TA explained it to me clearly and I MISREAD THE FRICKIN NUMBER. Astaghfirullah...
*excuse my dirty mouth today- but I am MAD. And I mean MAD. At myself.*
It's nobody's fault but myself. I read too fast. I was in a rush. I did not stop to think properly. And this is what I ended up with. It just means I have to work extra hard to make up for it in the final and the rest of the homework assignments.
Qaddar Allah ma sha'a fa3al.
Time to go to Turkish lesson...I hope the wondeful atmosphere of Coffman cheers me up *yeah right-my sarcasm today knows no bounds*.. November 07 Follow Up on Theories of Violence and PowerBefore posting the Eid Diaries Part II (if I ever actually get around to doing that), I thought I would follow up on the post I did previously about theories of violence and power. I haven't posted anything serious or political for a long time; my recent blog posts have been mostly entries on my daily life, so this makes for a nice change. Here is what I wrote concerning Hannah Arendt, Franz Fanon, and power and violence in colonial situations:
Hannah Arendt’s conceptualization of power and violence is convincing to an extent. I agree that violence and power are two very different phenomena (Arendt, 56), and that they usually appear together (52). I also agree with her that violence is often used when power is being challenged or is diminishing (53). However, I feel that her claim that violence can never create power (53, 56) does not apply to the world of colonialism. As Fanon explains, colonialism is a phenomenon that is founded on (Fanon, 35) and is perpetuated by violence (38), creating a “Manichean” world of ‘evil’ native subjects and ‘civilized’ colonists (41-42). In this Manichean world, the colonists treat the native subjects as though they were animals, violently ordering them to do their bidding and even referring to them using zoological terms (42). Under colonialism, the “agents of government speak the language of pure force” (38). The colonizers’ dehumanizing treatment of the native colonial subjects creates an atmosphere of violence where the colonized are rendered frustrated and politically powerless (54). In this atmosphere of violence and dehumanization, the colonized are further subdued by the fact that they have no real non-violent means of bringing about change to their situation (59, 61). Turning to the commercial or intellectual elites, or even the nationalist parties, for political empowerment over the colonizer will not achieve any real change since these groups’ interests lie in preserving the presence of the colonizing power (59-62, 68). Diplomacy and negotiations are also useless roads to take, for the colonizer’s interests will always be furthered and the colonized will gain nothing (61-62). The violence used to colonize a nation and then to further the colonial project there, combined with the increasing subduing and dehumanizing of the native subjects by especially violent methods, leaves the natives with only one means of changing their situation. That means is the use of violence by the natives to cleanse and re-humanize themselves (94), and to counter the colonizer’s violence. Contrary to the belief Arendt holds that violence can never create power (Arendt, 56), the use of violence gives the natives the power to break from the past and move towards liberation (Fanon, 89). Without violence, the colonized would continue to be subdued and dehumanized under colonial rule, frustrated and powerless, quiescent in the face of excessive wielding of power by the colonizer. When they undertake violent methods of resistance, they are cleansed and empowered with the ability to effect real change to their situation (86). In addition to violence having particularly constructive features, the use of violence to counter colonialism can succeed in ousting colonial rule for several reasons pertaining to the strategic position of the third world. First, since the 1960s, colonies were relied on as not only a prime source of raw goods, but also as a prime market for the colonizer’s manufactured goods (65). Any outbreak of violence in the colonies would jeopardize these economic relations and work against the colonizer (65). Also, with great development in the means of communication, news of violent outbreaks in a specific area can spread to other areas and encourage other subdued people to take action (70). Hence the strategic position of the third world ensures the success of violent outbreaks in empowering the natives against the colonizers, and the colonized can use this to their full advantage when employing counter violence. Therefore, as statement two claims, Arendt’s argument that violence and power cannot be derived from each other and that violence is not “constructive” (56) does not adequately address the question of violence and power in a colonial environment. Under colonialism, only violence can give the colonized real power to effect change. To not recognize this connection between violence and power in such situations will doom the colonized third world to continual dependency on the colonizing powers, even after traditional colonialism is officially gone. The truth of this is evident in today’s capitalist world system, where the third world is still almost completely dependent on the former colonial powers, even though they are not officially “colonized.” ©
All comments/opinions/arguments are greatly appreciated ! Let me know what you think please ... October 21 Theory: Violence and PowerSo how would you all like to take part in a little theoretical analysis here? Ok, ok, you don't have to cheer so loudly, it's no big deal, I mean come ON people (ahem)...so lemme know what you all think of this stuff here. And if I don't get any responses, I'll just assume most readers on here are not intellectual enough to think about these kinds of issues, so you'd better comment !! Ok, so I'm joking, but no seriously, I would like to get your opinions if you would be so kind as to voice them. Take a look:
Theory 1: Violence is power. Those who are able to implement violence have the power to make major changes in the world. Example: Colonized people cannot use peaceful means, such as negotiations or intellectual activities, to overthrow the violent colonizer; rather, they must take up arms and fight a bloody revolution to kick out the colonizer. Colonialism, in itself, is a violent phenomenon, and the native people's counter violence (i.e their revoloution) is completely justified. When they use this violence and kick the colonizer out, and embark on building up an independent nation, they are powerful.
Theory 2: Violence and power are complete opposites. Power is an end, whereas violence is a means to achieve a short-term goal. Violence is used when power starts to diminish, but violence will never be able to breed true power. Violence may overcome power in the short run, but in the long run, power will always win. Power always lies with the majority, because power requires numbers, whereas violence requires instruments to implement it. Example: If you put a gun to someone's head (violence) and order them to do something, they will obey you out of fear of being shot; however, as soon as you turn your back or lower the gun, they will cease to obey you; you do not have the real power to make that person obey you no matter what. Power is legitimate, whereas violence can only be justified by looking at the short term goal it is used to achieve.
So what say you? Violence equals power, or violence and power are complete opposites? Or anything else you might have to say about this subject??? I took the time to lay out these here theories, and hope that someone will take the time to give a response (anything!) about them.
By the way, for readings on theory 1, see Frnaz Fanon's "Wretched of the Earth". For reading on theory 2, see Hannah Arendt's "On Violence".
August 08 TextbooksI was just looking at my list of textbooks that I have to get for Fall Term 2005...the ones for my Political Science 3051 (Analysis in Political Science) sound pretty cool...I'll probaby go to the bookstore on Wednesday, though I might have to go back again sometime at the beginning of September since two of the required texts are not in stock yet..hmm..
Anyways check it out:
On Violence - Arendt
Totalitarianism - Arendt
Open Letters - Havel
Wretched of the Earth - Fanon
Globalization of World Politics - Baylis
International Politics - Art
Theories of International Relations - Burchill
Plus some math books and stuff...looks like I'll be doing a lot of reading..yay !
July 16 The What-How ProcessWhen reading a book I always go through a process that I call the "What-How Process"...Previously, my brain used to carry out this process unconciously; I never used to think about it. Now, after reading several of Naguib Mahfouz's novels, I have started to think about the What-How Process and go through it deliberately. Allow me to explain:
I believe that there are two things that a reader must examine whilst reading in order to determine whether or not a book is 'good'. Those two things, according to me, are:
1) What the author has to say
2) How the author is saying it
Oftentimes, an author has something very useful and important to say, and he/she writes a book in order to convey this message to readers. However, this author might not have a very entertaining or absorbing style of writing and hence what he is saying is good but how he is saying it is not so good. All in all, because the author's message is important and useful, we still consider the book to be 'good' even though how he is conveying the message is not so 'good'.
Othertimes, an author doesn't really have anything of use to say, but his/her style of writing (choice of words, grammar, phraseology, rhetoric, etc) is exteremly entertaining or absorbing. Hence this author might not be writing anything useful or important but how he writes makes his book 'good'.
A good writer, therefore, can either have something of use to say, or can have an entertaining way of saying something.
An excellent writer, on the other hand, combines both of these two things; an excellent writer has something very important and useful to say and says it in an entertaining or absorbing way.
The What-How Process is a process of examining why you think a book is good (or not so good) by looking at what the author is saying and how he/she is saying it.
Now, as I stated above, my brain used to carry out this process without me even thinking about it whenever I would read a book. After reading some of Naguib Mahfouz's novels though, the process that I used to carry out unconciously has suddenly become a clear and well-defined analytical framework for me to analyze books with.
What was so special about Naguib Mahfouz's novels that brought me to this realization? The fact that :
1) He had nothing useful to say
2) He didn't know how to say what he did have in an entertaining or absorbing way
Therefore, in my opinion, Naguib Mahfouz is a 'bad' writer, and shouldn't have won a Nobel Literature Prize.
July 03 Course Curriculum
July 01 Decisions on MajorsWhat the heck just happened ?! I posted this entry and then found out that everything I wrote wasn't there anymore ?! WEIRD AND ANNOYING..now I have to type it all again. *sighs as usual*
AS I was saying * clears throat*, I believe I have made some near-final decisions on majors that I would like to pursue inshallah..listen up:
Minor in Political Science (which I have almost completed)
Double major in Dentistry and English for undergraduate
Go on to Graduate School and pursue Masters and Ph.D degrees in Orthodontics and Teaching English as a Second Language (at University Level)
Sooo whaddaya think? For those of you who know me personally *or for those of you who think you know me personally because you read my blog everyday  *, you might be surprised at the whole Dentistry/Orthodontics thing...don't be. My decisions on majors offer me plenty of career oppurtunities inshallah. Looks like I'm up for a pretty hectic future huh...oh well. I can do it. Inshallah of course. May 23 Self EvaluationI decided to post my self-evaluation on my work in our Islamic World project..this self-evaluation was turned in to the teacher after he explicitly asked us to do evaluations on all of our group members and ourselves...When I went to see him in his office to ask him about our final grade on the project, he told me sarcastically that we were not supposed to evaluate ourselves, just our groups members...I was like
Myself I will admit right out that I absolutely hate evaluating myself on projects and work for someone else to read. Islam advises humility, while achieving good academic grades requires hard work, dedication, an appropriate final product, and most importantly and often annoyingly, telling everyone about it. I did work hard on this project; I took it seriously, I did my best to keep us all together and to make this a collective effort. From the beginning I established myself as someone who would always be there for the group and who would do her best to stay on top of this project and get it done right, as well as having a good time and possibly conveying a message while doing it. I put in long hours on Saturdays at the Wilson computer lab to research, analyze, and finish up my part of the project. Whenever I would come across an essay or article that I thought might be helpful to another group member, I would email it to that person or notify them about it right away. I specifically did the introduction, the ‘Occupation and Confiscation of Land’ section, and the conclusion of the paper. I probably sounded annoying to my group members when I would keep asking them how the project was getting along and sending out emails to fix a meeting time to have a briefing on how far we were in our research, though it seemed to help in the long-run because it helped keep us in constant contact with each other. I would say I deserve an A or an A+ on this project (hence my decision to avoid humility in this particular case and stick with doing whatever it takes to achieve a good grade J!!). *** What was so nice about this project was that we each had our areas of expertise that we were able to focus on when working on our project. *name censored* knows so much about the ancient biblical history of the region, I am very interested in the effects that Israeli land confiscation has had on the Palestinians, and *name censored* has extensive knowledge on the Palestine-Israel issue with regard to international laws. This variety of knowledge and expertise on all of our parts made this project go much smoother than expected. In addition to learning a lot, standing up to a challenge, learning new research and analysis skills, and best of all, working on an issue I am so passionate about and which means so much to me, I made some great new friends and hopefully accomplished my goal of creating a good impression of Islam by being the best I can be (i.e working very hard, caring about the group, making sacrifices so that the group benefits as a whole, and being a nice person with a sense of humor and a passion for what I believe is right) for anyone that I become acquainted with. *** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cool huh !! I know...I write well...LOOOL...And I'm pretty sure the teacher didn't mind reading it because I got an A on the class Just kidding...astaghfirullah...self-pride and bragging has been and continues to be the ruin of so many people..That won't happen to me inshallah...I really don't brag a lot...*side glance at Algerianlass88-lol*...
May 09 Exam GibbersOk so i feel sorry for all you readers.....because I am now going to rant and rave about my finals So: tomorrow....Human Geography from 8:00-10:00 am..lovely....I've got to prepare for the five essays tonight inshallah...and do some last minute revision... Friday: Global Politics...must finish the ID's, work on the short essays and prepare for the long essay (scary Saturday: Islamic World....got to finish the readings and summarize in addition to going over my whole notebook....inshallah khayr.... It doesn't look like much, but believe me it is ...anyways, I'll just be glad to get them over with....then I have May Session; more work and more exams, and finally another last exam which is very important....yalla shoo biddee asawwi ya 3ammi ...wallah....I've got to do it and I will inshallah...so prayers from you all would be great
P.S I probably won't update this blog for a week due to my strenouos (spelling?) studying schedule *Yeah, I know, nerdy, but hey that's what gets me results so I'll be nerdy and to heck with everybody Okkkkkk....a final goodbye for a while...*I might find a few minutes to update though*...salams.... May 02 Fall 2005 Schedulewow...i've spent a long time looking at the class schedule for Fall 2005 and trying to decide which classes I want/must take.....and here's a basic, first draft of my schedule for next fall inshallah..
What do you think?
1) Arab Film -002 LEC , 02:30 P.M. - 05:00 P.M. , Th 2) MATH 1051 Precalculus I *010 LEC , 1:25 - 2:15 P.M. , M,W,F -011 DIS , 09:05 A.M. - 09:55 A.M. , Th 3) POL 3835 International Relations -001 LEC , 10:10 A.M. - 11:00 A.M. , M,W,F 4) ECON 1101 Principles of Microeconomics *001 LEC , 09:05 A.M. - 09:55 A.M. , M,W,F - 013 DIS , 02:30 P.M. - 03:20 P.M. , W (and possibly another class ....not sure yet)..
interesting huh ???
April 18 The Importance of SpeakingI was thinking about how important the art of speaking is...sub7anallah....it really does make all the difference to be able to speak eloquently and persuasively...the Native Americans truly recognized this....they made pacts orally, they gave speeches..they were masters of the spoken word... and dare I say the Arabs also valued the importance of language and the spoken word...hence the extravagant poetry, the eloquent speeches and so on....Arabs would have speech / poetry contests, where the competing people had to make up poetry on the spot and be able of course to spout it in an elqouent manner....mashallah... George Campbell wrote in his introduction to "The Philosophy of Rhetoric" that without "eloquence, or the art of speaking...the greatest talents, even wisdom itself, lose much of their luster, and still more of their usefulness." A person's "own conduct ,may be well regulated" by wisdom, Campbell observed, but the art of speaking "is absolutley necessary for diffusing valuable knowledge, and enforcing right rules of action upon others."*
* George Campbell, The Philosophy of Rhetoric, ed. Lloyd Bitzer (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1963), xlix. ** Cited in James Andrews, Michael Leff, and Robert Terrill, Reading Rhetorical Texts: An Introduction to Criticism (Boston , New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998), vi.
April 11 A Story of Rhetoric
March 25 Field Work in Human Geography
March 22 What? No rhetoric major?I'm crying...well, not literally. But I really am disappointed. See, I've been taking these rhetoric classes and I totally fell in love with rhetoric (if you can fall in love with a subject "Technical Communication" "Designing Documents with New and Emerging Technologies" "Internet, Science, and Society" "Land, Nature, and Environmental Values" So you see, I have a legitimate reason to be disappointed. And I'm back to square one. Well, square one and a half since inshallah I already know that I want to minor in Political Science (although that idea might change later on By the way, what is rhetoric anyways? According to Dictionary.com , rhetoric is:
3. a. A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject b. Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric.
However, I prefer Aristotle's definition: " Let rhetoric be defined as the ability, in each particular case, to see the available means of persuasion."
Cool, huh?! And here's Artsitotle....
Homework and Spring Break?! Incompatible !!Bismillah, So who else takes an oath to finish weeks of homework in advance over Spring Break and then never sticks to it? I meant besides me...anyone? Oh, everyone ? Ok, well that's a relief. It's good to know that I'm not alone in the world when it comes to Spring Break and homework being, yep, incompatible. So I thought "well hey, I have a whole week, and I'm going to finish working on my Professional Persuasive Presentation, draw up the outline and get it over with. Also, I'll finish all of my readings for Global Politics and get that out of the way. Next, I will go on to finishing all the lessons on my online course, take the online quizzes and say bye bye to that. Finally, I will start reading Mahmoud Mamdani's "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" . I am really serious, I'll do this." Ha. Lovely goals, not so lovely will power. Out of all that, guess how much I actually did? Well, I did start reading "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim". In fact, I finished the first two chapters, which is actually not bad. I also did about three online lessons, leaving me with six more to go, two more quizzes, and one assignment. I also did one of the readings for my Global Politics class. That's about it. Oh well, I try to satisfy my guilty conscience with the lame excuse that "hey, it's Spring Break". But y'know everyone is telling me that so maybe I'm not so guilty after all. And where was it that I heard that only 20% of students actually do any work over Spring Break anyways ?! So inshallah I will be able to catch up with my homework some time or other. Not that I'm a lazy person (usually), but sometimes it's just easier to procrastinate. Does anyone not agree, because I'd love to hear your argument ?! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
the horror*, but I am a protective person, and I hope I'm making myself clear. This is not to imply that what I wrote is anything brilliant, lolz, but I've had trouble before, soooo..yeah. No trouble = all of us are happy bloggers. What say you? Good. I'm also not going to include a reference for the article I analayzed. Please don't take this all the wrong way, okies?! 
). 
that's not what you said and that's not what the whole class heard so STOP LYING *of course I didn't actually say that, but that's what I was thinking*...Anyways, here's how I evaluated myself...Note that I am a confident, proud person when it comes to academia...lol....(Side note: nothing below has been altered or changed except for censoring my classmates' names...The below was handed in to the teacher exactly as you see it here):
....A great thing about this blog is that I can brag as much as I want to without having to worry about it...how awesome is that...No one but the poor readers suffer *who does that leave besides me 
?! - ahem* ....I think I'll go wallow in self-pride...
...
)...
....
*...
..
Translation: "From a bad crow, a bad egg." Or, "When a mischievous bird of prey lays an egg, the egg too is mischievous."
The case was, in effect, thrown out of court. 
). I thought "Finally, a major I really like and can totally see myself working with in the future! YES!". That was before I found out that there is no such thing as a rhetoric major. In fact, very very few Universities in the world even have a rhetoric deprtament, let alone offer a major in rhetoric. The only options I have to focus my studies in the field of rhetoric is by majoring in one of these fields, and none of them appeal to me:
). Hmm...better get back to the drawing board...
|
|
&referrer=){kind=small}
