Draft of Public Argument

Draft of Public Argument 

So for Project 3 I am going to be using an auditory form of public argument. As I have continued into this piece more I have sort of transitioned from wanting it to be a podcast sort of interview to potentially a little news segment? Anyways, I provided you all with the script for my audio piece because  I think the main persuasion comes from the script but is conveyed through the audio. That being said if you all could please comment on how effective the script is and how well I convey it through the audio that would be great, thank you! 

SCRIPT FOR DRAFT OF PUBLIC ARGUMENT 

Vlad G. "Genetic engineering" 5/7/10 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution. 

Considering Visual Elements

Considering Visual Elements 

In a public argument the argument itself is not the only focus but so are the visual elements that go with it. Below is my consideration of visual elements that could be used in my public argument. 

Lumu (talk). "Arnold Boecklin Font" 2/9/11via Wikimedia Commons.  Public Domain.

• Are the different fonts I use complementary, or is the combination distracting? 
• Due to the fact that I will be creating my public argument in the form of a podcast there will not be that much text. That being said, the only text I think I will have is the title and then possibly a caption on a picture if I include one. I think it would be effective if I made these both the same font and then just the title in a much more pronounced size. 
• Are the fonts appropriate to the visual-rhetorical tone of my project? 
• The only visual fonts used in my argument will be for the title and photo caption so I think that they need to be effective in conveying the visual-rhetorical tone of my project. With that in mind I am going to look for a font which will not be too informal but not be too generic in order to be more visually appealing to the audience. 
• Is the theme or association that the image produces relevant to the theme of the argument? 
• I think it would be effective it I found a photo which directly relates to my topic of genetic engineering to put right below my embedment of the audio of my podcast. I think this would give the audience a visual depiction of the topic as well as an auditory depiction which could work hand in hand to help the audience relate more. 
• If the image is a graph or chart, does it clearly support a major point of my argument, or is it superfluous? 
• This question brought to my attention the idea of using a chart or graph. I think that if I could find a chart or graph that shows how genetic engineering can be effective in helping people based on the past scientific testing and research done then it can support the claim of my argument that genetic engineering leads to extreme scientific innovation. 
• Do the different visual and textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place? 
• I think that if I find the just the correct image then it can work well with the audio evidence which I will have. The image will have to be searched for though because most genetic engineering images are in favor of showing that it is unethical. I think that an image of genes or a graph of data could be effective in persuading the audience further. 
• If you are writing  a multimodal argument, do the visual images help you move from point to point in the argument clearly? 
• I think that because I am using a multimodal argument the listeners in general will more easily be able to understand genetic engineering in general. My image will not specifically be used to help move the argument from point to point but it will rather be used to encompass the argument as a whole.
• If you are calling your audience to take action are the consequences of not taking action and the benefits of taking action clearly expressed? 
• This is an interesting tactic that was brought to my attention. Due to the fact that I am only using one image I think it will be hard to prove the consequences of not taking an action and the benefits of taking that action. Although I do want my audience to take action to favor genetic engineering I think that I am trying to convey that more through the auditory part of the argument rather than through the visual part. 

Project 3 Outline

Project 3 Outline

Outlines are very effective in helping a writer decide what direction he or she wants to take with the work. Below is my outline for project 3. 

Kent, Carrie Belle. "Map of Genetic Engineering Argument" 11/8/15 via Coggle. 

• Introduction Your Public Argument
• The goal introduction of my public argument will be to "connect the issue to [my] audience's world view". I want to do this because with genetic engineering and debunking one of the many myths of why it is unethical could potentially affect us all in the future through lineage and science in general. By connecting this topic to my audience's world view they will be better equipped to understand the subject as a whole and connect with the reasons the topic is unethical. 
• Developing Strong Supporting Paragraphs
• Major Supporting Arguments: 
• Genetic Engineering is part of human evolution 
• If people don't want to use genetic engineering in the future they don't have to
• Genetic engineering could allow for vast advancements in sciences and human health 
• Major Criticisms: 
• Genetic engineering allows for creation of a new species which is unnatural 
• Genetic engineering could allow for "designer babies" to become a main focus 
• Key Support & Rebuttal Points:
• Help recognize how this topic could affect practically anyone 
• Point to timeline of human evolution over the ages (Timeline)
• Acknowledge counterargument of designer babies but recognize this would be few and far between 
• Tentative Topic Sentences: 
• Due to the fact that my public argument in going to be in the audio form I am going to focus on just having bullet talking points and then expand on them in the interview. These bullet points will include the key support and rebuttal and then specific pieces of evidence which I can use. 
• Gather Evidence:( I have only included two types of evidence because my video will only have time for about two different pieces of evidence in addition to the opinions)
• Timeline
• Debunk myths about genetic engineering 
• Specifically, idea that the public mainly thinks GMOs are unnatural. 
• Map of Argument
• Concluding Strategies
•  I think that in conclusion of my argument about genetic engineering I will try to specifically point to the future of the debate of the issue. Although this tactic might change I think this would be helpful in pointing to why the topic is so important and how it can affect everyone's lives and why it is important that society continues to think about it in the future. 

Reflection:

First I read Grace's Project 3 Outline. Hers was very insightful about her topic and helped me recognize that I need to focus on maybe finding more solid evidence regarding my topic of genetic engineering. It was interesting that we both are trying to connect our audience to the world view of our topics which I think is effective in really helping them look at the bigger picture. I then read Austin's Project 3 Outline. His was also very interesting and in depth. He was trying to decide how to conclude his argument and it was interesting to read the rest of his outline and then give input on what would be effective. He did a great job at assessing not only his side of the argument but also the opposing viewpoint and I think that is logical in indication to the other side that he respects the opposing viewpoint but that his is more reasonable. 

Analyzing My Genre

Analyzing My Genre 

In order to effectively write in the genre which a writer chooses it is first necessary for him or her to completely understand that genre. Below there are a number of examples of my genre and the analyzation of the genre in general. 

Breitenbach, Patrick. "My Podcast Set I" 8/8/08 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• 5 Genre Examples: 
• Example 1
• This is an example that shows the sort of interview type of sense which I want to have clear in my podcast. 
• Example 2
• Even though this example doesn't pertain to my subject this is an example of about the length which I want my podcast to be. 
• Example 3
• Example 4
• This is an example of a podcast that has the approximate length which I am aiming for and it is potentially a great place to post my podcast. 
• Example 5
• My Genre Details:
• Social Context
• The genre is usually set in a website which produces different lengths in podcasts. Originally I thought thought that NPR would be an appropriate contextual location for my podcast to be posted but after looking around on the site I realized the majority of those podcasts are upwards of 45 minutes long while mine will only be around two or three minutes long. That being said there are a number of other scientific websites would be appropriate to post a podcast on. 
• This genre can encompass pretty much any subject as I have found many different topics discussed in these types of podcasts. 
• A multitude of writers use this sort of genre but generally those who are effective speakers and well versed in the subject. Additionally, those who use this genre are speakers/ writers who think their topic would be conveyed effectively. 
• This genre is used to more easily convey a point in a different way than just writing an article. Sometimes hearing about an issue by a real voice rather than just reading a long article makes a person connect with the topic more easily and allows them to understand more. This provides the readers with and writers both with a more convenient and direct way of understanding and conveying the information. 
• Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre
• Depending on whether questions are being asked or not determines what content is included and excluded in the podcast. If it is an interview attention could be brought to the opposing views of the talker but if not he or she could easily just talk about the positives of the subject. 
• I think that this genre mostly focuses on pathos and logos. These rhetorical appeals effectively reach to the audience emotions to help them better understand while also explaining logically through logical facts. 
• For these podcasts there is almost always an introduction to the person talking and the subject which he or she is talking about. They also usually end in a similar way with the person talking coming to some sort of conclusion.
• The way in which the writer speaks usually varies in sentence structure and explanation throughout the podcast. Most of these sentences are simple enough for the general reader to understand and stated in the active voice. 
• Depending on the subject the word choice varies but in general the majority of the word choice is understandable by the general public with some words that may be more easily understood by more educated people. The overall effect is somewhat informal academic because the main jargon is academic but in a sort of conversation between two people. 
• What above Patters reveal about the social context of the genre
• The genre mainly includes those that would be interested in listening to podcasts about those specific subjects. That being said, it excludes people who are no interested in looking into finding podcasts. 
• The genre encourages a more thorough connection between the talker, author, and the reader, listener. That being said this specific podcast genre encourages the reader to engage in active listening which will most likely provide a better basis for them to understand the concepts with. 
• This genre mainly encourages an open mind to all sides of an argument and to listen effectively and openly to the thoughts discussed about. That being said, it is expected that the users have somewhat of an understanding of the topic discussed and are eager to learn more and hear more points of view of the subject. 
• It is not completely specific in what content the genre treats as most valuable. This genre comes with all different types of subjects and I found podcasts in many different types of areas. While there are some subjects that are emphasized more highly it doesn't seem as though the podcast genre picks and chooses what topics to focus on. 

Reflection: 

  I read both Gabee's "Analyzing My Genre" blog post as well as Chad's "Analyzing My Genre" blog post.  I thought Gabee's genre was very interesting because it was a good mix of opinion and factual evidence with also a good picture depiction for the reader. I liked that her genre spoke to such a large audience and it made me want to figure out a way to speak to a more broad audience in general. I decided to read Chad's blog post because we have a similar topic and a somewhat similar genre. That being said I really liked how his genre adds a bit of humor and or irony because I think it really helps to engage the reader. I also recognized how ours vary in that his speaks to mainly the general public and not really scientists or researchers while mine speaks to less of the general public and more of the scientists and researchers. 

Considering Types

Considering Types 

There are a number of different approaches which a writer can take in his or her argument. Below is my consideration of the various arguments that might be suitable for my writing.

Rocket 000. "Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement" 9/5/08 via Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.

• Position Argument:
• This would be a logical type of argument to write in due to the fact that a number of the articles which I have read about genetic engineering were in this style. It would be informative to my reader while giving them all the basics in understanding. I think this type of argument would also be very effective if I end up writing a formal article for my audience. 
• Proposal Argument: 
• I think this would be an interesting type of argument to use due to the fact that I could really figure out one of the problems in genetic engineering and then go from there in figuring out how it could be fixed through a proposal of cure. By "develop[ing] a proposal" I would really be able to connect with my readers about one specific part of genetic engineering and that problem in able to make them more likely to be in favor of genetic engineering. 
• Refutation Argument:
• I think this might be an interesting type of argument about genetic engineering because I could specifically pinpoint one of the problems of genetic engineering such as how people think it is unethical and try to break that down. By providing a refutation to this notion I would be able to dispel this belief hopefully entirely and convince readers that they should not believe the process is unethical. 
• Some of the types of arguments  I don't think would be effective would be the casual argument and the evaluative argument. While these would be good types of arguments to use in other areas genetic engineering hasn't quite had a burst of successfulness yet and not many policies have been implemented about it so I don't think an evaluative argument would be appropriate. Additionally, the casual argument doesn't really fit genetic engineering because there has not been enough headway with genetic engineering yet to analyze problems it has created. That being said I think the above three specified possible approaches would be most effective in conveying to readers what I want them to understand.

Reflection:

 I read Chris's "Considering Types" blog post in relation to his Rhetorical Action Plan. It was interesting to read his thoughts because we both were thinking about the refutation argument. While he did look at this type I think the evaluative argument would be very effective in conveying his ideas either through a video or a scientific option article.  I also read Stef's blog post on "Considering Types" in terms of her Rhetorical Action Plan. I really envy the passion she has about her subject and I want to find that for my topic in order to make as effective of an argument. Our topics and type of rhetorical strategy are a little bit different but I think they both work well. After having read a few other rhetorical approaches I have realized that it is a very individual process of determining what approaches are appropriate for one's topic and I think that ones I have come up with speak well to my topic. That being said I plan to keep a open mind going forward in case I realize that another argument would be better suited for my topic. 

My Rhetorical Action Plan

My Rhetorical Action Plan 

A rhetorical action plan is imperative to one's ability to effectively convey an idea or purpose. Below is my rhetorical action plan for my act of public speech. 

Appelo, Jurgen. "PDCA-Plan." 3/1/12 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• Audience:
• Knowledge: The audience is expected to know the basics of genetic engineering. While my article will go into a little bit of depth about genetic engineering it will only give enough to help them understand how beneficial genetic engineering is rather than being just an in depth informational piece. Although some of the audience may have ideas about genetic engineering already it is unlikely that they will be extremely well versed in their beliefs. 
• Values: I believe that the general audience will have values that encourage advancements in the sciences as innovation in general. Because of this I am hopeful that they will be more likely to support the idea of genetic engineering. 
• Standards of Argument: I think that scholarly research will be persuasive for my audience but I also think that more personal stories with less educated notion will be helpful in giving them both parts of genetic engineering. I think I will need to put it in terms that the general public will understand so it won't just be like reading a dry and dull piece. 
• Visual Elements: I think that with this topic the idea of visual elements is not extremely necessary because it is hard to convey over pictures. While a few graphs or charts might be beneficial it is yet to be determined how helpful they would be. 
• Purpose: The audience is reading the argument due to the fact that they want to learn more about the genetic engineering controversy as a whole. They will have found my article because they are interested in the topic and want to understand it. I will be trying to expand understanding about genetic engineering while also help encourage support of genetic engineering. I think that if I have a strong argument with much different evidence then it is likely that they will be motivated to look for other sources in efforts to understand further the genetic engineering controversy. 
• Genre 1: Article written for The Huffington Post 
• Examples:
•  "These Advances In Lab-Grown Organs Might Save Your Life One Day"
• "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea Of 'Designer Baby' Ban"
• The function of this genre is to help further the audience's understanding about genetic engineering through somewhat scholarly writing. This Huffington Post is a pretty popular site for online publication of scholarly research so I think it would be appropriate to publish here so that a majority of society would see it. 
• The setting of the genre is in the Huffington Post.
• In my article I think that I will use a mix of the rhetorical appeals we have studied in order to connect with my audience. The most effective articles that I have read have used a combination of the different rhetorical appeals so I think I will employ that tactic to make an effective argument. 
• This type of genre doesn't include visual elements so I don't think I will use any. 
• The style of this genre would be somewhat formal with a mix between conversational and academic. While it is not going to be published in a scholarly journal it still needs to sound educated and formal enough to provide the readers with my character's credibility. 
• Genre 2: Podcast interview about genetic engineering 
• Examples: 
• "Proposed Treatment To Fix Genetic Diseases Raises Ethical Issues"
• "Should we genetically engineer humans?"
• The genre provides readers with an opportunity to listen to interviews and podcasts regarding genetic engineering rather than having to read through an article. There are a number of locations where this could be published were many readers would be able to listen to it. It would be effective in helping readers understand the concepts on a more relatable level in a talked out way. 
• The setting of the genre could be any place which publishes podcasts, hopefully a well known location such as NPR or something of the sort. 
• For this genre I would focus mostly on logos and ethos due to the fact that my credibility will have already been proven because I was able to make it on to a podcast in general. 
• This genre doesn't use visual elements because it is all auditory. 
• The sale of this will be formal conversational. It will need to be appropriate to be publicly published but I will be partaking in a conversation with the person asking questions regarding the topic. 
• Responses/Actions:
• Positive Reactions:
• Increased interest in genetic engineering 
• Rise in support of genetic engineering 
• Recognition of and accreditation to importance of scientific advancement 
• Explain to people how the topic could relate to them in the future 
• Negative Rebuttals:
• People recognize they don't believe in it after reading further about unsuccessful attempts 
• Although some failures, there is much room for improvement still being made 
• Continued rebuttal from the "unethical" standpoint of genetic engineering
• Show how benefits of scientific advancements far outweigh the costs of the possibility of being unethical
• Increased worry in potentially becoming a society based solely on designer babies 
• Recognition of how there may be some of this but very much of it is unlikely 

Analyzing Purpose

Analyzing Purpose 

Kent, Carrie Belle. "Screenshot of Coggle on Expansion on Genetic Engineering" 10/30/15 via Coggle. 

Analyzing purpose is key to a writer's success. By analyzing purpose an author is more equipped to not just reiterate what other writers have already said but develop his or her ideas more fully. I made a Coggle analyzing the purpose of my public argument. The link for it can be found here