Writing Workshop Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Writing Workshop Paper - Essay Example In this method, students are exposed to different forms of writings and genre, in order to evaluate their proficiency and give appropriate recommendations. In addition, writing workshops allows teachers to meet the needs of individual student according to their weaknesses and strength. This paper presents a proposal on how to incorporate a writing workshop in the classroom. The writing workshop must have a predictable structure, regular time and a workman-like atmosphere for writing. This implies that activities of a writer’s workshop should have a definite time schedule that is accompanied by a realistic list of expectations and outcomes (Trachsel, 2005). The schedule is analogous to a classroom or a lesson timetable. My writer’s workshop will have a program that is spread across five days and according to available tasks. The basic steps of the writer’s workshop (WW) will be: 5 days a week 60 minutes per day Mini-lesson Writing time Author’s chair To ach ieve the objectives, the classroom will require having a special setup that facilitates the writing exercise. Firstly, we will need to label one of the corners of the classroom as the writing workshop. Students will then be required to arrange their chair and desk in a row formant in order to facilitate the exercise. Secondly, the WW will require books, which the student will use for the exercise.

Buddha was a religious innovator Essay Example for Free

Buddha was a religious innovator Essay In my opinion, Buddha was a religious innovator- since he went against all other prominent religious beliefs of the time in declaring that there was no soul- no permanent self (anatta). I will be discussing whether Buddha was indeed a religious innovator, the ideas he has taken from other religions and entirely original, new concepts he created. He disagreed with many other popular religious practices, for example sacrifices- around which the Vedic religion (which was popular around Buddhas time) revolved. He did so for many reasons, the main being Buddhists dont believe in a God- no God would mean sacrificing an animal would be wasteful and pointless. Another reason he disagreed with this would be that hurting the animal would be against the eightfold path since harming the animal unnecessarily would not be a right action it would also be an example of not showing the right mindfulness since if we were aware of the animals pain and suffering then we wouldnt be sacrificing the animal. Many Buddhists choose to be vegetarian as hurting animals creates bad karma due to the above. Buddhas main difference in opinion to ideas of the time would be that the Buddhist Dharma (or teaching) says that we have no soul or no permanent self, this is called Anatta. Buddhists believe that because we are made up of five Skandhas- (Form, sensations, perceptions, mental formation and consciousness) that are constantly changing, we have no permanent self. Buddhism was the first religion to say that we have no soul. The Jains and Shramanas (both prominent religions of Buddhas time) both taught that the atman (or soul) is reincarnated time after time until Moksha, where the soul returns to God (or Brahmin in some cases.) In Buddhism, Buddha taught that it is not our atman that is reborn, but our karma. For example- a candle lighting another candle, it is the heat from the first candle that lights the second- no part of the first candle is passed along to the second. Buddhists believe this, but with karma instead of heat- that is, they believe it is our karma that causes rebirth time after time. Buddha also made it clear that equality was an important part of Buddhism since we could be reborn as anything- poor man or a king- we are all the same. This was innovative since in Eastern Europe there was great emphasis on the social division called the caste system, which was present in the Vedic religion and very rigid. This meant that many of the lower classes and poorer people could not take part and so were cut off from the religion. However, Buddha did take ideas from the ideas of karma, but changed them slightly. For example, the Jains believed that karma was a sticky substance which floated above their heads preventing them from escaping rebirth, whereas Buddhists might perceive karma as a force which governs balance- for example if youre a bad, mean, rich person in this life, you might come back as a poor beggar who lives a miserable life. Another Jain idea that Buddha imitated was that of Ahisma or non-violence. Buddhists believe violence is wrong because of parts of the eightfold path, such as right action. This was the Jains main teaching- they were the first to become vegetarians- many Buddhists choose to become vegetarians too. Having considered both points of view, I still believe that Buddha was a great religious innovator simply due to the fact that most of his teachings and ideas had not been heard before.

The Rationality of Scientific Discovery: The Aspect of the Theory of Creation :: Philosophical Science Scientific Papers

The Rationality of Scientific Discovery: The Aspect of the Theory of Creation ABSTRACT: In order to understand the rationality of scientific creation, we must first clarify the following: (1) the historical structure of scientific creation from starting point to breakthrough, and then to establishment; (2) the process from the primary through the productive aspects of the scientific problem, the idea of creation, the primary conjecture, the scientific hypothesis, and finally the emergence of the genetic structure establishing the theory; and (3) the problem threshold of rationality in scientific creation. Given that the theory of scientific creation adopts the descriptive viewpoint of rationality, it therefore establishes rational principles such as the following: (1) a superlogical mode of thinking; (2) an analysable genetic structure which consists of the primary and productive aspects (including experiential facts, background theory, operational means, higher irrational factors, etc.); (3) a means of recourse to the effect of incubation of a higher idea; (4 ) a movement in thinking from generality to particularity; and (5) the replacement of irrational by rational factors. 1.The Logic Theory of Scientific Discovery and the Irrational Theory of Scientific Discovery The modern forms of the logic theory of scientific discovery have abandoned the discovery model of pure logic, and search after the discovery logic in a broad sense. Both the retrospective inference which Hanson initiated and the inductive which Maclauin elucidated deserve serious attention among them [1]. Their common charateristics are to resort to the irrational factors, at the same time, they are unable to expound the process of emergence of the new ideas. In addition, the rationality of discovery is summed up into "the algorithm" or "the patterns of discovery" is still put forward, and it holds that it is according to the overeconomical principle that the discovery of the scientific laws discovers "the patterns" in experience and data [3]. They are both the different expression of discovery logic, the former is a kind of logic of problem solving, the latter is actually an inductive inference. Their common shortcomings are the simplification and to be unable to reveal how the new ideas occur in the process of scientific creation. The irrational theory of discovery advocates "the method of bisection" of discovery and verification and holds that the scientific discovery is "the intuitional result like poetry" (Popper), and doesn't thoroughly have the possibility of epistemological research (L. Laudan) [4]. The problems of scientific discovery should be studies by psychology and sociology.

Kant & ontological proof

The basic principles of ontology are argument for existence of God as a predicate and argument for God’s existence as a necessary existence. The first leg of the argument states: God is the greatest and most perfect being that can be conceived. Existence in imagination and reality is greater than existence in imagination only. Therefore, God really exists. The second leg of the argument is that: God is the entity than which nothing greater can be conceived. It is greater to be necessary than not. God must be necessary. God necessarily exists.Kant’s objection to conceived God as proof of his actual existence is premised on the ability of everything that is said to exist to have some features or characteristics attributable to them. He argued that existence is not a property or the constituent of a thing. Anything that has the property of being non-existent cannot possibly have any other property.  David Hume’s objection is that nothing can be proved a priori. Pr oving a priori is through an opposite contradiction. The resultant contradiction makes something inconceivable. Nothing can be proven a priori, since it is impossible to comprehend anything not existing.Norman Malcolm, in defending the idea of God, maintains that while it may be true that existence of God as a predicate for his reality may be unsustainable, he calls attention to another twist of the argument, which is necessary existence. He argues that where the idea of God, greater than which nothing can be conceived, is possible, it is therefore logically consistent that He necessarily exists. I agree with Malcolm. God must necessarily exist so that the existence of other beings can be traced to Him, who in himself is self existent.REFERENCE.1. Malcolm Norman (Prentice Hall, 1963), Knowledge and Certainty: Essays and Lectures (Englewood Cliffs, N.).

McDonalds Video Advertisement Essay

This paper analyzes the rhetorical features of one particular video advertisement (2010 see Reference list for details) that was issued on the internet by the multinational burger company McDonalds. It now circulates on the internet with and without the English subtitles. The subtitled text of the advert is a very brief nine lines long, followed by the single tag line â€Å"Come as You are† and the full text is given below at Appendix 1. Hill and Helmers (2008, pp. 51-53) describe how a video uses a particular type of persuasion called â€Å"visual argument† which is rhetorical rather than logical or dialectical. The medium is very compressed and this does not allow full exposition of claim, argument, rebuttal, etc but on the other hand the visual aspect lends a sense of immediacy which written text does not have. They warn, however, that the apparent advantage of seeing rather than reading is partly illusory, since the images presented are highly structured and filtered so as to present a particular viewpoint. In their terminology the McDonalds advert would fall into the category of â€Å"didactic narrative†. The target market for McDonalds products is generally young families and teenagers. The opening shots set a scene which is familiar to this group: a busy and noisy McDonalds restaurant with many smiling faces. A father waits to be served while a son sits at a formica table and talks on his mobile telephone while looking at a photograph. Across the world, in France as well as in other countries, this is a regular occurrence and will resonate with both older and younger viewers who see themselves in the father or son role. The dresscode in the video is casual and â€Å"cool† as evidenced by the beanie hat worn by a customer, and the hoodie worn by the boy who talks. This is typical of styles popular with young urban males. At first it looks like a mainstream father and son, where the son talks to someone romantically on his cellphone. The person on the other end of the telephone is neither seen nor heard and one just assumes out of habit that this person is female. Lines 1-4 are spoken by the boy. The father arrives and lines 5-9 are spoken by the father. As the father quizzes the boy and makes a comparison with himself, the facial expression of the boy makes it clear that the father is not aware of a crucial difference between them: the boy is gay. The Tag line which is presented on a plain screen at the end just before the McDonalds logo â€Å"Come as you are† tacitly acknowledges that people are different, and extends a welcome to all kinds of people. It does not matter whether they are older or younger, gay or straight, they should still come to McDonalds and eat together. The claim, or main issue which the video presents is that diversity is a good thing, and people should be welcome regardless of their sexual orientation. There is no explicit verbal argument to back this up, but the story presents the gay son in a favourable light. This is done by camera angles that focus on his face, and the choice of an attractive young French male actor dressed in pretty average teenage clothes. This is by no means extreme gay activism with stereotypical gay wardrobe, mannerisms and speaking style but a subtle depiction of a situation that a pretty average young gay man is likely to encounter. It all looks and is intended to look â€Å"normal†. The video is youth-focused, because it lets the audience see things from the boy’s perspective, while making it obvious that the father does not appreciate the insider information which audience and boy share. The father represents the traditional French male role model of an experienced older man who is successful with women. The son represents a more up to date role model of a gay French man. An interesting aspect of the video is that there are a number of appeals going on at the same time in different directions. On the one hand there is a main message conveyed by pathos, which shows the young boy’s romantic feelings towards his boyfriend, and his wry acceptance of his father’s old fashioned and rather macho attitudes. On the other hand there is some authority and believability in the role of the father who pays for the meal and takes a positive and fatherly interest in his son. The son is inward looking and reflective, using the personal pronoun â€Å"I† to reveal his feelings, while the father uses the pronoun â€Å"you† more often and directs his feelings outwards. The father cites the evidence of his own experience to offer an example for the boy to follow in his footsteps. McDonalds will be well aware that parents and teenage children, and the sometimes complex and difficult relationship between them is absolutely the territory in which they operate their business. They provide a framework, something like a neutral territory, in which this generational conflict can be worked through, via the activity of buying and eating fast food. In making the gay-friendly message implicit, rather than explicit, McDonalds avoids the possible outcome of presenting a crass or sensationalist message. The way gaps in the narrative are left for the viewer to supply is also very clever, because it flatters the audience and forces them to get involved in constructing the meaning of the advertisement. Ambiguity used in this way is a very powerful rhetorical technique. There is still, of course, the possibility that some viewers will react negatively to the overturning of the traditionally dominant heterosexual point of view. Some viewers will resist the gay-friendly message that is being constructed but this, too, is part of the writer’s intention. Advertisers often court controversy as a means to extend the impact of their message and this is a prime example of that. If some viewers react with an indignant and anti-gay blog post or a you tube video or text response then this in turn provokes pro-gay and pro-McDonald posts from the viewers. The message is then guaranteed durability and a wider circulation. In purely technical production terms this video is a model of economy and precision. There are only two speakers, and each takes only one conversation turn. The product is never mentioned, and the instant recognizability factor with this brand makes this irrelevant in any case. Just in case there is any doubt in the viewer’s mind, however, the logo is added at the end. The colors are muted, and the mood is a gentle family intimacy with some tension caused by the unspoken facts which change the surface meaning of the discourse. Deep meaning is conveyed in shots of the changing expressions on the son’s face, and these meanings are obliquely referred to in the tag line â€Å"Come as you are†. This phrase is used in standard English to mean something like â€Å"don’t dress up specially – there is no need to be formal† and the McDonalds ad suggests an extension of this to mean something like â€Å"you don’t need to pretend you are straight, just be yourself† for a young and gay friendly audience, or â€Å"you don’t need to worry if your son is gay, just come and eat with him as normal† for an older audience who may be less open towards a gay message. The advert makes a plea for tolerance, not for any particular orientation. All of the components of the advert, even including the brief snippet of song saying â€Å"I’m going on my way† at the end, support these same messages and the images work, because they rest on a long McDonalds formula of adverts showing intimate conversations in busy restaurant scenes, but incorporate this new â€Å"diversity† based angle in a positive, friendly and contemporary way. Appendix 1. 1. Boy: Hello? 2. Boy: I was thinking about you too. 3. Boy: I miss you too. 4. Boy: My dad’s coming, I have to hang up. 5. Father: Is this your class picture? 6. Father: You look just like me at your age/ 7. Father: Let me tell you I was quite the ladies’ man! 8. Father: Too bad your class is all boys†¦ 9. Father: You could get all the girls. (Song in the background) 10. Tag line replaces the pictures : Come as you are. Hill, Charles A. and Helmers, Marguerite (2008) Defining Visual Rhetorics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lunsford, Andrea A. , Ruskiewicz, John J. , Walters, Keith. (2009) Everything’s an Argument. Boston: Bedford books. McDonald’s video advert â€Å"Come as You Are†, (2010) in French with English subtitles. Available online at: http://www. youtube. com/watch? v=xk8xyONKK_4&feature=related