Sei sulla pagina 1di 4

Wilson 1

Savanna Marie Wilson Professor Alicia Bolton English 101 1 October 2013 Smarty Pants: Intellectualism Should Not Be Shamed! Arguing is an important aspect in English, and many other things in life. Whether or not we realize it, everything we say or do will bring about some kind of argument. Arguing isnt necessarily having an opinion; youve got to have a fully developed argument for it to actually be a clear and arguable position. A good argument requires a list of things like background information, good reasoning, convincing evidence, appealing, and rhetorical appeals. One argumentative essay that generally meets these requirements are Grant Penrods AntiIntellectualism: Why We Hate Smart Kids and Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism. Penrods Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate Smart Kids argues that people are being decisive towards the intellectuals and that they need to lay off (757). He acknowledges the fact that the harmful stereotypes begin to occur as early as in high school. He also states that being uneducated shows where Americans hold intelligence. Meanwhile, Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism claims that schools and colleges do not acknowledge the fact that having street smarts can be used to apply that intelligence to academic work. Graff also says that schools and colleges need to use sports books and magazines and other things of that sort to use towards academic studies to stop students from getting bored and uninterested in what they are being taught. Both Penrod and Graff provide interesting claims and sufficient reasoning behind their claims, but Penrods essay is more effective because of its use of logos and convincing reasons and evidence.

Wilson 2

To begin, Penrods use of the rhetorical appeal logos and convincing reasoning and evidence is used profoundly in his article Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate Smart Kids. First, he talks about how a football team at Mountain View High School gets more recognition for winning the state championships. The academic teams also won their state championships but only got ten minutes of recognition at the beginning of the sports assembly. Penrod also talks about how the hatred towards the intellectuals begins somewhere and he believes it possibly comes from the examples set by public figures. That is his strongest use of logos: Certainly the image presented by modern celebrities suggests that intellectualism has no ties to success and social legitimacy. As an illustration, the website anglefire.com features a compilation of the names of famous high school drop outs. With such wellknown cultural icons as Christina Aguilera, Kid Rock, L. L. Cool J., and Sammy Sosa qualifying for such a list, any drive toward intelligence or education becomes laughable in the eyes of media-inundated young people (Noted Individuals). Thus, intellectualism loses the respect that its rigor would otherwise tend to earn it. Uneducated success extends far beyond just singers and sports stars, too; even the current President of the United States presents the image of the success of non-intellectualism. His reputation as a C student is widely touted, and his public speeches hardly exonerate his intellectual image. The fact that such a vital public figure can get away with saying things like It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it," and "there needs to be a wholesale effort against racial profiling, which is illiterate children" reflects rather poorly on the regard in which most Americans hold intelligence (The Very Long List). (755) What he is basically saying is that being a dropout or having low grades in school is acceptable in the eyes of Americans today. One use of anecdotes would be an example. He used examples

Wilson 3

by stating that Christina Aguilera, Kid Rock, L. L. Cool J., and Sammy Sosa are high school dropouts and any drive toward education becomes hilarious in the eyes of the media. Therefore, intellectualism loses its respect. Not only does Penrod use an example talking about celebrities, he also talks about the President of the United States. Penrod states that the President had a reputation as a C student and that his public speeches hardly pardon his intellectual image. The use of logos in Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism is not as effective as Penrods neither is his reasoning and evidence. Unlike Penrod, Graff does not have a strong use of anecdotes. Graff talks only about how he never knew that he was gaining knowledge from reading sports magazines. His use of reasons and evidence tend to be very vague. He goes off his personal opinion and what he thinks schools and colleges should do. He uses one fallacy very often, Hasty generalization. He states, If I am right, then schools and colleges are missing an opportunity when they do not encourage students to take their nonacademic interests as objects of academic study (Graff 204). This is generally an opinion and Graff believing that because he thinks that it would have worked for him as a child then it would work for children in school now. In conclusion, Penrods Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate Smart Kids is way more effective than Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism due to the fact that Penrod uses logos, reasons, and evidence to support his thoughts on Anti-Intellectualism, unlike Graffs opinion on Hidden Intellectualism. Graff relies strongly on the assumption that his readers believe as he does. Penrods essay is a good example of an argument for students to study; Graffs, on the other hand, is only useful for someone who thinks as he does and could be used for demonstrating bandwagon appeals.

Wilson 4

Works Cited Graff, Gerald. Hidden Intellectualism. They Say I Say. 2nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff, and Cathy Birkenstein. New York: Norton, 2010. 198-205. Print. Penrod, Grant. Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate Smart Kids. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings and Handbook. 3rd ed. Ed. Marilyn Moller. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2013. 754-757. Print.

Potrebbero piacerti anche