April 5, 2015

1. In my opinion our research question is pretty solid. We asked what

drives racial preferences in humans. The documentary was very
interesting but there were some major points that bothered me. The
biggest of these things is probably the dynamic of the couple. All of the
men that were interviewed honestly seemed really creepy. They
seemed socially awkward and there is part of you that has to question
if some of them actually have a racial preference of if online
interactions with someone overseas were first. I am honestly very
surprised that the two in the movie stayed together.
2. I believe that the question I previously mentioned would be a good
one for these sources. That question being what drives people with
racial preferences? For this question my thesis would be along the lines
of people are attracted to different racial preferences based on things
like appearance and cultural backgrounds. As far as racism I do not
believe having a preference is racist. People like what they like and as
long as there is no detriment to society can you call it racist? There is a
definite difference between fetishism and preference. Fetishism is the
extreme version where someone may not only peruse someone of a
certain race but it becomes almost an obsession to him or her.
3. The upcoming research paper does not concern me that much
honestly. I am interested in my topic and I love debating. That being
said I am actually looking forward to it.

March 22 2015
1. The word feminism is such a powerful word in todays media
because of the extremely negative or positive connotation that go with
it. Many people are under the idea that feminism is nothing but woman
whining about pointless things. On the other side many people view
feminism as a movement not just for equality for woman but for all
people. This is a hot button issue that you cannot really be on the
fence about. I like what Adichie is saying in that "The problem with
gender is that it prescribes how we should be rather than who we are."
This is what I feel the base root to feminism should be; however, I also
feel that a lot of people use "feminism" to get on a soapbox they do
not necessarily know anything it.
2.In my opinion these are Rogarian arguments. They are saying that
patriarchy hurts society because the less desirable are always passed
down from generation to generation instead of being corrected and
retaught.
3. In my opinion feeling is a very sensitive subject in general. This is
because today's society in my opinion is very sensitive. There is a
massive movement in political correctness. This is the idea that if you
tread on anyone's toes you will hurt their feelings and suffer much
social outcast. I think that people's feelings are important but that
there is an air of oversensitivity.
March 4, 2015

1. The biggest difference between emotional truth and factual truth is

that factual truth is just the facts. Emotional truth is when the author
uses emotions to tell the true story, but they tell it in such a way it
helps their argument. OBrian was trying to show that way is not what
it all seems. He uses stories such as the buffalo dying to show this.
2.America is based on people from other countries moving to the
states. The idea of the "American Dream" comes from this. It is the
idea of coming here from nothing and making it somewhere nice. With
out immigrants this could not happen.
February 15, 2015
1. "The Fire Within" is an argument of definition because he takes a
situation with set parameter and argues for it. For example he talks
about not giving up a seat to a white woman, and he relates it to
Christians not following the religion. This is relating
ethnoautobiography because he writes it exponentially and
analytically.
2. Wittgenstein uses circumstantial evidence by saying that ethics is
nothing but what you say it is. He says something about telling a lie
and confronting him about it. He says that if one doesn't think its
wrong it isn't.
3. Foot's essay could not be used in an essay other than using it for
definitions.
4. What do you define ethics as?

February 8, 2015
1. The fallacy for logos would be that of a slippery slope effect. In
essence it would be saying that if something is true than it cause
ridiculous clams that make the audience question ones credibility. The
fallacy of ethos would be the deformation of ones character. In an
argument if you were to essentially call someone a name you lose. For
pathos the fallacy would be that of trying to use emotions like fear to
win your argument. This is probably most common when arguing for
God as I have heard someone say "Aren't you afraid that if you don't
believe in God you will go to hell?" In this instance this person just lost
the argument.
2. An argument of fact is attempting to find out if something is true or
not. Facts are often very controversial as they deal in personal beliefs.
An argument of definition is something with boundaries. This would be
saying that if this happens than that is the result. This would more be
the ideal argument for an ethical debate. That being said the argument
for God is that of fact.
3. An argument of evaluation isn't so much an argument in and of
itself. It is more the judging of other arguments by using pathos, logos,
and ethos.
4. In "The Problem With Evil" the argument is leaning to the side of
ethos. Lewis in the beginning talks about how if God id good than he
would want good things for his creatures, but since bad this happen He

is either not good or has no power. I find it interesting that he is using

an ethos mindset in his argument and not only that but and argument
in definition as he sets up a boundary leads to a conclusion and makes
an argument based off that.