Rhetoric and Ideology Project
The point of this project was to create something (a piece of writing, a video, a piece of art, etc.) about a controversial topic and use 5 major elements of Rogerian argumentation. They message I was trying to convey was that schools need to be teaching inclusive sexual education classes apposed to abstinence only classes. After looking at the political spectrum my perspective has not changed about this topic but one thing I learned about the ideology of others that I didn't know before is that most ideas and biases are learned from parents and not necessarily created by an individual themselves. I have learned that rhetoric is used in most peoples everyday lives and ideologies are very very controversial. The Rogerian rhetoric could play a very important role in a democratic society because it letting other people know we hear them. It focuses on other ideologies and why they could make sense but said ideology is essentially better.
The Importance of Inclusive Sex Ed
Inclusive sex ed classes hold very important imformation for teenagers. By inclusive I mean courses that teach about sexualities and gender identities, how to practice safe sex, and how to prevent and deal with dangerous sexual situations. It also teaches that it is okay to sexually curious. The sex ed course I took at Animas High School was very useful for me as a curious teen. The main thing that stuck with me from said course was that being on birth control is not weird or something to be embarrassed about but it is actually very common and helpful. The course taught me that sexual harassments and abuse is different for everyone; it taught me how to determine, deal with, and prevent situations of that sort. Most importantly the course made me aware of the resources I have available to me such as Planned Parenthood, counselors at school and many websites I can use to answer any questions I have.
I understand the abstinence-only approach. Some parents don’t want your kids to be taught about sex at a young age, they don't want their children to be thinking about and experimenting sexual situations. Some parents think that preaching abstinence-only to your teenagers will stop them from wanting to have sex, but this is a misconception. The article titled “Abstinence Only Education is a Failure” explains the statistics that prove those ideas wrong. In the first paragraph the authors state “Between 2002 and 2014, the percentage of schools in the U.S. that require students to learn about human sexuality fell from 67 percent to 48 percent …”. This shows that the amount of non-abstinence-only courses being taught in the United States dropped significantly. The authors explain: “In 1995, 81 percent of adolescent males and 87 percent of adolescent females reported receiving formal instruction about birth control methods; by 2011-2013, only 55 percent of young men and 60 percent of young women said the same.” This shows that during the time that the amount of inclusive sex ed classes being taught declined, the amount of teenagers who felt like they were educated declined. Since these very beneficial classes were not being taught as much, the less teenagers had the important information they needed. These percentages dropping means teens are not getting the information they feel that they need, they feel unprepared for life in a sense because of the lack of information. A couple paragraphs later the authors explain that “Withholding critical health information from young people is a violation of their rights. Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs leave all young people unprepared and are particularly harmful to young people who are sexually active, who are LGBTQ, or have experienced sexual abuse.” in this generation students are taught about mental health and obviously physical health, why exclude sexual health? Inclusive sex ed classes are just giving children more knowledge about their own bodies. I understand that as a parent you do not want you kids to be having sex, you don't want to even think about the possibility of your kids having sex and as a daughter I don’t want my parents to know or think about that but this doesn’t mean you should keep your kids from necessary information.
Without going through an inclusive sex ed class you child with not be prepared or educated. Speaking from experience, without the sex ed class taught at Animas High School I would not be as prepared and in a sense as safe as I am. This does not mean I became sexually active or curious because of this class, this means everything from I know how to avoid and deal with sexual assault, I know how to take care of my body, I know how to stay safe and prevent an unwanted pregnancy's and STI’s and so much more. I truly do understand not wanting your child to be sexually active but why would you potentially keep your kid from information that would keep them safe?
I understand the abstinence-only approach. Some parents don’t want your kids to be taught about sex at a young age, they don't want their children to be thinking about and experimenting sexual situations. Some parents think that preaching abstinence-only to your teenagers will stop them from wanting to have sex, but this is a misconception. The article titled “Abstinence Only Education is a Failure” explains the statistics that prove those ideas wrong. In the first paragraph the authors state “Between 2002 and 2014, the percentage of schools in the U.S. that require students to learn about human sexuality fell from 67 percent to 48 percent …”. This shows that the amount of non-abstinence-only courses being taught in the United States dropped significantly. The authors explain: “In 1995, 81 percent of adolescent males and 87 percent of adolescent females reported receiving formal instruction about birth control methods; by 2011-2013, only 55 percent of young men and 60 percent of young women said the same.” This shows that during the time that the amount of inclusive sex ed classes being taught declined, the amount of teenagers who felt like they were educated declined. Since these very beneficial classes were not being taught as much, the less teenagers had the important information they needed. These percentages dropping means teens are not getting the information they feel that they need, they feel unprepared for life in a sense because of the lack of information. A couple paragraphs later the authors explain that “Withholding critical health information from young people is a violation of their rights. Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs leave all young people unprepared and are particularly harmful to young people who are sexually active, who are LGBTQ, or have experienced sexual abuse.” in this generation students are taught about mental health and obviously physical health, why exclude sexual health? Inclusive sex ed classes are just giving children more knowledge about their own bodies. I understand that as a parent you do not want you kids to be having sex, you don't want to even think about the possibility of your kids having sex and as a daughter I don’t want my parents to know or think about that but this doesn’t mean you should keep your kids from necessary information.
Without going through an inclusive sex ed class you child with not be prepared or educated. Speaking from experience, without the sex ed class taught at Animas High School I would not be as prepared and in a sense as safe as I am. This does not mean I became sexually active or curious because of this class, this means everything from I know how to avoid and deal with sexual assault, I know how to take care of my body, I know how to stay safe and prevent an unwanted pregnancy's and STI’s and so much more. I truly do understand not wanting your child to be sexually active but why would you potentially keep your kid from information that would keep them safe?
"Your Life on Earth" Personal Philosophy Project
My project is a video I edited of pictures and videos I have of me and my friends. It is an emphasis on the happiness I feel when I am simply in the presence of my friends. My first idea for this project was to create a collage using mostly clips from a magazine to just show the idea of shared happiness. Through my thinking process I decided that a video collage of me myself would be more personal and having the aspect of music would add a lot more depth of emotion to this project. The essential question of my project was "What is happiness to you?", where does your happiness come from, what truly makes you happy? My whole life I have been a "people person" and I truly appreciate the relationship and friendships I have. There is not enough words to really express how much I love the important people I have in my life and their impact on me, good or bad.
During the course of this project I didn't develop any new insights about myself but I did discover things about life and the varieties of ways people see it. Everyone is my class perceived the meaning of life in many different ways. Every single person had many different views of true happiness and life values. Obviously I know everyone has their own opinions about everything but I never expected so much variety on such a big concept that we all inevitably go through, life. My thinking for this project and my philosophy statement was influenced by the people around me and the media we consumed in class. We watched "Into the Wild" which gave me my exact philosophy statement, it gave me a perfect way to put the way I feel about happiness into a couple words.
My intellectual quandaries just continue for my future self. I wonder what I will think when I am out of high school, I wonder if I have the same mindset when I'm married, I wonder if I will still value relationships and friendships the same when I am on my death bed, will I even be in contact with any of the same people? As for questions this project sparked in me I wonder how other people come to their meaning of life and happiness. Where do their philosophy statements come for, what did they experience in life to think the way they do about happiness?
During the course of this project I didn't develop any new insights about myself but I did discover things about life and the varieties of ways people see it. Everyone is my class perceived the meaning of life in many different ways. Every single person had many different views of true happiness and life values. Obviously I know everyone has their own opinions about everything but I never expected so much variety on such a big concept that we all inevitably go through, life. My thinking for this project and my philosophy statement was influenced by the people around me and the media we consumed in class. We watched "Into the Wild" which gave me my exact philosophy statement, it gave me a perfect way to put the way I feel about happiness into a couple words.
My intellectual quandaries just continue for my future self. I wonder what I will think when I am out of high school, I wonder if I have the same mindset when I'm married, I wonder if I will still value relationships and friendships the same when I am on my death bed, will I even be in contact with any of the same people? As for questions this project sparked in me I wonder how other people come to their meaning of life and happiness. Where do their philosophy statements come for, what did they experience in life to think the way they do about happiness?
Click the photo for a link to my video
Leading up to this project we watched the movie "Into the Wild" and then wrote a intertextual analysis essay on it. We had to make an interpretive claim about the movie and support that idea with other types of text, the soundtrack, previous media, etc. This is mine.
Chris McCandless Died Miserable
Chris McCandless had reached the opposite of Eudaimonia when he died, he was in misery. Aristotle's idea of eudaimonia was the highest human good. Reaching eudaimonia is when you are happy with living but content with the possibility of dying. You reach eudaimonia after living a fulfilled life, you feel like you accomplished everything you needed to in your lifetime. When you reach eudaimonia you come to the realization that you can share happiness with others but you can't rely your happiness on said others. You are happy, you don’t want to die, but you are ok with the chance that it could happen because you feel you have done everything you needed to in life. Chris McCandless’s life portrayed in the movie “Into the Wild” written and directed by Sean Penn was a great example of not reaching Eudaimonia. Chris McCandless was not happy or content with his life when he died.
Chris was a boy who wanted to get away from the control of society and his parents. He got rid of his government documents and any traces of his real self and started his journey to Alaska going by the name Alexander Supertramp. He thought he could only reach true happiness by himself. In his mind nobody else was able to assist him in finding happiness because no one understood him or had the same goals and ambitions as he did. In the end he writes “happiness is only real when shared”. He spent an extended amount of time all alone after he had met amazing people and unconsciously learned much from them. He came to the conclusion that true happiness can only be reached with others after it was too late to get back to civilization and reconnect with said amazing people. This in itself is proving that he was not happy when he died. He believed that happiness had to be shared and he was alone for long this is showing that he was not happy.
As Chris was dying towards the end of the movie he was shown laying on his bed and replaying memories of his family and dreaming of returning to them. During the scene of him dreaming of getting back to his family he narrates “What if I was running into your arms right now”. This shows that he longed for his family. He missed his mom, dad and sister and desperately wanted to get back to them. During the memories shown in this montage he is shown crying and screaming in sorrow. He was very obviously in pain because of his yearning for his family. This is showing that he was not happy when he died, he was not where he wanted to be and the fact that he wanted to get back to his family showed he did not feel like he accomplished everything he needed/wanted to in his life, proving he did not reach eudaimonia.
Chris did not like the idea of things. He entered the wild with only the clothes on his back and a couple weapons for survival, no food or water. While he was in the wild he relied on finding food to sustain himself. Nearing the end of the movie, Chris was shown eating a type of berry that made him sick and unable to eat, leading to his death caused by starvation. The process of starving to death is long, he became very skinny and sick looking. You could tell by the shape that he was in, he was not happy or living well. After being malnourished for so long he lost his strength. He is shown barely capable of walking or even writing in his journal. He looked as if he was in pain anytime he tried to pull himself up off the floor of his bus. He was notably in lots of pain and suffering adding to the idea that he did not reach Eudaimonia because he was not happy at his death.
Chris was obviously in a very bad state when he died. He did not want to die and he was not happy meaning he did not reach the highest of human good, Eudaimonia. It takes a great journey to reach Eudaimonia and many people do not make it to that feeling. It is a different experience for everyone and Sean Jenn did an amazing job at showing the failed attempts of Chris McCandless.
Chris McCandless Died Miserable
Chris McCandless had reached the opposite of Eudaimonia when he died, he was in misery. Aristotle's idea of eudaimonia was the highest human good. Reaching eudaimonia is when you are happy with living but content with the possibility of dying. You reach eudaimonia after living a fulfilled life, you feel like you accomplished everything you needed to in your lifetime. When you reach eudaimonia you come to the realization that you can share happiness with others but you can't rely your happiness on said others. You are happy, you don’t want to die, but you are ok with the chance that it could happen because you feel you have done everything you needed to in life. Chris McCandless’s life portrayed in the movie “Into the Wild” written and directed by Sean Penn was a great example of not reaching Eudaimonia. Chris McCandless was not happy or content with his life when he died.
Chris was a boy who wanted to get away from the control of society and his parents. He got rid of his government documents and any traces of his real self and started his journey to Alaska going by the name Alexander Supertramp. He thought he could only reach true happiness by himself. In his mind nobody else was able to assist him in finding happiness because no one understood him or had the same goals and ambitions as he did. In the end he writes “happiness is only real when shared”. He spent an extended amount of time all alone after he had met amazing people and unconsciously learned much from them. He came to the conclusion that true happiness can only be reached with others after it was too late to get back to civilization and reconnect with said amazing people. This in itself is proving that he was not happy when he died. He believed that happiness had to be shared and he was alone for long this is showing that he was not happy.
As Chris was dying towards the end of the movie he was shown laying on his bed and replaying memories of his family and dreaming of returning to them. During the scene of him dreaming of getting back to his family he narrates “What if I was running into your arms right now”. This shows that he longed for his family. He missed his mom, dad and sister and desperately wanted to get back to them. During the memories shown in this montage he is shown crying and screaming in sorrow. He was very obviously in pain because of his yearning for his family. This is showing that he was not happy when he died, he was not where he wanted to be and the fact that he wanted to get back to his family showed he did not feel like he accomplished everything he needed/wanted to in his life, proving he did not reach eudaimonia.
Chris did not like the idea of things. He entered the wild with only the clothes on his back and a couple weapons for survival, no food or water. While he was in the wild he relied on finding food to sustain himself. Nearing the end of the movie, Chris was shown eating a type of berry that made him sick and unable to eat, leading to his death caused by starvation. The process of starving to death is long, he became very skinny and sick looking. You could tell by the shape that he was in, he was not happy or living well. After being malnourished for so long he lost his strength. He is shown barely capable of walking or even writing in his journal. He looked as if he was in pain anytime he tried to pull himself up off the floor of his bus. He was notably in lots of pain and suffering adding to the idea that he did not reach Eudaimonia because he was not happy at his death.
Chris was obviously in a very bad state when he died. He did not want to die and he was not happy meaning he did not reach the highest of human good, Eudaimonia. It takes a great journey to reach Eudaimonia and many people do not make it to that feeling. It is a different experience for everyone and Sean Jenn did an amazing job at showing the failed attempts of Chris McCandless.