If your class is small, every- one can participate in a single discussion. You may, however, wish to break the class into small groups to maximize the speaking opportu- nities for every student.
Be sure to save some time at the end of the session for groups to summarize their discussion for the whole class this is great practice in summarizing and constructing oral argu- ments. If your class periods are sufficiently long, give groups 10 or 15 minutes to prepare a discussion, and select one group to present its arguments and ideas to the class for 5 or 10 minutes.
If you retain the same groups over several discussion sessions, each group could have a turn at presenting its arguments to the entire class. Even confident and experienced writers will find new ideas in this chapter, and for many students these unfamiliar ideas may make for something of a conceptual mess.
Give yourself and the students a few weeks to use the terminology, practice analyz- ing texts, and ask questions. The most important lesson in this chapter is that all language and even images can serve as argument. Students may also have some dif- ficulty making the distinction between argument and persuasion. As an in-class activity, you might ask your The All-American Rejects - Prime Cuts (CD) to write a one- sentence definition of one of the terms.
Then have students read their definitions aloud without identifying the term. The rest of the class can try to guess which word is being defined and explain their guesses. Understand- ing how arguments change depending on contexts and even under- standing the contexts themselves can be challenging for students. Fortunately, even seemingly homogeneous classes usually are com- posed of students who carry different assumptions and who have var- ied cultural backgrounds and experiences.
Students often rightly perceive the difficulty of separating the three appeals and treating them as distinct entities. In almost all rhetorical situations, the three appeals overlap significantly, so that, for example, an effective logical or emotional appeal builds a particular kind of ethos.
They will also quickly realize that it can be difficult to find pure examples of the kinds of arguments that stasis theory introduces, but with work they should be able to see that many authors move through one or more stasis questions in making their arguments. To help students understand stasis theory, you might consider walking through an imaginary crime in class.
If someone goes miss- ing, for example, there is a question of fact. Did something happen to this person? If a dead body is found, then investigators know that something happened and try to define the event: was it suicide, an ac- cident, or a murder? If they can define the crime as murder, they might next evaluate it: was it murder in the first, second, or third degree?
When they have evaluated the severity of the crime, the investigators or the judicial system makes a proposal about what to do next: should the criminal be given a prison sentence of a limited number of years, life imprisonment, or the death penalty?
Do they feel the word has positive or negative connotations? Do their feel- ings about the word affect how they understand the rhetoric of the second bumper sticker?
Is it possible to interpret that visual argument as a criticism of George W. Bush and as an endorse- ment of him? Can an argument really be any text that expresses a point of view? What kinds of arguments — if any — might be made by the fol- lowing items?
It could also be a taunt to fans of other teams, particularly the New York Yankees. It might also support the loyal tradi- tion of Red Sox fans or celebrate their World Series win. Some people might avoid the CD for that reason, and others might select it because of the adult content.
This warning might also serve as a good example of a strong argument that nonetheless frequently fails to persuade. For example, the calories or fat or sodium totals might be higher or lower than those of competing products. This exercise would work well in class, perhaps as an introduc- tory activity for the first day or two of the course. You might think about saving the responses and returning them on the last day of the class to show students how their understanding of argument has changed.
This exercise introduces students to one method of categorizing arguments. You could supplement this exercise by asking stu- dents to develop their own rhetorical taxonomy: how else might they divide the world of argument?
What common experiences — if any — do the following objects, brand names, and symbols evoke, and for what audiences in par- ticular? Read the main editorial in your campus newspaper for three or four days. Then choose the most interesting one, and consider how the editor creates credibility, or ethos, in the editorial. If your school lacks a daily student paper, you might consider having students select editorials from a variety of publications, making sure that some students choose editorials from publications targeted toward young readers, women readers, men readers, or a specialized au- dience.
Students can then discuss how authors use differ- ent strategies for creating ethos. For example, an editorial writer in a music magazine directed toward young readers will employ ethos-building strategies significantly differ- ent from those an editorialist for the Wall Street Journal would use. Take a look at the bumper sticker below, and then analyze it. What is its purpose? What kind of argument is it? Which of the sta- sis questions does it most appropriately respond to?
What appeals does it make to its readers, and how? Encourage your students to think about the ethos of a person who might put this bumper sticker on a car and the ways that images and words make its argument. The first two tutorials complement this chapter especially well.
You might also ask them to compare and contrast the con- texts and the claims of the speeches. Students will certainly struggle, as we all do, with distinguish- ing between appropriate and inappropriate emotion since that distinction is determined by the rhetorical situation, especially the au- dience. Determining appropriate and inappropriate emotion requires judgment, and agreement is never guaranteed. Students may also struggle with distinguishing between reason and emotion.
This chapter includes excerpts from emotionally grounded arguments that are effective because they exist on the shift- ing border between emotion and reason think of how Georgiana Kleege uses the fact of her blindness to make an emotional appeal page You can help your students see the relationships among reason, emotion, argument, and persuasion by drawing on the board a diagram that shows rational argument as a subset of persuasion.
In- vite your students to help you develop another diagram that shows everything as an argument. Such a diagram leaves room for emotional appeals as a legitimate part of argument and inquiry, an idea that some students resist. Before you show the diagram, though, you might have your students de- velop their own diagrams to illustrate the relationships.
Have the class critique those student diagrams as tests: where, for example, do the civil rights arguments of Martin Luther King Jr. Under what conditions do these and other examples serve as legitimate argument? Exercises 1. To what specific feelings or emotions do the following slogans, sales pitches, and maxims appeal?
First make sure that they can explain what argument the image is making. Many college students are not familiar with protests against corporate power, and the pur- pose of the image may confuse them. If the students are bothered by this flag, press them to dis- cuss what makes this image troubling for them: what values and emotions does this particular representation of the flag chal- lenge? You can extend the consideration of this image by dis- cussing whether appropriating an image like the flag is ever appropriate for protest or for support.
How could they adapt the imagery of the flag to express their opinions about the United States? Most students can readily appreciate the connections between rhetoric and advertising, so asking them to determine how adver- tising employs rhetorical strategies can be an especially productive exercise. You might emphasize how different advertisers focus on different emotions. A magazine like Rolling Stone, aimed at a younger demographic than Time, is more likely to contain humor- ous advertisements.
Ads in Time and Newsweek might appeal to the emotions that parents feel about their children since those magazines have an older audience.
Ask students to identify the emotional appeals and the logical appeals and to ex- plain their combined effectiveness. How does emotion work in these mo- ments? In particular, how do Jackson and Reeve use arguments from the heart to help bolster their claims of reason? You might also ask students to complete this kind of analysis as a homework assignment; separating the appeals to pathos from the other elements of argument will force them to sharpen their thinking about how rhetoric works.
This chapter presents two primary difficulties for students. First, many students feel uncomfortable with the idea that ethos is context- specific. They do not like the idea that good and honorable people can seek to change their self-presentation for different audiences without lying or misrepresenting themselves.
Further, the idea that, say, Jessica Simpson has a more credible ethos than a senator or gov- ernor in the right context — for example, a cosmetics advertisement — bothers some students. The second and more important difficulty is that some first-year students find it a challenge to take on a voice they are not accustomed to and call it their own. Many students simply do not have the writing experience to believe that they have more than one voice or that they could develop a variety of voices for different rhetorical contexts.
Some students will want to argue that adopting different voices is a form of lying — by creating characters that do not exist or by taking on authority that is not theirs to claim.
Explain to students that the written voices they use in class, in emails to family members, and in job applications, for example, al- ready differ but that they are not necessarily false representations. This image from a presidential campaign may not be meaningful to students, but adapting the strategy to their own arguments would be a great exercise for small groups, allowing students to produce their own arguments and enhance their technical skills if they work on a Web site.
Have your students present their work to the whole class, and be sure to press them to specify their audience s. Different audiences require differ- ent kinds of authority, and a project like this can help students grasp that essential principle.
Consider the ethos of each of the following public figures. Then describe one or two public arguments, campaigns, or products that might benefit from their endorsements as well as several that would not.
The strategies we outline in this chapter claiming authority and establishing credibility work in almost any rhetorical situation, and we have included excerpts that The All-American Rejects - Prime Cuts (CD) the importance of arguments from character. You can extend the exercises by ask- ing students to list the many voices they have and the situations in which they are appropriate.
Ask students to find things they have written for different audiences, or assign them a topic and a set of audiences. A writer who researches also has an ethos — one that is based in part on which sources the au- thor uses and in part on how the author uses the sources. As mentioned in the above notes, the context of the argument deter- mines what kind of ethos is necessary for the occasion.
Many students might already have an opinion about Lance Armstrong. Does their opinion of Armstrong change any if they see him on the cover of Every Second Counts?
What about Jackie Chan? Does he have a viable ethos for a milk advertisement? As group work or a homework as- signment, have students consider how ethos figures into an argument in which no person is visible. How can a newspaper have an ethos? What ethos does the New York Times have? But using evidence responsibly is complicated. Students will need to become comfortable critiquing facts as well as opinions, questioning surveys and statistical evidence, and uncovering assump- tions that lie behind enthymemes.
The concept of the arguable proposition might help students see that making a distinction between fact and opinion can sometimes be difficult. Certain propositions are not arguable: the square root of 81 is 9; Spain borders Portugal; Charles Dickens wrote in English. We do not argue about these claims because we accept them as commonplaces: they are, for most purposes, facts.
But other facts are arguable: Christopher Columbus discovered America, William Shakespeare wrote all the plays attributed to him, clear-cutting in the rain forest has little environmental impact. At some point in the not too distant past, these last three facts were commonplaces, at least to certain audiences. But now they are arguable propositions: reasonable people could dispute the claims and offer other evi- dence in support of counterarguments.
They will need to click through a gallery of posters that use many of the same tactics to find the one printed here. Ask your students to read the mission statement on the Web site to further understand the context within which this image was created.
Depending on the makeup of your classroom, this image might generate heated conversation and opinions from all sides of the political spectrum. It will help if you keep the focus on the visual and verbal strategies employed here. A good place to start might be to break your class up into small groups and ask them to dis- cuss how the text is subverted by the image. How does the image appeal to emotions?
Have them report back to the class with their findings. Discuss whether the following statements are examples of hard evidence [inartistic] or rational appeals [artistic]. Not all cases are clear-cut. This chapter distinguishes between artistic and inartistic proofs: the first relies on authorial invention enthymemes, syllogisms, analogies, and so onand the second on specific pieces of evi- dence. You will need to help your students see the effectiveness of artistic appeals, too.
We offer several excerpts that you could use to explore artistic ap- peals, but a quick look at any newspaper op-ed page will reveal many more examples. As an introduction to Toulmin logic and as evidence for the idea that artistic appeals can be effective, have your students find the claims and reasons embedded in newspa- per editorials.
Student newspapers also offer, in our experience, examples of ineffective artistic appeals. Stu- dents are often especially interested in logical fallacies, and the assignment in which they rewrite the headline for the shampoo ad will help them think about why some people intentionally choose to use logical fallacies. In what contexts is a fallacy more effective than a rigorously argued logical claim?
In those cases, what role do facts and reason play? Ask your stu- dents to examine at least twelve of the sample arguments. Can they generalize about the kinds of situations that benefit most from logical appeals? The next few chapters emphasize how rhetoric can help them produce arguments.
The rhetorical concepts that the book has introduced help students to understand how and why people make the arguments that they do. First-year writers, who bring a range of experiences and abilities to the classroom, may know some of these concepts under different names. But once they can articulate these ideas, they can think, read, and write more consciously and critically. Encourage your students to explore their familiarity with these concepts by asking them to name examples of each of the categories of argument.
Popular advertisements are a good tool for showing stu- dents the power of carefully crafted appeals; students have some- times studied advertisements in psychology classes, and they come to think of advertising as a series of tricks. But rhetorical analysis can help them see advertising — and therefore many other forms of dis- course — as communication that they can understand. Describe a persuasive moment you can recall from a speech, an article, an editorial, an advertisement, or your personal experi- ence.
Some students may feel energized by the idea that they can discover hidden agendas through the application of rhetor- ical concepts. And is the Chronicle really addressing the quality of its ethos, which is what Zombietime ultimately attacks? A careful discus- sion of the sample should help students make their own argu- ments about the images that they find. Having students present their rhetorical analysis of the photo to the class will force them to articulate how they broke the text down into in- dividual elements.
These exercises ask a great deal of students and could easily serve as paper assignments. Make sure that your students choose clearly argumenta- tive texts to analyze. You might consider taking any one of these exercises and modeling the response for your classes to help build their confidence before they begin their own rhetorical analyses. When students write a rhetorical analysis, they fre- quently become so concerned with breaking the argument apart to isolate separate elements that they overlook the purpose of the argu- ment.
A rhetorical analysis that recognizes the goals of an argument can identify why the creator of the argument makes certain choices, including choices to omit, for example, a reliance on logical claims.
Tutorial 3 will help keep students focused on judging how well the ar- gument they are analyzing accomplishes its goals. But for reasons that we explain in the chapter, Toulmin logic can also be a powerful as an analytic and productive tool.
Our experience has been that when first-year students commit themselves to understanding and using the Toulmin framework, their writing im- proves noticeably. Students begin to make arguments that use evi- dence effectively, and they write papers that show greater sensitivity to audience. The system holds students accountable for every part of their argument, while forcing them to question the foundations and assumptions underlying their claims.
But like any complicated system, Toulmin logic takes time to learn. Do not expect your students to become comfortable with the con- cepts immediately. Instead, plan to introduce and review the various elements of Toulmin argument over a period of weeks.
This chapter explains the system in a few pages, but the material is significantly more complex than that of the previous chapters. Take your time leading students through the idea of claims and reasons. These two key elements might take a week to explain completely, especially if you use real-world examples in which claims and reasons are not made explicit. Letters to the editor of any newspaper will illustrate the problems of making clear claims supported by coherent reasons.
Some letters will serve as examples of good, clear writing; others will make great counterexamples. Students usually struggle with the idea that there are two kinds of evidence — in support of reasons and of warrants — and that an argu- ment might be exemplary in its use of one while completely ignoring the other.
The Toulmin system gives you a way of explaining to your students exactly what the evidentiary problems are in their argu- ments. Show them pages filled with long para- graphs that reach all the margins on the page, and their eyes will give them plenty of information before they start reading.
If you can access the Web in class, you might show students im- ages of newspaper front pages from the early twentieth century beside current front pages of USA Today.
The importance of white space will be immediately clear to them. After comparing images from different time periods, have them make up their own announcements about a July 4th celebration.
Following is a claim followed by five possible supporting reasons. State the warrant that would support each of the arguments in brief. Which of the warrants would need to be defended? Which would a college audience likely accept without significant back- ing? Bush; Al Gore should have won the election. You can help students learn Toulmin logic by taking every op- portunity to use the terminology in class.
The more students hear the words, the more comfortable they will be using them them- selves. Reason: Because I want everyone to see each other in the discussion.
Warrant: Seeing other students in a discussion is good. Warrant: If I want a student to do some- thing in class, the student should do it. Reason: Because I have not eaten since last night. Reason: Toulmin is too complicated.
In short, use the system to show how powerful it can be. A final note: students work hard in other classes to learn com- plicated systems. Every academic field has terminology and a tax- onomy that take time to learn.
You should make no apologies for teaching difficult material. Toulmin is hard to learn, but the effort is repaid many times over. Enthymeme: If students work hard to learn in any other classes, then they can expect to work hard to learn in a writing class, too.
Before an argument can progress to the next stage, everyone must agree that something did happen. Consider a missing person case. If no one knows where the person is and no body can be found, then authorities cannot arrest and try someone for murder, decide that an accident occurred, or rule the death a suicide.
First, there must be agreement that something happened; only after the parties have agreed that something has hap- pened can they determine which term or definition best applies. An argument of fact is the basis of further claims. Your students may find arguments of fact to be especially interest- ing because they have long understood facts to be immutable. Prob- lems arise, however, when they begin to consider what kinds of facts can be reasonably argued and which cannot be reasonably argued.
For instance, in the exercises for this chapter, the statement that there has only been one Roman Catholic president of the first forty-three hardly seems arguable.
A quick look in any encyclopedia would confirm this fact. But what if a historian found evidence that an earlier president was a Roman Catholic who had suppressed his religious affiliation because he feared the anti-Catholic prejudice that was common in the late nine- teenth century? In that case, even this seemingly straightforward, eas- ily verified claim becomes arguable. A good argument with good evidence can make new facts.
This example, which will fall far afield from the work that students will produce in their classes, nonetheless might help them understand that facts can be arguable. Research will play a crucial role in developing good factual arguments, and the brainstorming exercises included below should help them sort out which arguments would be particu- larly viable for a paper. To extend this exercise, you might ask students to find examples of arguments made visually that mislead the viewer.
You might also spend some time look- ing at the different graphs that appear in USA Today. For each topic in the following list, decide whether the claim is worth arguing to a college audience and explain why or why not: [Answers will vary; some suggestions are provided. How well can we measure hurricane strength before the Saffir- Simpson scale was created? How do we compare hurri- canes that are now hitting populated coastal areas to those that hit coastal areas with few residents? What do we consider high pay?
What if we run out of fossil fuels or if obtaining them becomes too costly? These exercises would be especially helpful for helping students brainstorm paper topics of their own. You might use exercises 2 and 4 as group work in class. Immediate peer review of topic ideas will help some students see how reasonable their claims might be as well as how much work individual claims might require.
Exercise 3 gives students a number of examples of factual arguments to look at as models. This tutorial helps students to see how factual sources can have an agenda and to understand that the existence of an agenda or bias a particularly loaded word for many students does not necessarily hurt the credibility of a source.
This tutorial will also help students understand that how a source or a student writer uses facts is part of an argument. This example works well in the classroom as an introduction to arguments of definition: an urn is discovered to be missing from a house and is found in the house of another man.
At the level of fact, there is agreement: the defendant has the urn that be- longs to the plaintiff. But there is considerable disagreement about definition: the plaintiff argues that the urn was stolen, whereas the de- fendant argues that it was merely borrowed.
The case can go no fur- ther until the parties settle the question of definition. Toulmin logic will help you explain the contested — and the rhetorical — nature of definitional claims.
Because definitional criteria are warrants, they must be chosen with audience in mind if the audi- ence members do not accept the criteria you choose, they will not ac- cept any other part of the argument.
You could return to the urn example to demonstrate the need for shared definitions of theft or borrowing. If, for example, you were to argue that borrowing without explicit permission constitutes theft, you would need to provide evi- dence for that criterion; your evidence must be tailored to a particular audience. Not everyone would accept that criterion: what about close friends who share their possessions without needing permission each time they borrow something?
Some students who struggle will be able to place an object within a given class a fiddle is certainly a violin; prostitution is an exploita- tion of women; paid workers are not volunteers but will balk at the need to explore or defend definitional criteria.
Turn to Toulmin to show that they might have evidence in support of their reasons but not in support of the warrants — the definitional criteria themselves. You might extend the exer- cise by asking students to bring or create images that illustrate their preferred definitions of patriotism. The adaptation of the Uncle Sam recruiting poster might be an especially interesting image to ask your students to work with.
How might they ap- propriate this image to put forward their own definition of pa- triotism? You can have them describe how they might put together a poster of their own, but many of your students can manipulate images to create their own poster, so you might consider asking them to bring those images into class or posting them on the Web. Briefly discuss the criteria you might use to define the italicized terms in the following controversial claims of definition.
Compare your definitions of the terms with those of your classmates. These exercises offer suggestions for helping students think of their own definitional claims by extending examples in the text. Another good exercise is for students to come up with far-fetched definitional claims: Oprah Winfrey is a cult leader; Disney is a virus; Tom Cruise is an alien. When students write about the more creative claims and experiment with off-beat arguments, they have a greater opportunity to say something fresh.
They often establish fundamental agreements, and if an author or a speaker can convince an audience to accept his or her definition, then the rest of the argument becomes much easier.
For homework, ask students to identify the definition claim and the audi- ence for the claim. What competing claims of definition can they iden- tify, and how might they take those competing claims into account if they were writing a paper on this argument? The parties disagree about the nature of the incident. One says the urn was stolen, and the other says it was merely borrowed.
The defendant might argue that he stole the urn for a good reason: the urn contained water that he needed for his ill child. The defendant now makes an argument of evaluation: the act of theft was, he claims, praiseworthy. You can use the story of the urn to show your students how argu- ments of evaluation grow out of arguments of definition. Nevertheless, most students will benefit from thinking of the two as separate, at least in the abstract.
Many students will need help choosing the level of evaluative ab- straction for their arguments. The best argument probably lies be- tween those extremes, and most students will need help crafting a strong, arguable thesis. Some students will be content to argue that something is good or bad; push them to complicate their ideas so that they write more interesting arguments. As with arguments of definition, evaluative arguments challenge students to defend their criteria.
Toulmin logic will show that criteria are warrants and must be developed with audience in mind. If the au- dience does not accept the criteria, the evaluative judgment will not be accepted either. Ask stu- dents how they might rearrange this chart. What information could they highlight or suppress? How might a supporter of the American effort in Iraq present the same information? You might ask students to research how political campaigns use charts and graphs to present information.
How do they design visual information to make their arguments? Choose one item from the followings lists that you understand well enough to evaluate. Develop several criteria of evaluation you could defend to distinguish excellence from mediocrity in the area. Then choose another item from the list, this time one you do not know much about at all, and explain the research you might do to discover reasonable criteria of evaluation for it. You might use this exercise as an in-class activity, having students work in groups according to which topics they know best.
Many students will be sur- prised by how many criteria the group can come up with and how challenging it can be to establish criteria that many people can accept. Exercises 2 through 5 highlight the importance of developing evaluative criteria, which in our experience has been the step that most frustrates students. Because students generally feel comfort- able with evaluative arguments in some form such as for movies and sportsthey can usually generate topics and claims with ease. They tend to have more difficulty tailoring criteria to specific au- diences.
With supplementary exercises, therefore, we recom- mend that you focus on helping them think about the warrants for particular claims, a skill that they can then transfer to their papers. Exercise 6 encourages a more analytic approach to evaluation using a genre that students probably have not studied much.
This exercise also helps move students from some potentially simple evaluation arguments what makes a good pizza? With this ar- gument more than any other, students need to be reminded of the im- portance of supporting their arguments so that their target audiences will find their claims persuasive.
For homework, ask students to identify the evaluative claim and the audi- ence for the claim. What are the implied criteria for evaluation? The guide to writing causal argument in the chapter can help walk students through the process of writing a causal argu- ment.
In some versions of the stases, causal arguments came before ar- guments of evaluation; in others, they came after. Show your class by using the examples from this book or from elsewhere that regardless of their place in the order of the stases, causal arguments build on and set up other arguments.
Like definitions and evaluations, they rarely appear in pure form, though we provide some examples of such pure causal arguments in the text. The situations that open the chapter suggest such ideal causal arguments, though they also rely on defini- tional issues. We have found that students typically try to tackle causal argu- ments that reach too far for a regular class paper.
Remember, too, that because the logic of causal arguments can be complex, students will likely benefit from extra time and help as they make causal claims. For useful models, you might turn to sports writing. Students can easily see how reasonable, informed observers can differ on why a team or an individual won or lost a competition. The causes of the following events and phenomena are quite well known and frequently discussed. But do you understand them well enough yourself to spell out the causes to someone else?
Working in a group, see how well and in how much detail you can explain each of the following events or phenomena. Which explanations are relatively clear-cut, and which seem more open to debate? In the class discussion or in the papers they write, push students to identify a potential audience for this presentation. How much prior knowledge does someone need to have about malaria to understand the argument?
What kind of action does some one need to be able to take to be a target audience for this argument? Then ask them to focus on the argument itself: Would these claims be more effective if they were presented more simply? Do the bells and whistles of the presentation add to or detract from the main point? If they were to simplify this argument, what claims and evidence would they choose to em- phasize? Exercises 2 and 3 would work well as large-group activities. For exercise 2, go around the class several times to see how far afield from the initial cause you can go.
Alternatively, go around the class only once for each cause, but choose several initial causes to take to extremes. Exercise 4, which offers students practice at dif- ferentiating between types of causes, would also make a good in- class exercise, though you might have each student work individually or in pairs and then compare causal arguments.
You could focus in particular on the dis- cussion of the book New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus. As a discipline, history is especially concerned with causal arguments, and Charles Mann articulates a causal argument about the population decline in the Americas. Have students pay special atten- tion to how Mann talks about using sources to build his arguments.
What sources can they consult to build their own causal arguments? You can ask students to define terms carefully, to explain their evaluative criteria, or to explore the causal connections more thoroughly. This is a fun unit to teach because students put their rhetorical training to use and use language to change the world. Students often enjoy writing about practical problems on campus or in the community. If your students write policy proposals, be sure to teach them the dangers of biting off more than they can chew.
We have asked students in our classes to do extensive audience analysis as part of the writing process. In the early stages of the writing process, ask students to write about their audience and con- sider the approaches that will be most rhetorically effective. Remind your students that if a proposal is to be accepted, it needs to be finely tuned to the demands of its audience. Toulmin logic could help some students understand their audience by drawing attention to warrants.
No other stu- dent-written argument seems to lend itself to a variety of student presentations as well as the proposal argument. This exercise asks students to think particularly about a local audi- ence, either their school or community.
Many of your students are likely to have highly developed technical skills, so you might consider requiring them to create Web sites for their proposal arguments.
But you might also ask them to think about what kinds of proposal arguments might benefit from simpler, less technical presentations. This exercise might be even more interesting if you ask your stu- dents to think of some possible defenses of off-the-wall sugges- tions.
But perhaps the most important aspect of this exercise lies in pushing students to move beyond relatively simple solutions. We have no objections to more ed- ucation, but encourage your students to make more specific pro- posals. The exercises focus on two key issues for proposal arguments: developing claims that represent responses to real problems and tailoring proposals to a specific audience. Extend the exercises by asking students to examine a variety of proposals — from editori- als in the student newspaper to large-scale governmental policy proposals — in terms of those same issues.
How have editorial writers targeted their audience in their pro- posals? Is the claim primar- ily a policy or a practice proposal? What special strategies do these proposals use to appeal to a particular audience?
Does the proposal call for a feasible action? You might discuss several of these proposals in class to help students formulate support for their own claims. This chapter might best be approached as part of another unit so you can show the relationship between figures and definition, for ex- ample. Metaphor is a definitional argument, after all. By combining this chapter with others, you can illustrate the ways figures argue and are not merely dressing on top of already established arguments.
Nowhere is he taught that a scientist is different from a technician or from a reader of books about science.
It is easy to misunderstand the point of these contentions. I do not wish to underplay method; I wish only to point out that even in science, means may easily be confused with ends. It is only the goals or ends of science that dignify and validate its methods. The working scientist must, of course, be concerned with his techniques, but only because they can help him achieve his proper ends, i.
Once he forgets this, be becomes like the man spoken of by Freud who spent all his time polishing his glasses instead of putting them on and seeing with them.
Means centering lends to push into a commanding position in sci- i "But even the scholars were likely to work most at big monographs on little subjects. Original research they called. What mattered was that the facts that they found had not been known before, not that they were worth knowing. Some ober specialist might sooner or later make use of them. The specialists in all the universities wrote for one another, with the patience of mound builders, for mysterious ends.
Three 11'orlds, Harper k Row. Means Centering in Science 13 ence the technicians, and the "apparatus men," rather than the "question askers" and the problem solvers. Without wishing to create an extreme and unreal dichotomy, it is still possible to point out a difference between those who know only how to do and those who also know what to do.
These former individuals, of whom there are always a large number, tend inevitably to become a class of priests in science, authorities on protocol, on procedure, and, so to speak, on ritual and ceremonial.
While such people have been no more than a nuisance in the past, now that science becomes a matter of national and international policy, they may become an active danger. This trend is doubly dangerous because laymen under.
Means centering tends strongly to overvalue quantification indis- criminately and as an end in itself. This must be true because of the greater stress of means-centered science on how statements are made rather than on what is said.
Elegance and precision are then counterposed to pertinence and breadth of implication. Means-centered scientists tend, in spite of themselves, to fit their problems to their techniques rather than the contrary. Their beginning question tends to be Which problems can I attack with the techniques and equipment I now possess? How else explain the fact that most run-of-the-mill scientists spend their life-times in a small area whose boundaries are defined, not by a basic question about the world, but by the limits of a piece of appa.
Ultimately this must remind us of the famous drunk who looked for his wallet, not where he had lost it, but under the street lamp, "because the light is better there," or of the doctor who gaye all his patients fits because that was the only sickness he knew how to cure. Means centering tends strongly to create a hierarchy of sciences, in which, quite perniciously, physics is considered to be more "scientific" than biology, biology than psychology, and psychology than sociology. Such an assumption of hierarchy is possible only on the basis of elegance, success, and precision of technique.
Means centering tends to compartmentalize the sciences too strongly, to build walls between them that divide them into separate territories. J acques Loeb, when asked whether he was a neurologist, a chemist, a physicist, a psychologist, or a philosopher, answered only, "I solve prob- lems. And it would be well for science if it had more men like Loeb. But these desiderata are clearly discouraged by the philosophy that makes the scientist into a tech- nician and an expert rather than a venturesome truth seeker, into one who knows rather than one who is puzzled.
If scientists looked on themselves as question askers and problem solvers rather than specialized technicians, there would now be something of a rush to the newest scientific frontier, to the psychological and social problems about which we know least and should know The All-American Rejects - Prime Cuts (CD). Why is it that there is so little traffic across these departmental borders?
How does it happen that a hundred scientists prosecute physical or chemical research for every dozen who pursue the psychological problems? Which would be better for mankind, to put a thousand fine minds to producing better bombs or even better penicillin or to set them to work on the problems of nationalism or psychotherapy or exploitation?
Means centering in science creates too great a cleavage between scien- tists and other truth seekers, and between their various methods of search- ing after truth and understanding. If we define science as a search for truth, insight, and understanding, and as a concern with important ques- tions, we must be hard put to it to differentiate between the scientists on the one hand, and the poets, artists, and philosophers on the other hand.
Ultimately, of course, a seman- tically honest differentiation should be made, and it must be admitted that it would have to be mostly on the basis of difference in method and in techniques of guarding against mistakes. And yet it would clearly be better for science if this gap between the scientist and the poet and the philosopher were less abysmal than it is today. Means centering simply puts them into different realms; problem centering would conceive of them as mutually helpful collaborators.
The biographies of most great "You must love the questions themselves"-Rilke. MacLeisli, The Hamlet of il. Problem Gen cling s. Means Centering in Science 15 scientists show that the latter is more nearly true than the former.
Many of the greatest scientists have themselves been also artists and philosophers, and have often derived as much sustenance from philosophers as from their scientific colleagues. Questions and problems in science can rarely be formulated, classified, or put into a filing system. The question of the past are no longer questions, but answers.
The ques- tions of the future have not yet come into existence. But it is possible to formulate and classify the methods and techniques of the past. These then are termed the "laws of scientific method. In the hands of he less creative, the timid, the conventional, these "laws" become vir.
Such an attitude is especially dangerous for the psychological and social sciences. Here the injunction to he truly scientific is usually trans- lated as: Use the techniques of the physical and life sciences. Hence we have the tendency among many psychologists and social scientists to imi- tate old techniques rather than to create andinvent the new ones made necessary by the fact that their degree of development, their problems, and their data are intrinsically different from those of the physical sci- ences.
Tradition in science can be a dangerous blessing. Loyalty is an unqualified peril. If the laws of scientific method have already been formulated, it remains only to apply them. New methods, new ways of doing things, must inevitably be suspect, and have usually been greeted with hostility, e. The expectation of such hostility probably is partly to blame for the fact that there have not yet been invented the relational, holistic, and syndrome logics, statistics, and mathematics demanded by the new psychological and social sciences.
Ordinarily, the advance of science is a collaborative product. When there is no collaboration, the advance is apt to stop dead until there shows up some giant who needs no help. Orthodoxy means the denial of help to the heterodox. Since few of the heterodox, as well as of the orthodox are geniuses, this implies continuous, smooth advance only for orthodox science. We may expect heterodox ideas to be held tip for long periods of weary neglect or opposition, to break through rather suddenly if they are correctand then to become in turn orthodox.
Not only does it block the development of new tech- niques; it alsotends to block the asking of nian ' questions, on grounds that the reader might well expect by now, that such questions cannot be answered by currently available techniques, e.
Surely, anyone who had read and understood the history of science would not dare to speak of an unsolvable problem; he would speak only of problems which had not yet been solved. This tendency can go to the most incredible and dangerous extremes. On what possible basis could tisis statement have been made if not an exclusive respect loi, polished and successful techniques, and a complete lack of awareness of the ques.
How shall I as a psychologist translate this and other similar jibes from my physicist friends? Ought I to tise their techniques? But these arc useless for my problems. How would that get the psychological prob- lems solved?
Ought they not be solved? Or ought scientists to abdicate from the field completely and give it back to tise theologians? Or is there perhaps ais ad Ilosnz? Is it implied that the psychologists are stupid and tise physicists intelligent? Means Centering in Science 17 inherently improbable statement be iiiade? Then I must report my impression that there arc as many fools in any one scientific group as in any other.
Which impression is more valid? I am afraid that I can see no other possible explanation except one that covertly gives the primary place to technique-perhaps the only place.
Means-centered orthodoxy encourages scientists to be "safe and sound" rather than bold and daring. It makes the normal business of the scientist seem to be moving ahead inch by inch on the well-laid-out road rather than cutting new paths through the unknown.
It forces conserva- tive rather than radical approaches to the not-yet-known. It tends to make him into a settler rather than a pioncer. This is where a problem- oriented science would have him be as often as necessary. And this is where he is discouraged from going by a means-stressing approach to -science. Overstress on methods and techniques encourages scientists to think 1 that they are more objective and less subjective than they actually are, and 2 that they need not concern themselves with values.
Methods are ethically neutral; pi-oblems and questions may not be, for sooner or later, they involve all the knotty arguments about values. One way of avoiding the problem of values is to stress the techniques of science rather than the goals of science. Indeed, it seems probable that one of the main roots of the means-centered orientation in science is the strenuous effort to be as objective nonvalued as possible.
But as we have seen in Chapter 1, science was not, is not, and cannot be completely objective, which is to say, independent of human values. Furthermore, it is highly debatable whether it ought even to try to be that is, completely objective rather than as objective as it is possible for human beings to be. All the mistakes listed in this chapter and in the previous one attest to the dangers of attempting to neglect the short- comings of human nature. Not only does the neurotic pay a huge sub- jective price for his vain attempt, but ironically enough, he also becomes progressively a poorer and- poorer thinker.
Tue Yogi and Ehe Corn missar, Macmillan,p. If means-centering philosophies were ex- treme which they rarely areand if they were quite consistent which they dare not be for fear of obviously foolish consequencesthere would be no way to distinguish between an important experiment and an unim- portant one. There could be only technically well-prosecuted experi- ments and technically poorly prosecuted experiments. Of course, this does not actually happen in an extreme way, but this is only because of appeal to criteria and standards other than methodological ones.
However, although this mis- take is rarely seen in a blatant form, it is often enough seen in a less obvious form. The journals of science are full of instances that illustrate the point, that what is not worth doing, is not worth doing well. If science were no more than a set of rules and procedures, what difference would there be between science on the one hand, and on the other, chess, alchemy, "umbrellaology," or the practice of dentistry?
To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle requires creative imagina. Lion and marks real advance in science. Some of these propositions are so true as to be platitudinous. These I feel need re. Others may be found less acceptable and more debatable.
This theoretical statement is usually accepted piously enough by psythologists, who then often proceed calmly to ignoreit in their actual experiments. That it is an experimental reality as well as a theoretical one must be realized before sound experimentation and sound motiva- tion theory are possible.
In motivation theory this proposition means many specific things. For instance, it means the whole individual is moti- 'vated rather than just a part of him. In good theory there is no such entity as a need of the stomach or mouth, or a genital need. There is only a need of the individual. It is John Smith who wants food, not John Smith's stomach. Furthermore satisfaction comes to the whole indi- vidual and not just to a part of him. Food satisfies John Smith's hunger and not his stomach's hunger.
His perceptions change lic will perceive food more readily than he will at other times. His memories change he is more apt to remember a good meal at this time than at other times. Hi emotions change he is more tense and nervous dian he is at other times.
The content of his thinking changes he is more apt to think of getting food than of solving an algebraic problem. And this list can be extended to almost every other faculty, capacity, or function, both physiological and psychic. In other words, when John Smith is hungry, he is hungry all over; he is different as an individual from what he is at other times. It can be seen upon closer analysis that the hunger drive is more a special case of moti- vation than a general oiic. What are the more common immediate motiva- tions?
We can find these easily enough by introspecting during the course of an average day. Customarily these have been phrased as secondary or cultural drives and have been regarded as of a different order from the truly "respectable" or primary drives, i. In actuality these are far more important for us and they are far more common.
It would therefore be well to make one of them paradigm rather than the hunger drive. The common assumption lias been that all drives will follow the example set by the physiological drives. It is fair to predict now that this will never be. The typical drive or need or desire is not and probably never will be related to a specific, isolated, localized somatic base. The typical desire is much more obviously a need of the whole person.
Considering all the evidence now in hand, it is probably true that we could never understand fully the need for love no matter how much we might know about the hunger drive. Indeed a stronger statement is possible, namely, that from a full knowledge of the need for love we can learn more about general human motivation including the hunger drive than we could from a thorough study of the hunger drive.
It is well in this connection to recall the critical analysis of the con- cept of simplicity that has been made so often by the Gestalt psychologists. The hunger drive, which seems simple when compared with the drive of love, is actually not so simple in the long run The appearance of simplicity can be obtained by selecting isolated cases, activities that are relatively independent of the wholeness of the organism.
An important activity can easily be shown to have dynamic relationships with almost everything else of importance in the person. Why then take an activity that is not at all average in this sense, an activity that is selected out for special attention only because it is easier to deal with by our customary but not necessarily correct experimental technique of isolation, reduc- tion, or of independence from other activities?
We want money so that we may have an automobile. In turn we want an automobile because the neighbors have one and we do not wish to feel inferior to them, so that we can retain our own self-respect and so that we can be loved and respected by others.
Usually when a conscious de- sire is analyzed we find that we can go behind it, so to speak, to other, more fundamental aims of the individual. The symptoms are important, not so much in themselves, but for what they ultimately mean, that is, for what their ultimate goals or effects may be. The study of symptoms in themselves is quite unim- portant, but the study of the dynamic meaning of symptoms is important because it is fruitful-for instance, making possible psychotherapy.
It is characteristic of this deeper analysis that it will always lead ultimately to certain goals or needs behind which we cannot go; that is, to certain need-satisfactions that seem to be ends in themselves and seem not to need any further justification or demonstration.
These needs have the particular quality in the average person of not being seen directly' very often but of being more often a kind of conceptual derivation from the multiplicity of specific conscious desires. In other words then, the study of motivation must be in part the study of the ultimate human goals or desires or needs. These facts imply another necessity for sound motivation theory. Since these goals are not often seen directly in consciousness, we are at once forced into the necessity of dealing with the whole problem of unconscious motivation.
Careful study of the conscious motivational life alone will often leave out much that is as important as or even more important than what can be seen in consciousness. Psychoanalysis has often demonstrated that the relationship between a conscious desire and the ultimate unconscious aim that underlies it need not be at all direct.
Indeed the relationship may actually be a negative one, as in reaction formations. We may then assert that sound motivation theory cannot possibly afford to neglect the unconscious life.
The main reason for this is that two different cultures may provide two completely different ways of satisfying a particular desire, let us say, for self-esteem.
It may then be that, if we think of ultimates, the one individual's desire to be a good hunter has the same dynamics and the same fundamental aim as the desire of the other individual to be a good medicine man.
We may then assert that it would be more useful for psychologists to combine these two seemingly disparate conscious desires into the same category rather than to Ilift them into different categories on purely behavioral grounds. Human beings are more alike than one would think at first. There are several ways of showing this.
For instance, it is well known that sexual behavior and conscious sexual desires may be tremendously complex in their un- derlying, unconscious purposes. In one individual sexual desire may actually mean the desire to assure himself of his masculinity. It may in other individuals represent fundamentally a desire to impress, or a desire for closeness, friendliness, for safety, for love or for any combination of these.
Consciously the sexual desire in all these individuals may have the same content, and probably all of them would make the mistake of dinking that they seek only sexual gratification. But we now know that this is not correct, that it is useful in understanding these individuals to deal with what the sexual desire and behavior represent fundamentally rather than what the individual consciously thinks they represent.
This holds true for either preparatory or consummatory behavior. Another line of evidence supporting this same point is the finding that a single psychopathological symptom may represent at one and the same time several different, even opposing desires. A hysterically para- lyzed arm may represent the fulfillment of simultaneous wishes for revenge, for pity, for love, and for respect.
To take either the conscious wish in the first example or the overt symptom in the second in a purely behavioral fashion means that we arbitrarily throw out the possibility of a total understanding of the behavior and of the motivational state of the individual. Let us emphasize that it is unusual, not usual, that an act or a conscious wish have but one motivation. A static psychology would be content to put a period to this statement. But a dynamic psychology would imply very many more things by this statement with full empirical justification.
For instance, it means also tension and strain and un- happiness. Furthermore, quite apart from the current relationships with the rest of the organism, such a state of affairs automatically and of necessity leads to many other happenings. In other words, the feeling of rejection is itself a motivating state. Current conceptions of motivation proceed ordinarily, or at least seem to pro- ceed, on the assumption that a motivational state is a special, a peculiar state, sharply marked off from the other happenings in the organism.
Sound motivational theory should, on the contrary, assume that motiva- tion is constant, never ending, fluctuating, and complex, and that it is an almost universal characteristic of practically every organismic state of affairs.
As one desire is satisfied, atiother pops up to take its place. It is a characteristic of the human being throughout hi whole life that he is practically always desiring something. We are faced then with the necessity for studying the relationships of all the motiva- tions to each other and we are concoittitantly faced with tise necessity of giving up the motivational units in isolation if we are to achieve the broad understanding that we seek for.
This appearance practically always depends on the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of all other motivations that the total or- ganism may have, i. We should never have the desire to compose music or create mathematical systems, or to adorn our homes, or to be well dressed if our stomachs were empty most of the time, or if we were continually lying of thirst, or if we were continually threatened by an always impending catastrophe, or if every- one hated us.
Preface to Motivation Theory 25 Proper respect has never been paid by the constructors of motivation theories to either of these facts: first, that the human being is never satisfied except in a relative or one-step-along-the-path fashion, and second, that wants seem to arrange themselves in some sort of hierarchy of prepotency.
For several different reasons such lists are theoretically unsound. First of all they imply an equality of the various drives that are listed, an equality of potency and probability of appearance. This is incorrect because the probability of any one desire emerging into con- sciousness depends on the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of other prepotent desires. There are great differences in probability of appear.
Secondly such a listing implies an isolatedness of each of these drives born each of the others. Of course they are not isolated in any such fashion. Third, such a listing of drives, since it is usually made on the be- havioral basis, neglects completely all that we know about the dynamic nature of drives, e.
Such listings are foolish also because drives do not range themselves in an arithmetical The All-American Rejects - Prime Cuts (CD) of isolated, discrete members. They arrange them- selves rather in a hierarchy of specificity. What is meant by this is that the number of drives one chooses to list depends entirely on the degree of specificity with which one chooses to analyze them. The true picture is not one of a great many sticks lying side by side, but rather of a nest of boxes in which one box contains three others, and in which each of these three contains ten others, and in which each of these ten contains fifty others, and so on.
Or another analogy might be that of a description of a histological section under various degrees of magnification. Thus we can speak of a need for gratification or equilibrium; or more specifi- cally of a need to eat; or still more specifically of a need to fill the the stomach; or still more specifically of a desire for proteins; or still more specifically of a desire for a particular protein; and so on.
If we wished, we could have such a list of drives contain anywhere from one to one million drives, depending entirely on the specificity of analysis.
Furthermore, it should be recognized that if we attempt to discuss the fundamental desires they should be clearly understood as sets of desires, as fundamental categories or collections of desires.
In other words, such an enumeration of funda- mental goals would be an abstract classification rather than a cataloguing list Furthermore, all the lists of drives that have ever been published seem to imply mutual exclusiveness among the various drives.
But there is not mutual exclusiveness. There is usually such an overlapping that it is almost impossible to separate quite clearly and sharply any one drive from any other. It should also be pointed out in any critique of drive theory that the very concept of drive itself probably emerges from a pre- occupation with the physiological needs.
It is very easy in dealing with these needs to separate the instigation, the motivated behavior, and the goal object. But it is not easy to distinguish the drive from the goal object when we talk of a desire for love. Here the drive, the desire, the goal object, the activity seem all to be the same thing. It is only the fundamental goals that remain constant through all the flux that a dynamic approach forces upon psychological theorizing.
Considerations that we have already dis- cussed should support this statement without much further proof. Cer- tainly motivated behavior is not a good basis for classification, since we have seen that it may express many things. The specific goal object is not a good basis for classification for the same reason. A human being having a desire for food, then behaving in the proper fashion to get it and then chewing and eating it may actually be seeking safety rather than food.
An individual going through the whole process of sexual desire, courting behavior, and consummatory love making may actually be seeking self- esteem rather than sexual gratification.
It is a truism to say that a white rat is not a human being, but unfortunately it is necessary to say it again, since too often the results of animal experiments are considered the basic data on which we must base our theorizing of human nature.
There are certain further considerations that are pertinent to my contention that motivation theory must be anthropocentric rather than aiimalcentric. First let us discuss the concept of instinct, which we can define rigidly as a motivational unit in which the drive, motivated be- havior, and the goal object or the goal effect are all appreciably deter- mined by heredity.
As we go up the phyletic scale there is a steady trend toward disappearance of the instincts so defined. For instance, in the white rat it is fair to say that, by our definition, there are found the hunger instinct, the sex instinct, the maternal instinct. In the monkey the sexual instinct has definitely disappeared, the hunger instinct has clearly been modified in various ways, and only the maternal instinct is undoubt- edly present.
In the human being, by our definition, they have all three disappeared, leaving in their place conglomerations of hereditary reflexes, hereditary drives, autogenous learning, and cultural learning in the moti- vated behavior and in the choice of goal objects see Chapter 6. Thus if we examine the sexual life of the human being we find that sheer drive itself is given by heredity but that the choice of object and the choice of behavior must be acquired or learned in the course of the life history.
Young arbitrarily excluded the concept of purpose or goal from motivation theory because we cannot ask a rat for his purpose: Is it necessary to point out that we can ask a human being for his purpose? Instead of rejecting purpose or goal as a concept because we cannot ask the rat about it, it would seem much more sensible to reject the rat because we cannot ask him about his purpose.
That is to say there is much less variability, for instance, in the choice of food in the white rat than there is in the monkey, and there is less variability in the monkey than there is in the human being Finally as we go up the phyletic scale and as the instincts drop away there is more and more dependence on the culture as an adaptive tool.
If then we have to use animal data let us realize these facts, and for in-' stance, let us prefer the monkey to the white rat as a subject for motiva- tion experiments if only for the simple reason that we human beings are mitch more like monkeys than we are like white rats. Harlow and many other primatologists have amply demonstrated It is now necessary to say at least a word about the situation or environment in which the organism finds itself.
We must certainly grant at once that human motivation rarely actualizes itself in behavior except in relation to the situation and to other people. Any theory of motivation must of course take account of this fact, including not only in the environment but also in the organism itself, the role of cultural determination. Once this is granted it remains to caution the theorizer against too great preoccupation with the exterior, with the culture, the environment, or the situation. Our central object of study here is, after all, the organ- ism or the character structure.
It is easy to go to thc'cxtreme in situation theory of making the organism just one additional object in the field, equivalent with perhaps a barrier, or some object that he tries to obtain. We must remember that the individual partly creates his barriers and his objects of value, that they must be defined partially in terms set by the particular organism in the situation.
I know of no way of defining or describing a field universally in such a way that this description can be independent of the particular organism functioning within it. It certainly must be pointed out that a child who is trying to attain a certain object of value to him, but who is restrained by a barrier of some sort, deter- mines not only that the object is of value, but also that the barrier is a barrier. Psychologically there is no such thing as a barrier; there is only a barrier for a particular person who is trying to get something that he wants.
For instance, any purely behavioral theory needs situation theory to give it any sense at all. A motivation theory that is based on existing drives rather than on goals or needs also needs a strong situation theory if it is not to fall.
However, a theory that stresses constant fundamental needs finds them to be relatively constant and more independent of the par- ticular situation in which the organism finds itself. For not only does the need organize its action possibilities, so to speak, in the most efficient way feasible and with a great deal of variation, but it also organizes and even creates the external reality. Another way of saying this is, if we accept Koffka's distinction between the geographical and psychological environment, that the only satisfactory way of understanding how a geographical environment becomes a psychological environment is to understand that the principle of organization of the psychological environ- ment is the current goal of the organism in that particular environment.
Sound motivation theory must then take account of the situation, but must never become pure situation theory; that is, unless we ai-c - explicitly willing to give up our search for an understanding of the nature of the constancy of the organism in favor of understanding the world it lives in.
To avoid unnecessary argument, let me stress that we are now con- cerned, not with behavior theory, but with motivation theory. Behavior is determined by several classes of determinants, of which motivation is one and envit-onmental forces is another.
The study of motivation does not negate or deny the study of situational determinants, but rather sup- plements it. They both have their places in a larger structure. There are specific isolated conditionings and habits to account for, segmental responses of various kinds, and a host phenomena of dissociation and lack of integration that we know about.
The organism furthermore can even react in a nonunitary fashion in daily life as when we do -many things at the same time. Apparently the organism is most unified in its integration when it is successfully facing either a great joy or creative moment or else a major problem or a threat or emergency.
On the whole when life is easy and successful, the organism can simultaneously do many things and turn in many directions. Although it was a bumpy road, they managed to find some light by creating an album that even Pierre said was his favorite. The album was centered around different stages of relationships, calling attention to love, heartbreak and everything in between. Their East Coast twang and classic pop-punk sound that made them colossal left The All-American Rejects - Prime Cuts (CD) with an album to remember.
Sticks And Stones is arguably one of the most popular albums by New Found Glor y to this day despite it being released in In fact, it was so successful, it landed the band in American Pie 2. It ended up catching the attention of four teenagers from Maryland who were inspired to call their band All Time Low as well as Mark Hoppus.
The latter led New Found Glory to follow their release supporting blink on one of their summer tours. From exploring deep topics to expressing lighthearted emotion, the Offspring provided a diverse record that everyone could have a stab at.
The band poured urgency and passion into the album, leading it to its undeniable success. Staying true to their religious roots, Mmhmm was entrenched with inspiring lyrics and uplifting melodies paired with pure optimism.
Although their music portrayed an elevated mood, they managed to integrate a sense of realness throughout. Having supported bands such as Simple Plan and Good Charlotte on tours during that time, Relient K truly set themselves up for success.
Debuting their now-recognizable gang vocals and steady breakdowns, Set Your Goals came in as an explosive force in pop punk. On their debut, Set Your Goals strayed away from common themes of heartbreak and focused on more complex topics, including forced influence, risk-taking and authenticity that left people wanting more.
This release was followed by several U. And of course, it includes their childish banter that we all know and love. Not to mention, the band pleasantly surprised listeners with string instruments glimmering throughout. The songs on the album were equivalent to a friend helping you through hard times, which attracted listeners from all walks of life.
From party to professional, Sugarcult introduced their fans to a more mature and serious side of themselves through this record while still managing to have a blast along the way. All Killer No Filler got the recognition it deserved with its diverse and dynamic nature. Audiences positively received their first album, stimulating the creation of a major Myspace fanbase.
This held them through the test of time, even following the death of the social media platform. Inspired by their sun-soaked hometown of Jacksonville, Florida, Yellowcard graced us with their fourth album, Ocean Avenuein This musical debut with Capitol Records ultimately catapulted their pop-punk sound into the mainstream.
Clearly, it was ingrained in our brains during the early s in the best way.
I Feel - Teddy Thompson - Bella (CDr, Album), Tango Fur Einsame Herzen - Jack Van Doorn - Tango Fur Einsame Herzen (Vinyl), DRANG! - Miss K-Toon - Mehr Als Gewollt! (File, MP3), Hypothesis, Groove Glove, Trees - Johnny Nash - Love And Peace (Vinyl, LP, Album), Phausis - Fareed - Phausis EP (Vinyl), Wish I Didnt Miss You (Electronic Youth Dub) - Various - Hed Kandi: Ibiza 2013 (CD), Pato Pobre Y Pato Rico - Los Pitufos* - Banda Sonora Original De La Pelicula La Flauta De Los Pituf, Surrender (Bassrockerz Remix) - Bassrockerz Pres. Elena (42) - Surrender (Vinyl)