Emotivism: What Makes Us What The Good Life

“My father beat me for letting another boy steal from me. Two years later, he beat me for for threatening my ninth-grade teacher” (Coates 28). He speaks on how this puts him in a “Damned if I do, Damned if I don’t situation”, If he fights he will be beaten if he doesn’t…he will still be

In his 1992 essay “A Hoot in the Dark: The Evolution of General Rhetoric,” George A. Kennedy proposed a foundation of and for a “General Rhetoric” that encompasses the activity of all social, communicative animals, a rhetoric as potential energy that exists prior to not only speech but to the whole of communication. Twenty-five years later, writing in the same journal, Philosophy and Rhetoric, and affiliated with the same institution, Pennsylvania State University, Henry Johnstone identified rhetoric, as a philosophical activity, as one of the handful of activities that separate humankind from the rest of the animal kingdom. Kennedy expanded the particular activities that fall under the domain of Rhetoric to illustrate, in part, that rhetoric, far from being a superfluous, inexact art to be discarded of by the rampant logical positivism and instrumentalism which is characteristic of our era, is in fact integral to the very existence, survival, and indeed consciousness of not humankind, but the whole of socio-sentient life. Johnstone, too, argues his point against the devaluation of rhetoric as a discipline, even though his claim runs counter to that of Kennedy: rhetoric, he says, “is the evocation and maintenance of the consciousness required for communication,” a property unique to human beings (21). It would be folly, according to Johnstone, to attribute this

Four principal scholars explored the symbolic interaction theory, George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, William Isaac Thomas, and Herbert Blumer (Smith & Hamon, 2012). George Herbert Mead proposed that through interaction with others, we learn about ourselves—this is done through three stages; play stage, game stage, and generalized other (Smith & Hamon, 2012). He identifies the movement between “I” and “me.” “I” being the spontaneous, immediate reactions to a situation, “me” being the roles learned from prior experiences (Smith & Hamon, 2012). Charles Horton Cooley had the idea of the “looking-glass self”—which explains individuals consider how they appear to others in order to create their own concept of themselves (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The third scholar, William Isaac Thomas, was known for the definition of the situation, which led to the idea that understanding perspective of the people involved in the situation was necessary to understand human behavior in general (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The Thomas Theorem stated

The self is expressed in a multitude of ways ranging from speeches to television as well as writing. Not only that but as human beings it is instinctual to make an observation and write it down, but we tend to add our own personal view as to what we believe, or interpret something entirely else from the observation. By reading Karen Ho's "Biographies of Hegemony" and Jean Twenge's "An Army of One: Me" essays as well as Robert Thurman's "Wisdom" it is evident that each employed a distinctive argument and method to explain their views on what they wrote but what each of them shared in common was how their writing allowed their

In the book, a time from before the book takes place is known as, The Unmentionable times, it is a day and age when individuality was present. The past is said to be unmentionable because the possible discovery of the Era, where machines could do things for humans, could bring forth a new way of life, where technology could be restored and individualism could return. Many rules exist in the book, but one that stood out to me the most is the removal of the words I, me, and my, in the book all people refer to themselves as either our, we, or us which symbolizes the way men are forced to think of themselves and their brothers, the main reason for the establishment of the rule is to prevent even the slightest thought of making a decision for yourself, all rules placed in this society are similar, they all revolve around one thing: the avoidance of

“We tend to overstate and to understate, to glorify the good and ignore the bad in ourselves.” (20) J.D. Vance introduces his readers to a world which many didn’t know existed, the world of white working class people, known as hillbillies, living in Rust Belt towns. Vance gives an inside look by telling stories of his life that are common circumstances in the hillbilly society. But as he says in the quote above, humans, no matter their race, background, or hometown, have a tendency to stretch the truth. Often we avoid putting ourselves or those we love in a bad light, we make our stories more grand so we can gather peoples interest, or we simply leave things out because its easier than reliving things that cause us so much heart ache.

Trudging through the mountains of facts, studies, and opinions relevant to social and political issues creates a daunting task for political strategists, leaving them to decide what information is relevant and essential for the voting public to know, in order to rally the voters to support a certain candidate. However, these mountains of facts and opinions can turn off voters, and scare away many potential supporters, forcing political strategists to also engage the emotional lives of the populace: enter the role of cultural narratives- tales of adventure, sacrifice, defeat, and victory grabbing hold of the emotional lives of the audience, and as George Lakoff points out, “…politics is about the narratives of our culture and our

This article is another piece of written truth as to how one’s social upbringing reflects their views and opinions.

I can also look at the different forms of personal pronouns that are used by the speakers. Both Cook and Pichai’s speeches use “We” the vast majority of the time, but occasionally use “I”, depending on the context.

As a child Jal was made into a child soldier to fight for his people’s freedom. In order to be a soldier Jal had to face many trials, these trials made him frigid, cautious, and stoic. This affects the way he interprets situations, often making him fight any potential threats. “....“There is no war here,” she’d whisper in the dark. “You’re safe now.” But I knew I wasn’t and still slept with one eye open to make sure I could see my enemy. I missed my AK-47 and wanted a

Later, she describes these fights they would have as “battles,” providing insight as to how she views the relationship between her and her dad. Clearly, she sees him as an

I do not include myself in her “we”, not because I don’t think of myself as being part of a population or a species of general habit. It’s because as a reader I never put myself inside

By identifying with a group, collective emotions can be experienced even in solitude, as evidenced by the existence of two separate worlds. The use of “incommensurable” points to the dichotomy of society and the individual and highlights the fact that the social construct consists of individual components rather than a single entity. This is evidenced when a man speaks to the crowd and “His language becomes high-flown…the feelings he arouses return to him enlarged and amplified, reinforcing his own to the same degree” (212). The speaker expresses the collective sentiment and, much like a biological positive feedback loop, the emotions of the crowd resonate back to the speaker. Thus the speaker transcends his own identity as simply an individual and becomes an incarnate of the group. When emotions trickle down from society to the individual, they loop back and beget society.

What constitutes the 'tribulations of the self' in contemporary society, according to Anthony Giddens? Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer.This essay will seek an explanation of what constitutes the 'tribulations of the self' according to Anthony Giddens (1991). In the first part of this paper, I discuss some central ways language has been viewed focusing the review on social constructivist writings as well as those stemming from the study of human development.

George Herbert Mead’s theory of the “I and the Me” claims that people are an object to the audience due to the emergence of the perspective of the others. The self is recognized as a social object set by our social structure and behavior. Mead divided the self into two separate parts. The “I” is known as the actor of the self. The “me” is the object that is formed by the evaluations of the audience’s perspective towards the self. Thus, the “me” controls and discipline the “I” of the self. The concept of the “I and the Me” was first derived from the work of self development. Mead wanted to focus on how the two separate part of the self define the identity of the person through symbolic interaction.