George Carlin's 'Jammin In New York'

The world breaks and spins and shakes. I’m screaming but they are muffled screams. I can’t breathe in. I feel like I’m underwater. Deaf and drowning”. Silvey’s use of hyperbole allows us to draw attention to what happens when adolescence’ bear the weight of society on their backs, igniting an emotional change. We see Charlie’s attitude towards the Vietnam War and his perception of the world when Charlie is informed of the death of Jeffrey Lu’s family members, “What kind of lousy world is this? Has it always been this way, or has the bottom fallen out of it in the past couple of days? Has it always been so unfair? What is it that tips the scales? I don’t understand it.” This reinforces Charlie’s determination for order which is represented in the use of rhetorical questions. This further demonstrates that our knowledge of the world can affect our attitudes and perspectives.

He compares and contrast on how environmentalists have mislead society into thinking that we as a race are doomed. He states that environmentalists argue that Earth is currently facing lot of environmental concerns and that our raw materials are becoming more and more scarce. Environmental problems like global warming, animal extinction, air and water pollution, waste buildup, and many more affect mankind. And also the degrading of our planet has increased at an alarming rate over a small time span. As a result, our actions have not been in favor of protecting the planet, so natural disasters are hitting us on a bigger than before.

However, upon further analysis, it is evident that global warming and the civil rights movement are connected through issues of morality and politics. The civil rights movement helped fix the damaged people that were discriminated against. A global warming movement can also help fix damaged people in third world countries. McKibben explains, “The waters sweeping down the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers from the Himalayas could not drain easily into the ocean—they backed up across the country, forcing most of its inhabitants to spend three months in thigh-deep water.” Global warming has absolutely no connection to the civil rights movement. Likewise, in “The Obligation to Endure,” Carson also uses a false analogy when she weighs the enormity of environmental contamination to that of man’s extinction by nuclear weapons. She says, “Along with the possibility of the extinction of mankind by nuclear war, the central problem of our age has therefore become the contamination of man’s total environment with such substances of incredible potential for harm…” Both McKibben and Carson

In the book The Future of Life, author Edward O. Wilson highlights the ineffective nature of the debates between the two side of environmentalism. He achieves this by pointing out parallels and similarities of the language between two sides in the satirical piece.

Environmentalists worry so much about the well-being of the planet for merely the human species’ survival. Things such as natural disasters, which reasons.org say “Part of that response acknowledges that the forces behind these ‘natural disasters’ play a critical role in Earth’s capacity to support life.” If people are so concerned about the planet, then people should realize that these natural disasters actually help the Earth regenerate itself. Without these natural ‘disasters’, the planet would not be how it is today. As Nash continues to criticize humans, he states, “...capitalist-driven culture in its cancer-like tendency to self destruct.” Pollution and destruction of wildlife is a problem, but it is something that can be fixed, or having Earth fix itself. Nash is saying that humans are destroying the planet entirely, which is kind of ridiculous. If people were really destroying the Earth as much as Nash says, Earth itself would have already gotten rid of people through things like natural disasters, disease, or natural selection. The Earth will take care of itself and as Tom Haering says, “Nature plays no favorites: Survival of the fittest.”

As societies of today become more aware of their impact on the world, I feel we begin to work towards belonging to the world rather than ruling the world—we become less self-centered. There are individuals beside Daniel Quinn who warn about the destruction of the world. In 2007, Al Gore and others won the Nobel Peace Prize for “their efforts to bring the impending environmental, social, and political catastrophes of global warming to the public’s attention”

His tone in this part of the speech conveys his standpoint on the climate emergency and shows he deeply believes that we must do something to change our current way of thinking in order for us to believe that we are in an emergency state. Gore explains that our relationship with the Earth has had a drastic turn since the creation of technology and that through technology our way of thinking has changed. As the technology grows our life span increases. While this may seem to be good thing, it has also had a negative affect. With the increase in population, new technology has evolved to the point where we are making a greater carbon footprint, than we have in the past. The newer the technology the greater the demand and the greater the demand the higher the co2 levels rise. We are so busy creating things we have forgotten that some of these creations have negative consequences on our environment.

Mckibben inaugurates his third paragraph suggesting that we make the environmental issues, “"the great moral crisis of our time, and the equivalent of the civil rights movement of the 1960s."(747). He uses this analogy to explain that in his opinion, we are strip-mining the present and destroying all of whom come after it. Thus, leading him to discuss exactly how humans’ materialistic ways have impacted the earth. From Bangladesh living three months in thigh high-deep water, to polar bears becoming “20% scrawnier than they were a decade ago” (748). The environmentalist writer goes on to discuss how to deal with global warming since it is indeed creeping up on us.

On May 24, 2014 the graduates of Maharishi University all gathered to hear a speech by the well know comedian and actor Jim Carrey. The purpose of the speech was to get the graduates thinking about their future beyond school. Jim started his speech in a very funny, yet clever way. He used jokes to ease the tension that he could sense in the room. With the use of jokes and making the crowd laugh, he grabbed their attention and continued to hold that attention throughout the speech. Jim wants the students to realize that “What we really want seems impossibly out of reach and ridiculous to expect, so we never dare to ask the universe for it” (2). Jim wanted the students to get away from the fear of taking the “conservative pathway” (3). Jim did a very good job at getting a very strong point across but at the same time keeping it entertaining enough to grab your attention the entire time. Even though his speech was intended for the students of Maharishi University, it also appealed to the adults. I am positive that the speech had some adults questioning their job, lifestyle, and whether or not they have lived a life of fear and conservatism.

The book assigned to me for this assignment was Killer Show by John Barylick. It 's an informative non-fictional book. It tells the real life tragedy of the fatal “Station” nightclub fire in West Warwick, Rhode Island. The story is told using flashbacks and analysis in each chapter of the book. Before I started reading this book I was intrigued because the main events in this story are in the 21st century. This is unlike the other books that could have been assigned to me. The date of this horrific tale was February 20, 2003. The book goes in detail about the history of the Station, what was the cause of the fire, how people escaped the fire and the aftermath of the fire. Barylick is a respected Providence, Rhode Island lawyer. After the fire, he was one of the lawyers that represented the many victims of the fire. Therefore, he knows how much this fire affected the West Warwick community. He has researched the public record of the fire 's investigation which allows him to point out those at fault. There were ownership issues, fire marshal issues and sustainability issues that caused such a disaster. The focus of this story that changed the built environment. Although this is a troubling story there is much to be learned from it.

The essay opens up with McKibben talking about how the political campaign against global warming is flawed because at our current point there is nothing much that can be done to fix it.(Mckibben,1) He then goes to state that humans are the biggest culprit behind global warming and supports this by giving examples such as SUVs and American ignorance.(2,9) He concludes by saying that if ten percent of America were to go green, it still would not save the planet, but ten percent could get the government’s attention to pass laws making everyone go green. (11)

First, he develops ethos by building credibility and trustworthiness. Not only is he an environmental activist, but an award winning actor as well. The notable man’s success helps appeal to audiences, because if people admire his work in the film industry, then they’ll potentially become more fascinated in his work dedicated to preserving biodiversity and supporting renewable energy. DiCaprio’s ethos is established by demonstrating that he hopes to make a difference. Additionally, he uses logical reasoning in order to appeal to logos. Quoting Abraham Lincoln in the beginning and end of his speech signifies how critical climate change is, because he makes an allusion to the Civil War. DiCaprio incorporates personal experiences into his speech as well, including impressions from some of the countries he visited. While comparing today’s struggle to those of the 19th century, the environmental activist brings to light the importance of protecting this planet. Moreover, an appeal to pathos is created by the use of vivid, emotional evidence. The audience feels sympathy and fear due to the detailed descriptions of the industrial pollution in China, the deforestation of Canada, the glaciers melting in Greenland, the flooding throughout India, and the droughts raging across the United

Ginsberg reflects on the satire of people worshipping American culture when it is actually the cause of their trouble. Which glorifies a civilization restricting you to normality, and destroying the best minds. These parts take the reader behind Ginsberg’s belief of the “best minds” American culture changes across the fundamental desires to destroy them.

So as I now stand here, ladies and gentlemans and all the people from all over the world, please, lend me your ears for just a few minutes(pathos--direct address). Some people now believes that the world is unsavable, but I think they are wrong because, as a human being living in this world, we can do so many things to save our planet.(logos--concede).

DiCaprio includes several appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos throughout his speech to convey that environmental problems need resolution. Although he is not a scientist, DiCaprio builds his ethos through saying, “I am not a scientist, but I don’t need to be.” He recognizes that resolving environmental damage doesn’t have to fall in the hands of only the science community. Therefore, he takes initiative by presenting himself as a concerned human being with only the thought of making the Earth cleaner. Additionally, he uses logos by stating not only facts but also bringing attention to information that should already be obvious. After talking about way to improve our environment through economy, he states, “The economy will die if our ecosystems collapse.” As the economy relies on the environment for it's resources that later facilitate trade, only a healthy environment can maintain a steady economy. In addition, DiCaprio uses pathos throughout his speech to invoke fear and guilt. Most notably in his speech, he states, “And solving this crisis is not a question of politics. It is our moral obligation...” He points out that despite knowing the Earth is changing in a negative way, people would rather choose to fight each other instead of tackle the environmental problems themselves. And as a result of the human ability’s failure to separate political views aside from bigger problems, the future generations on the Earth will