After analyzing the last two minutes of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s speech on his take on knowledge vs. thinking (watch it here, from 3:26 to 5:26), I noticed there were three things that were a key component to his speech: his eye contact/gestures, the way he organized the speech, and his strong ethos appeal.

Throughout his speech, he is consistently making eye contact with the audience and is using his hand motions to really engage and captivate the audience. This shows how passionate he is about the topic, which compels the audience to listen and really grip his main point. It also shows that he is well informed on this topic, which engages the audience as well.

His organization is interesting, and for the most part easy to follow. He begins with an example, which allows the audience to envision his idea in a real life situation. He then explains the outcome of the example and relates it back to his main idea: how to think goes much farther than knowing what to think.

People know who Neil deGrasse Tyson is, being one of the most famous astrophysicists out there. His audience knows that he is extremely smart, and they also know that he is very talented at communicating a complicated topic in a simpler way.  People are engaged because they know who he is, and that what he is saying actually has meaning, he’s not just making ideas up.

Overall, I think Neil deGrasse Tyson was very effective in terms of getting his point across. He used real world examples, spoke cleanly but simply, and was able to get his point across in the most understandable way possible.

I agree with the writer’s idea that many studies are uncontrollably biased and that “correlation does not equal causation” (after all, I’m a psych major and that is the first thing they teach you). In even the most controlled study settings, there are series of uncontrollable factors, which can lead to skewed results. However, I do not necessarily agree with the argument that many studies are inaccurate. Also, he bases this information off of research, so isn’t he contradicting himself? I believe that there are many studies that are biased and not credible, but I also believe that there are many studies that are the exact opposite. It all depends on which study you choose from. For example, if you simply Google “do vaccines cause Autism” and you see information from Generation Rescue, Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization, you would know that that specific source is not credible. Jenny McCarthy is avidly against vaccines, so the information put on her website is obviously biased. However, if you find research from a source that you know is unbiased and scholarly, that is information that you would want to use in research. 

This is important to know when finding information for my paradigm shift research because in order to find compelling and accurate evidence for a paradigm shift, the sources should be reliable and unbiased. Finding scholarly articles and studies can help form a better essay and further understand the research at hand. Addressing this is significant when writing this essay because unreliable sources can completely tear apart your writing. Therefore, it is important to thoroughly research the information from your source as well as the source itself. My essay is on the topic of cigarettes and vaping, so I will have to research sources that are unbiased on both ends of smoking and non-smoking. 

Cigarettes were huge in America during the 1950s and 60s; almost every public place allowed anyone to smoke at any time, even high schools had smoking sections! Obviously, times have changed. When the discovery that cigarettes are connected to lung cancer was confirmed, many things shifted. Advertisements against smoking became more popular, warnings on cigarette packs were issued, and laws were being passed to designate smoking sections in many more public places. The rate of people who smoked cigarettes decreased steadily, and is still decreasing today. However, there has been another shift. More people, especially teens and younger adults, are turning to vaping and e-Cigarettes. The percentage of young people who Juul or vape has increased significantly. This modern day shift is due to the invention of vapes, Juuls, e-Cigarettes, etc., along with a more accessible way to target teens: social media. The shift of cigarettes started in the 1950s and the percentage of cigarette smokers is reaching its lowest levels today, while the shift of using smokeless tobacco began in 2016 and is still continuing today.

I chose to research and write about the double paradigm shift regarding cigarettes and vapes because it is something that Penn State students, along with almost all other teenagers and young adults, have experienced first hand. People Juul at parties, in their dorms, even while walking to class; we see it everywhere. This is something that I know this audience can relate to, because we all know at least one person who owns a vape. This shift needs to be explored and researched because, in a sense, history is repeating itself here. People think vaping is healthier than cigarettes, similar to how people in the 1950s didn’t realize that smoking is extremely hazardous to their health. By researching and bringing awareness to this topic, people may be able to understand that we have made similar mistakes like this before with cigarettes, so why continue to do this?  Overall, I feel that this topic is relevant, interesting, and informative to my audience, and I am excited to research more about it!

In the article, Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?, author Jean M. Twenge discusses how childhoods have changed thanks to the invention and usage of smartphones. Everything has shifted, from how kids and teens spend their free time to the appeal of getting a license. The biggest change between generations is the longing for independence. Years ago, teens couldn’t wait to get their license, as it marked the first step towards adulthood and freedom. Now, kids are pushing off the responsibilities of having to become an adult, and more and more teenagers are waiting to get their license until it is an absolute must have.

The definition of a paradigm shift, according the the Cambridge Dictionary, is “a time when the usual and accepted way of doing or thinking about something changes completely”. The lessened appeal for independent freedom can be considered a paradigm shift because the way teenagers think now has completely changed from the way that they thought several years ago. This shift of thinking was triggered by the innovation of the internet, and now widely-used smartphones. Teenagers can reach out to their friends without leaving their bed, which results in less of a need for independence. Years ago, kids needed to have that independence in order to see their friends and communicate with other people, but nowadays, teens have all their freedom in the palm of their hand.

Not only is this a paradigm shift because of the lack of desire for freedom, but also the increase in depression and the decrease of sleep in teenagers. Graphs in this article show that teens are now more likely to feel lonely or left out, and more likely to not get enough sleep at night. This is a paradigm shift because it is a change in what many teenagers are doing. They are less likely to go out because they can just communicate through text or FaceTime, they feel depressed if they do not get a certain number of “likes” on Instagram, the list goes on. This change is leading to a generation full of depression and anxiety.

While this change in teenager’s thoughts and activities is considered to be a paradigm shift, it is not necessarily a good one. Teens without smartphones years ago were much happier than teens today. On the bright side, Twenge mentions that more and more teenagers are linking certain problems to their smartphones, which is definitely a step in the right direction.