Photo by the New York Times

Terror has struck citizens in the South Asia country, Myanmar. There is currently a major genocide emergency in the western region of the country. The Rohingya, a Muslim minority, are facing severe discrimination from the government. The United Nations (UN) has cited that the mass killings and sexual violence against the Rohingya peoples constitute “crimes against humanity.” Furthermore, the UN has accused the Myanmarese government of practicing ethnic cleansing and genocide.

As of 2019, the horror continues, leaving over a million Rohingyas as refugees in neighboring Bangladesh and Malaysia. This image showcases Rohingya refugees crossing the Myanmar-Bangladesh border. The picture holds great significance that persuades readers to protest the Rohingya genocide. There is an argument that is present in this image: end violence against the innocent. Men, women, and children are being killed. Nothing is being done to stop these atrocities. This crisis is argued to be unmatched by any in recent times. The image’s argumentative case is built upon human experience and analogies. The publication of this image in the New York Times also aids in its persuasive nature.

In the foreground of the photo, two men can be seen holding children. The first man is carrying his child on his shoulders. It can be inferred that the young child grew tired from walking. It is unknown the distance these refugees have traveled to cross their countries border. However, it is important to note that many of the refugees appear to wear no shoes. In the far right corner of the image, the second man is walking with a small boy through the grass. They may be avoiding the rough mud path because of the lack of protective shoes. For the average American, it can be very hard to comprehend how children are able to handle this tough journey. There are undoubtedly many dangers. Regardless of the lack of relatability, this image creates an overall common experience. There are families present in the photo– young children. It is a common value to protect the young from harm. The two men in the foreground of this image represent this value. They are both trying to make the strenuous journey less harsh for their children. Whether this is carrying them or protecting their feet from the rough road, anyone can relate to this example. The appeal to a common ground strengthens the image’s argument.

Sadly, this photo is familiar. The world has grown accustomed to global atrocities. Millions of refugees are displaced from their home countries due to political unrest, civil wars, and ethnic discrimination. When the global community learned of the horrific Holocaust, they declared “never again.” Yet, there has arguably been 30 known genocides since 1945. The most recent, and well known, would be the Rwandan genocide that occurred in 1994. Similar photos were documented of the Tutsi, the minority that was ruthlessly slaughtered in unprecedented numbers. The world failed to recognize the terror that was occurring in Rwanda. Global leaders are now failing to give significant aid to the Rohingya peoples in Myanmar. The analogy linking this photo to prior experiences helps aid in the overall theme, or argument, of the image.

The publication of this image in the New York Times helped raise awareness of the situation. The widespread viewing of the picture helps aid in the argumentative stance the image creates. The primary message this photo emits is one of pleading– pleading for the global community to end its hypocrisy and deliver upon the aged declaration of “never again.”

Image by TED

TED Talks diffuse ideas. They try to educate the global community on a variety of topics and establish changes in attitudes, lives, and the world. This is the exact purpose of Mikhail Zygar’s TED Talk, “What the Russian Revolution Would Have Looked Like on Social Media.” Zygar argues that anyone can change history. He draws on his own experiences in his home country of Russia to show the public’s false perception that only famous figures matter in history. By drawing personal connections and applying historical facts to relate with modern-day society, Zygar makes a compelling argument that achieves TEDs’ goal– spreading a new idea to reshape the world.

The overall theme of Zygar’s talk is simple: every person can make a difference. He begins his talk with inference about his fellow Russian citizens. Zygar points out that the Russian people have this perception that their country could never become democratic. This perception is based on the stereotype that history is written by the winner. Only influential leaders matter. This “predetermined” look of history leads many to believe they have no relevance. To debunk this ideology, Zygar formulated a new, modern approach with a vague question of how Facebook would have affected the Russian Revolution. He created Project 1917. This website mimics a social platform like Facebook but uses diary entries and other historical documents from the Russian Revolution. The outcome of this experiment proves that public opinion motivates history rather than political leaders. This shows that Russia still has the potential to be a democratic country.

Zygar is not presenting a speech. He is simply holding a conversation with his audience. This natural approach leads to a positive and influential atmosphere. By having a personal connection with his audience, Zygar develops a very powerful argument. He uses techniques like strong eye contact, effective gestures, and vocal inflection to build a strong presence on the stage. This largely affected his success in expanding his audiences’ knowledge. My personal knowledge of the Russian Revolution was expanded in a way I did not expect. I thought I would hear about the actual historical events. Instead, I learned the unknown history. For example, Russia was the first country to abolish the death penalty. They were also one of the first to grant women the right to vote. These accomplishments were due entirely to the people. After listening to this TED Talk, I am convinced that ordinary people can influence history.

Image by Giphy

In Season 2, Episode 17 of The Office, main character Dwight K. Schrute delivers a moving speech at a paper sales convention. His exceptional delivery, organization, and persuasive appeals made his speech effective.

Early on in the episode, it is discovered that Dwight K. Schrute has an overwhelming fear of public speaking. His coworker, Jim Halpert, helps Shrute overcome these fears by giving him some simple tips. Little does Schrute know, these tips come straight from a speech made by the Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini. During his speech, Schrute uses extreme hand gestures to communicate his passion to the audience. By banging his fists on the table, he can engage the audience to listen and understand his intense speech. Schrute also uses various vocal techniques to gain the attention of his audience. There is a significant amount of vocal inflection during the majority of his speech. The powerful, commanding tone of his voice showcases how emotional his speech is. The use of pauses and the increase of vocal volume also helps with the effectiveness of his speech. Despite a lack of strong eye contact, Schrute manages to receive a standing ovation by the end of his speech, proving that he has properly impassioned a formerly disinterested audience of salesmen and women.

The organization of Schrutes speech starts with the startling cry of how blood moves the wheels of history. This outlandish remark works well as an introduction because it gains interest from the audience. Schrute then moves on to ask a series of questions throughout the speech, questions that further the presentation of his argument. He ties this subtle interrogation to a chronological format; tying each remark to periods throughout a person’s life. Schrute then ends with a call to action. This is a characteristic of all great speeches. By successfully calling his audience to act on the issue he is presenting, Schrute proves the effectiveness of his speaking abilities.

Dwight Schrute’s speech utilizes persuasive techniques. An appeal to pathos is present through the majority of the presentation. Schrute speaks with emotions. His dramatic vocabulary and metaphors signify his emotional response to his topic. Schrute makes many references to a “neverending fight” that paper salesmen encounter in their industry. He passionately commands his audience to join arms because “together they will prevail.” By comparing the salesmen’s labor rights to the “motherland”, Schrute invokes a feeling of unity amongst his audience. This emotional response shows the usage of Pathos.

Overall, Dwight Schrute’s speech was extremely effective. Schrute’s amazing delivery, organization and effective use of persuasive appeals engage his audience to respond to the call of action he presents in his speech. Schrute was able to unite a divided conference of salesmen and create an atmosphere that promoted comradery.

Image by Wired

Statistics can be used to prove anything, even if the proof is not real. Research studies are used in the process of arguing numerous topics. Their conclusions are seen as fact. However, these studies can often hold bias and are manipulated to aid the presenter’s best interest.

The article, Studies Are Usually Bunk, Study Shows, analyzes how behavioral research studies are misleading. The piece describes how these studies are often biased due to the sample sizes and overall purpose. Manipulation of these research studies has damaged the population’s ability to regard such pieces with skepticism. Since the research is ‘scientific’, it is automatically trusted.

Skeptical regard to research is essential when writing a paper. When preparing research for a paper, one must carefully examine the contents and credibility of the source. This can be done by looking in libraries’ databases, and not on Wikipedia. Scholarly articles are great resources of information that can help develop an essay.

For my Paradigm Shift essay, I will be sure to not use behavioral studies since they are shown to not be credible. My topic is the shifts of global religion, so the subject is already susceptible to bias. I have to be very careful in picking credible sources for my paper. Research studies on my topic would easily be bunked because religion is so personal and unique to each person. I have to keep in mind that each culture has different views on aspects and interpretations of religion. Facts and ideas that may be relevant in the revivals of Christianity will not be relevant to Buddhism.

Overall, author Andy Kessler is right; the world is not binary, but research studies are.

Image by the National Museum of Women in the Arts

Ideology is not the same as religion. Crazy, right?

These two terms are often confused in modern-day discussions of morals and ethics. Both concepts can be traced back to the dawn of civilization. They influence people’s opinions, emotions, and overall way of life. So, what’s the big difference?

All forms of religion have the concept of a superhuman power that controls the universe. This can be found in forms of gods, or anything that requires some type of worship. Religion is a set of moral codes that are tied directly to a spiritual guide. It is completely based on faith.

On the other hand, ideology is entirely political. This term deal with ideas linked to political theory. Ideology is based on proofs that are derived from economics or political.

With that understood, a Paradigm Shift is defined as a change in the understanding of an idea. This term is often used in scientific situations to describe a shift in the thinking of the educational mind. Paradigm shifts are linked to ideology. Ideology is often confused with religion due to the many similarities. So, this term can also be used to describe religious revivals or a direct change in prior theological thought.

Religious revivals are characterized as a shift of the church to the original ethics and morals of the religion after a period of sin. These movements are scattered throughout history.

Firstmost, Christianity is the world’s largest religion with 2.4 billion followers. It has experienced perhaps the most famous revivals that are well documented in western history. Starting in the 4th century, Christianity rose to prominence when declared the official religion of the Roman Empire. Throughout centuries, fellowship remained high, lasting through the breakdown of empires and declaration of wars. It wasn’t until the 16th century when the first major historical shift in the religion began.

Due to corruptness in the Catholic church, a sect of Christians broke away and developed what would be known as Protestantism. This lead to the creation of many different denominations of Christianity with different interpretations of religious texts. A pattern continued, revivals occurring through varying periods of history. In the United States, the most prominent would be the Great Awakenings, events that revitalized Protestant church attendance in the 1790s and 1830s.

The revivals in Christianity is just one example of Paradigm Shifts in religion. Similar events can be found in societies around the world. Religion has a presence in many people’s lives, making it a very relatable topic to all audiences. In the United States, church attendance is falling at an increasing rate. If one looks at historical trends, it can be inferred that modern ‘Great Awakening’ will happen. It is just the question of when.

The concept of a ‘Paradigm Shift’ was created by philosopher Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge Dictionary defines the term as “a time when the usual and accepted way of doing or thinking about something changes completely.” With this information known, what classifies as a Paradigm Shift?

Historically the term refers to scientific theologies that have become outdated and replaced with new, better theories. An example of this could be the concept of a flat earth. The Greek philosopher, Aristotle was the first to propose an observation that the earth was round. However, this theory did not publicly replace the original paradigm theory until Ferdinand Magellan sailed around the world in 1519. This fundamental change in scientific theories proves a Paradigm Shift has taken place.

In recent times, Paradigm Shifts have been associated with sociological changes amongst generations. Jean M. Twenge’s article, “Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?” is a great example of a modern-day Paradigm Shift.

Image by Jasu Hu

The article poses a series of questions that develop a theory that the younger generation’s reliance on cellphones relates to a major societal shift from previous eras. In general, paradigm shifts are created by the young. The changes in ideas usually take the lifetime of a generation. These two characteristics can be found in Twenge’s article. The writing states:

At first I presumed these might be blips, but the trends persisted, across several years and a series of national surveys. The changes weren’t just in degree but in kind. The biggest difference between the Millennials and their predecessors was in how they viewed the world; teens today differ from the Millennials not just in their views but in how they spend their time. The experiences they have every day are radically different from those of the generation that came of age just a few years before them (Twenge).

In this quotation, the usage of the word ‘radical’ provides a clear understanding of the severe change the younger generation is facing. The lapse in time and the cause of the change being related to the young, proves that a paradigm shift has taken place.

The Paradigm Shift described in Twenge’s article relates to the drastic downward trend of teens’ mental health with the increased usage of smartphones. This new theory, that smartphones cause mental illnesses, has a wide array of supporting evidence. Therefore, it debunks the prior paradigm theory causing a Paradigm Shift.

Image by nbcnews.com

This image was captured in the aftermath of a major humanitarian crisis that shook the world.

On April 21, 2014, 276 Nigerian schoolgirls were kidnapped by the Boko Haram terrorist organization. In response to the Nigerian government’s poor handling of the situation, protests erupted from parents and their communities. Their signs were painted with the words, “Bring back out girls”. News of the horrific event spread across the globe. Western celebrities began joining the conversation, begging their country’s government to intervene. NBC news arrived on the scene to record the uproar of events that followed and captured this image that shows the critical nature of the situation.

This photo is commanding the Nigerian government to take action and save the school girls that they have sworn to protect.

I am drawn to this image because I can sense the despair and desperation these women feel. These girls are their children. I feel there is so much historical context behind this photo. What has occurred is arguably one of the worst events in human history. Hundreds of lives are lost. Physically lost. These families do not know if their daughters are dead or alive. The image also poses questions. It makes accusations against those in control. How could a government fail its people like this? I expect to explore how this image is meant to impact more than just the Nigerian government. The women holding the signs will take any countries’ aid. They just want their daughters back.

This image has a strong comparison to the artifact I chose for my civic engagement speech. Both images deal with children, and the failure of a government to protect them. I feel I can expand upon the ideas I present in my speech to strengthen my argument for the essay. I plan to focus on the images failed appeal of ethos, and how they both present a call to action. My primary goal is to correctly analyze the nature of this photo and how it affected communities around the world.

Logical appeals can be found in the most unexpected places. One may see a bumper sticker on their drive to work that affects their viewpoints on the Republican Party. A meme on Instagram could raise awareness for climate change. Anything from a t-shirt slogan, Facebook post, to a Redbubble sticker on a Hydro Flask can influence opinions. The one similarity all of these platforms share is the literary appeal of Logos.

Take this Twitter meme as an example:

This post made by an ordinary woman tackles the issue of littering.

Mistreating planet Earth is a huge societal problem. Human civilization has turned the oceans into trash pits, vanquished thousands of native forests, and taminated the air quality in many parts of this world. Approximately 75% of the American population have admitted that they littered in the past five years. The most common items littered are cigarette butts and fast food wrappers. These objects harm wildlife and disrupt natural ecosystems. While littering may not seem a serious issue compared to the mass waste that corporations are producing, the mentality that the earth is a garbage can is toxic and results in disrespect for the environment.

To try and spread awareness for the ill effects of littering, this woman uses a logical appeal to connect with Generation Z. By comparing ex-boyfriends to trash, the social-media influencer establishes an easily understood platform. Here is the logic: why should one litter if they can’t even throw their old boyfriends out of their lives? To this young generation of women, many relationships with men are toxic, just like litter.

A surprising 43% of college women report that they have experienced toxic, or abusive, dating behaviors. This statistic develops ground for a commonplace among females. It is a well supported idea that not all young men treat women with an appropriate amount of respect. This view is shared by a community of females that has been gaining momentum over the past years with the rise of feminist movements. Not only does this image present a commonplace, but also a strong established ideology. The groups of idea created by the feminist movement have been directly related to the logic in this meme. The audience automatically thinks that littering is just as terrible as toxic relationships.

By linking a relatable, and logical approach, the author of the tweet is able to effectively convince her readers to stop littering, and respect the environment. The short message is clear, concise, and proves a point due entirely to the literary appeal of logos.