This past Wednesday, for ENGL 137H, I presented a TED talk to a few fellow classmates regarding a paradigm shift that has occurred in recent years. My topic was the shift in 3D Printing from an industrial to a consumer field, and the therefore shift from positive to negative effects of 3D printing. Well, if you remember back from my post after doing our first speech for the same class, you’ll remember how many times I explained that I simply HATE public speaking of any sort. So essentially a speech where I was required to put on a performance to transform a mundane lecture into an exciting talk, was pretty much a recipe for disaster. I might as well have gone into ANGEL and put my failing grade for English in now, because I had a feeling this was not going to be good. Well, naturally I did not want to fail this project, so I took a lot of time and practiced in the One Button Rooms to try and rehearse what I was going to say and when. I also practiced several times in my dorm the morning of the talk, which probably made people on my floor think I was talking to myself about 3D printing. However, after both performing my talk, and listening to others’ talks, I think it is safe to say that they were pretty good. I especially liked when people used humor to break the tension, and when I was presenting, when I got a chuckle out of the audience, I found that it relaxed me and made me more at ease. What I think I could have changed about my talk is the amount of slides on my powerpoint. I felt I might have had a bit too many, and I was worried that it would be distracting while I was speaking. All in all, I think it turned out alright, but I’ll want to keep this in mind in any future presentations I give. Overall, the last hurdle (besides the accompanying paper due Friday) before Thanksgiving break is over, and I am grateful that I can go home thinking I might (shockingly) have done decently well. Posted below is a video of my TED Talk (don’t judge too much while watching, I was extremely nervous).
Tag Archives: rcl
TED Talks: A Shift in the 3D Printing World
Music Only A Mathematician Could Write
Scott Rickard giving his TED Talk: The Beautiful Math Behind The Ugliest Music.
After watching this TED Talk I can honestly say I have never heard anything like it, but it held my attention for a whole ten minutes at 11:30 at night, so I definitely found it interesting. This TED Talk, given by mathematician Scott Rickard, was about mathematically designing the world’s ugliest piece of music. What exactly constitutes ugly? Well, according to people that study music for a living, a piece of music that has repetition can be considered beautiful. But believe it or not, avoiding repetition in a piece of music is nearly impossible without advanced mathematical concepts. Don’t trust me? Sit down in front of a piano, whether you play or not, and try to play for only 30 seconds without repeating anything the entire time. I tried this myself, I really did. Over and over for nearly an hour (while my Chem homework sat undone, but anyways) I tried to play without repeating anything. I couldn’t do it. It’s more complicated than it sounds. So in this TED Talk, Rickard explains the research he has done with other mathematicians and engineers regarding the subject. Using sonar and a 200-year-old mathematical concept dealing with prime numbers, he and his crew were able to create what they call “The Perfect Ping” (aka the world’s ugliest song). It was performed on stage by an accomplished pianist. But after hearing it played, I have to agree with the musicologists when they say that repetition is necessary in any beautiful piece of music (it was almost as bad as a Katy Perry song, almost).
Looking deeper into the TED Talk, I found some things that I thought were done very well, and others that weren’t. For one thing the speaker, Rickard, was obviously nervous, which is understandable, but after watching other Ted Talks I found that others were better able to hide their insecurities. I also felt that perhaps a bit more background was given then was necessary, but if he was given a certain time that he had to fill, then I feel like the information added a nice storyline to his presentation. On the other hand, I really enjoyed the topic. I’m not sure if it’s because I am interested in both Math and Music, but I found the concepts and research to be fascinating. Again, it might only be me, and some of you might fall asleep during the ten minutes of the talk, but I found that the duel aspects of the presentation (liberal arts and analytical thinking) invited and supported a wider audience. In addition, while it might not be entirely relevant for our TED Talks, I enjoyed how the ugliest music piece was played in person on the piano, and not recorded or played on an automated sound system. I do enjoy listening to music (I have no shame in admitting that I blast classical music while I’m studying), and I found that the live performance allowed me to better connect with the piece. All in all, the music was pretty rough (which it was meant to be), but I found the talk to fascinating, and it was certainly something I wouldn’t have thought of myself. And another wonderful thing about this talk: the mathematical theory they used to make this possible was all centered around multiplying by the number 3. Isn’t math wonderful?
3D Printers: Let’s Face It, They’re Pretty Awesome
I. Introductory Paragraph
A. Hook: Imagine a world where instead of printing out english essays, you can print out whistles, cups, phone cases, and much more. Fortunately, this dream is getting closer to reality as 3-Dimensional (3D) Printers become an increased presence in both manufacturing and everyday life.
B.Background Information
1. What a 3D Printer is
2. What they’re used for
C.Thesis Statement
Topic: 3D Printers
Purpose: To explain why and how 3D printers have become an increased part of our world and what it means to us.
Subtopic 1: Past/ Background of 3D Printers
Subtopic 2: Shift in Usage of 3D Printers in Industry
Subtopic 3: What 3D printers mean to us
II. Body Paragraph
A.Topic: How 3D Printers came to be
B. When 3D Printers were first thought about.
C. When/ How 3D Printers were actually invented successfully.
D. When 3D Printers First Appeared in Industry.
E. Concluding: Transition from how 3D Printers were introduced to the actual shift in their usage from experimental to practical.
III. Body Paragraph
A.Topic: How 3D Printers became a bigger part of industry.
B. What caused their increased usage.
C. When exactly this increase in 3D Printer usage occurred.
D. How 3D Printers have developed since then/ what implications come along with them.
E. Concluding: Transition from explaining the shift in thought about 3D Printers to what this could mean in the future.
IV. Body Paragraph
A. Topic: How 3D Printers will affect us in the future, and how they will develop from this point.
B. How the thoughts about 3D Printers may shift in the coming years.
C. Possible projects that 3D Printers could work on in the future, and how these projects will affect us and how 3D Printers are thought about.
D. How 3D Printers might make the shift into consumer and personal use.
E. Concluding: Tie up what 3D Printers could mean to us in the future, and how their use in the coming years may change the community’s thoughts about them.
V. Conclusion Paragraph
A. Summary of Main Points: Sum up the transition in the usage and thinking of 3D Printers.
B. Emphasize Message as a Whole: State that 3D Printers are becoming an increased part of not just industry, but also our personal lives; so we need to develop opinions and ideas about their usage and what affects it could have in the future.
C. Lead to related thinking or action: Relate the 3D Printer usage in manufacturing to the general increase in machinery used in production today, and what that could mean for those that are thinking about the benefits and drawbacks of 3D Printer usage.
A Response to Adichie’s and Marshall’s Ted Talks
After viewing both of the Ted Talk’s from friday’s class, both the Single Story, given by Adichie, and Talk Nerdy to Me, given by Marshall, I certainly have a better idea of what exactly giving a Ted Talk entails. One thing I noticed in particular that both Ted Talks had in common were their excessive use of humor, whether intentional or not. This sort of took me by surprise, I guess I thought that a Ted Talk would be formal and very uptight. Neither of these initial ideas were true, on the contrary, the Ted Talks were both very lively, entertaining, and even funny.
I personally liked Adichie’s talk better, for a number of reasons. First off, I believe that she presented her information/ stories much better, because her thoughts were more organized. Marshall’s speech was sort of all over the place, and she was very over excited. Not that being excited about what your talking about is a bad thing, she just talked a little too fast and jumped around the stage a bit too much for my liking, but that’s just one person’s opinion. Secondly, in addition to the presentation of the speech, I also liked the content of Adichie’s talk better. I know it sounds really weird, considering I’m in the science and engineering field, but I feel that the message wasn’t as intriguing in Talk Nerdy to Me. Maybe it’s because I’m one of the closed-minded engineers that Marshall describes in her talk, but I just find trying to explain engineering much harder than she describes it to be. From past experiences, I’ve found that most people, unless they are in the field, often could not care less about science and engineering. Perhaps this is different in college when surrounded by scholars and intellectuals, people who want to soak up all the knowledge around them. On the other hand, it isn’t as simple to explain how science and engineering works in a way that is easy to understand without “dumbing it down.” However, in Adichie’s speech, I found it much more relatable and relevant to life today. 
The “Danger of a Single Story” is such a common thing to see these days, and I know I am certainly guilty of assigning people to just a single aspect of their life. Because of this, Adichie’s talk really kept my attention and made me want to hear what she was saying. All in all, both the talks were very different and unique, but I definitely like one more than the other.
An Analysis of President Bush’s Post- 9/11 Speech
Chaos. Grief. Anger. As a nation we all remember a horrific time in our history that occurred over thirteen years ago. Though I was only five years old at the time, I remember the events of September 11, 2001 as if they happened yesterday. I remember my mom picking me up from daycare early because it was right near an international airport. I remember my dad telling me he didn’t know when he was going to be home because his building was put under high security. I remember my grandmother desperately trying to contact my aunt, a flight attendant for US Airways. I remember her crying of relief on the phone when we finally contacted her and found that she was safe. And lastly, I remember the president of the United States, telling me, a terrified five year old, that everything was going to be fine. However, I wasn’t the only scared American to hear this speech. It swept over the nation like a blanket of safety, and provided a sense of security, no matter how brief, to a troubled country. In this post 9/11 speech, which aired only a few hours after the last attack, the president not only gave a short state of the union, he also offered condolence to the country, all while building a subtle feeling of anger brewing beneath the surface. In the midst of a troubled nation, President Bush effectively uses kairos, rhetorical appeals, and awareness of audience to provide a sense of security for those worrying about their country, a feeling of comfort for those grieving their loss, and a promise of revenge for those angered by the events of the day.
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, President Bush took the opportunity to assure his citizens that everything was going to be fine, and their country would march on together. However, just twelve hours before Bush gave this speech, it was just another beautiful September day in the states. Then at around 8:45 AM, the history of America would be forever tarnished as a plane flew into the first of the twin towers. The nation was in a state of chaos with most people believing this to be an innocent plane crash. On the contrary, as the first attack was followed by three more attacks shortly after, the country tried to piece together what was going. By that evening, most Americans were confused, angry, and devastated. At this point, Bush used kairos to his advantage and took the opportunity to comfort his nation. Bush was able to reassure his country when they were most vulnerable by giving a sort of “state of the union” in his speech. Naturally, many citizens had no idea how their country was going to proceed from that point, to which Bush responded, “The functions of our government continue without interruption.” This is a key point to reflect on because it really shows how bush effectively uses the actual time of the speech to tell the country that the government was fine. Had we waited any longer to give this speech, it might not have been as affective, due to the fact that Americans would have remained confused and in the dark about what was happening to their homeland. Therefore, this explanation of the functioning of the government met Bush’s goal of reassuring his citizens that America remained strong, even in the context of the situation.
Furthermore, while the American people were confused, most of the nation was simply weighed down by insurmountable grief, to which Bush responded with a comforting message. Through his use of different rhetorical appeals, the president was able to pull on America’s heartstrings to provide a ray of hope for his citizens. Of course, because Bush was the President- a historically symbolic position in the American government- he already carried a credibility with him, however he takes that a step further in this speech by using specific words and phrases to establish ethos. For instance, Bush repeats words such as our, us, and we to tell the American people that they are one body, and that he stands by them. On the other hand, he also uses phrases such as , “I appreciate so very much the members of Congress who have joined me. . .” This statement also establishes ethos for the president because it exemplifies his position as a high governmental official that his people can trust. Essentially, both of these personas of President Bush provide him with a duel image: in one aspect, he is an American citizen just like us, however by contrast, he is also an authority figure that will protect his citizens. This really establishes his credibility because it makes American citizens trust him and listen to what he has to say. In addition, Bush utilizes logos to provide factual reasons why and how the country would remain strong. He explained what procedures were taken after the attacks, and how those would prevent further attacks. This appeal to America’s logic told his citizens that they were still secure in their homes, and that actions were being taken to assure their safety. Considering the feeling of vulnerability throughout the nation, this was able to provide a factual statement that people could hold onto to reassure themselves that they were sheltered from outside enemies. Despite the fact that ethos and logos are both used effectively in this speech, the most obvious use of rhetorical appeal comes in the form of pathos. Bush uses rhetoric that carries such strong emotion and meaning that one can’t help but be comforted by it. He continually uses words such as “strong,” “justice,” and “peace” to provide comfort for his country. All of these words not only carry a positive connotation, they also exemplify core American ideals. Furthermore, he also uses phrases like, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America.” This statement uses the pathos driven idea that they- meaning the terrorists- can hurt us physically, but we are still united as a nation and we will continue functioning as the America we were before the attacks. Naturally, this provides comfort for a nation that was feeling particularly insecure at the time. Overall, each of these rhetorical appeals met Bush’s goal of comforting his grieving nation.
Moreover, while America was indeed saddened by the events, their was certainly a quiet anger right beneath that grief. President Bush, being a politician, of course realized the situation that his nation was in, and naturally began to think of the next steps that would be taken in reaction to the events of that day. In other words, the President realized that his next steps would be taking action against those that had harbored these events, and indeed a declaration of war followed just 9 days after this initial speech was given. It follows then, that Bush was able to setup his declaration in this first speech, by subtly playing to American ideologies to unite his people against a common enemy. Consider this statement by Bush, where he explicitly states one of his future goals, “. . . we stand together to win the war against terrorism.” This unites his citizens, regardless of political party or background, under the common American ideology that we will get revenge and we will do what is necessary to make sure our people have the safety and rights that they deserve. Therefore, this statement quietly fuels the fire that was America’s feeling of anger and resentment. Considering this, it is clear that their is a divide in the primary and secondary audiences in this situation. While the primary audience (those that were watching the speech the evening of the attacks) was almost entirely on board with and content with President Bush’s reaction to the situation, when we look back on this speech today, a different approach is often taken. To many in the secondary audience, or those that are reading this today, Bush is criticized for making a rash decision in going to war. For example Bush says that they “will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” This demonstrates that in the blind anger of the nation, they would take any and all actions necessary to avenge the attacks. All in all, through his awareness of his audience and his future political goals, Bush is able to further the anger felt by Americans at the time.
Though the events of September 11, 2001 plunged America into a state of disbelief, through the extensive use of various rhetorical devices, President Bush was able to temporarily console his nation. Considering the state that the country was in after the attacks, the presentation of this speech may have seemed an almost necessary thing to do for the president. However, the use of rhetoric goes above and beyond the basic presidential speech, it enables a connection with the American people on a personal level. Overall, we will never forget the events of that day, but we will especially remember how we pulled together as a nation, and how President Bush’s speech aided that feeling of unity.
The Rhetorical Devices of our Favorite TV Ads
Ohhh you almost had it, you gotta be quicker than that! Sound Familiar? I’m sure many of you have seen the State Farm commercial that this quote refers to. If not you can view it here:
Now this commercial and many other commercials may seem like just funny ads that we are forced to watch until our favorite show comes back on; but do these ads actually exemplify some of our rhetorical devices? Let’s take a look. For this ad, I would definitely say that ethos is a huge part. When “Anthony” appears, he looks professional, well-kept, and knowledgable about insurance. On the other hand, when the fisherman shows up with his “dollar,” he looks like a sweet old man, but not someone you would trust to buy insurance from. This establishes ethos, or credibility, for Anthony (State Farm), while providing, for lack of a better term, reverse ethos for the competition (ruining their credibility). There isn’t really a show of pathos to much in this piece, unless you are a girl who has felt the passion of wanting a purse that is too expensive. There is logos present in the form of the idea that any normal person would want a greater discount on something you would like to purchase. Because of the discount with State Farm, it makes the reader think about them for a potential insurance company. The downside of this ad is that it is rather transparent. All those savvy consumers out there are constantly on the look out for business trying to trick them into buying something. It’s pretty obvious what each of the aspects in this video are trying to get you to do, so it’s easy to disregard the commercial as something rather exaggerated and obvious.
Now for an ad that is a little less known. Even if you’ve never played tennis before in your life, you’ve probably heard of John McEnroe, who was famous for his tennis tantrums. I’ve included a video of them, just for your viewing pleasure, because I find them highly amusing.
*Tying this back into effective use of rhetoric, these outbursts are great examples of how to not use rhetoric.*
Well anyways, this next ad is for Chase Moblie Banking. It uses tennis players Andy Roddick and good old Johnny Mac. Some of you may not have seen this commercial, so you can view it here:
For this commercial there is, believe it or not, a lot more pathos involved. However this is also one of the downfalls of this advertisement. See for someone like me, who is a tennis player and who understands the sheer frustration of the sport of tennis, this commercial really connects with me. Also, seeing someone like Johnny, from the olden wooden racket days of tennis, brings about a sort of humor along with a bit of nostalgia from the past. This captures the attention of the audience. Unfortunately, the audience isn’t all made up of tennis players, and for those that aren’t, this commercial holds a lot less meaning. Furthermore, ethos is also established by using tennis pros. This shows that if the big-time tennis players use this mobile banking app, so should I. Again, this really only holds true for people that idolize, or at least respect, the tennis pros. Which again, is usually only tennis players or people that know the sport. So while this is a great commercial for someone that plays the sport of tennis, for just an average american looking for mobile banking, it really doesn’t get the job done.
At Least the Speech is Over!
This past week, our ENGL 137H class presented our first project for the year in the form of a speech. The speech was supposed to be about either a civic artifact or a civic individual that was interviewed for the assignment. Overall, I though
t all of the speeches were very well (with the exception of mine, perhaps!), but there were definitely some things that worked better than others.
First of all, I have to say that I absolutely HATE making speeches. I took a public speaking in high school and it was the lowest grade on my transcript from all four years. I didn’t like it before the course, and after it I hated it even more. I always thought it was a waste, since the papers I wrote weren’t all that bad (for me), but I always screwed up the speech and therefore flagged the report. Anyways, lets just say headin
g into this speech I was terrified, not only for me, but for my fellow classmates. After watching monday’s speeches, I only got more nervous, however, because they were all so well-presented. I especially think that having a powerpoint with pictures and captions worked well. I have to say, I didn’t originally think to do that, but after seeing a few, I decided it would be a good idea. Another thing that I did notice was that everyones’ volume, for the most part, was pretty good. I didn’t really have to strain to hear anyone’s speech. Furthermore, I thought that two common problems were nervous fidgeting and filler words (“like,” “um”). In addition, I thought the content of the speeches were all very good, especially for this being the first project of the year. I believe that all of the errors in the speaking were all easily fixable, and I think everyone in the class definitely came in as good speakers. Well, one down lots to go fellow classmates!
Kathy Heller- A Civically Engaged: Tennis Coach?
Coach Heller at a USTA Middle States Hall of Fame banquet. She is the second one in from the left. She’s standing next to our other high school coach, Coach VanBuskirk (far left).
Card that Coach Heller gave us for graduation.
Oh Coach Heller, she really is a character. She was one of my tennis coaches in high school, and she is the exact embodiment of a sweet old grandma- with one exception. Coach Heller, despite her ripe old age, does more for her community than the rest of our hometown combined. This may be an exaggeration, of course, but she certainly does a lot considering she isn’t getting any younger. Coach Heller used to be a teacher in the Nazareth (my hometown) School District, and ever since she retired, she has remained involved in several clubs at all of the schools in the district,especially the high school. This is part of the reason I chose her as a civic person to interview for my speech. I believe that it’s interesting how even though she retired from the district, its almost as if she never left her job anyway. Through the sixteen different clubs/ activities that Coach Heller does, she really inspires others to become civic citizens through her example. She often gets some of the high school players (including me) to help her with different indoor practices, programs, and tournaments she runs for the younger children in our community. Coach Heller doesn’t only give back to the tennis community, however, she also spends her time helping with other service clubs in our community. For example she is a member of the Blue Eagle Education Foundation, which among other things, offers up a local scholarship for graduating seniors. I think one of the most interesting things is the large role that kairos plays in her civic engagements. Coach Heller told me that she really became involved in all of these activities when she retired from teaching, because she wanted to both remain involved in her community, and keep her self busy. She found the prime opportunity to really let her civic side take off, which is exactly how kairos relates to her civic life. All in all, Coach Heller is both a civically engaged person and a delight to be around, whether it’s playing tennis or passing her in the local food store.
Oh the Rhetoric You Hear in the Grandfather Clock Lounge of Atherton Hall
As a college student, I am in the prime location to hear rhetoric being used in its finest form. As you walk through campus a swirl of clashing opinions surrounds you: law students debating about current events, engineers arguing over the most efficient design, and musicians discussing their favorite classical pieces. One of the best places to hear rhetoric being put to good use is in the study lounges in all of the dorms. I live in Atherton Hall, so one of my favorite places to study in the building is the Grandfather Clock Lounge. I absolutely love studying to the background noise of a gifted student playing the piano and people engaging in conversation. Although their is a quiet study lounge just across the hall, there is something about the grand piano, fireplace, and groups of people that makes it more comfortable in the GFC Lounge. One might think that the sound of arguing humans would be a bit distracting while trying to get work done, however these confrontations I speak of are not pointless squabbles, they are artful works of rhetoric.
My first experience with the rhetorical arguments that sometimes happen in the lounge occurred about two weeks ago. Two girls, that appeared to be upperclassmen, where hard at work discussing how to best compose an email regarding a club that they headed. Seeing as I had already neglected to focus on my chemistry reading, I decided to listen in on their conversation. It was a few days after the career fair, so they were writing to their new freshman group members on upcoming events and meetings. One of the girls, he laptop propped open on the wood table, sto
pped in the middle of typing and told her counterpart that she believed their email was too vague regarding club eligibility. She thought that they should be firm when explaining club dues and the requirements of the club, however her fellow club officer believed that the writing sounded too harsh, and that they would scare people away from the group. They talked back and forth about the best way to inform their new members about the club, while still being polite about their demands. In the end, they agreed on a compromise: a statement that said that even though dues were to be handed in by a certain date, they would be lenient with people who needed a little extra time due to financial or personal reasons. In the end, this argument was resolved through the exchange of carefully worded rhetoric, an important tool to have when communicating with our peers.
Wait a minute! That was an argument? Where were the raised voices, the faces slowly turning to a horrible shade of purple, the throwing of punches? The answer to that is simple, they were having an argument using rhetoric, which is very different from simply engaging in a fight. While both students had different views on how to approach the situation at hand, they used words to work out the differences in their ideas. They made a subconscious decision to act as civilized humans and talk out the kinks in their ideas, instead of flipping the table and causing a scene. They used powerful words that carried certain meanings to persuade each other that their ideas was best. And in the end, when they could not reach a definite solution regarding whose ideas to use, they used even more rhetoric to come to a compromise. In other words, an argument, a true argument, should be an overbearing display of words, not a performance of physical strength.
What does it mean to be Civic?
After reading two different pieces about what it means to be a civic person, I believe I have adapted my own definition based on the pieces that I would like to share with you. I believe that the first reading, “How People Learn to Be Civic,” written by Michael Schudson, brought up an interesting point about what being a civic citizen truly means. As the author questions, “Why is citizenship reduced to service rather than linked to justice?” it really made me think about what I consi
dered to be civic behavior. Following the reading of this question, I began to think that perhaps being civic isn’t necessarily all about doing charity work and things of the sort, but that perhaps being civic is doing what is morally right. These two concepts may seem very similar, and I confess there is a slight overlap between the two (it could be said that doing charity work is something that is morally right). However, there is also a distinct difference between the two. For example, if civic responsibility were simply linked to charity, than cheating on a test would not be considered a lapse in civic duty. I’m sure we can all agree that one would not be being a civic citizen if they were cheating in any form, but on the other hand, the situation would have nothing to do with charity, or “giving back to the community.” The situation would have to do with being an honest and just member of society. This is where I believe there is an error in society’s idea of citizenship. Being civic doesn’t just mean being a benevolent, charitable person, it means promoting and living by an idea of justice in your everyday life and in your community. Overall, while the concept of being civic may seem like an obvious definition, the idea often raises more question than it answers. I encourage you to respond and put what you believe to be your own ideas of civic duty!