Audience appeal

Kirsten and I both believe that the thesis is clear because he states unequivocally that higher education is broken. The writer uses sources that are documented appropriately by giving credit to other authors use of evidence. For example in passage six he state a quote by Daniel Park in his book, A whole new mind: Why right brainers will rule the future. His quote was "Free agent economy which was envisioned by Daniel Park. We both can relate to the fact that not everyone needs to go to college unless their career choice is within the health care field. He states that college is expensive and we as readers can relate due to the fact that most of us students are taking out loans just to become successful.

College is a waste of time

The four pillars of an argumentative writing are thesis, evidence, refutation, and concluding statement. In the essay I just read it had all of the pillars. I believe the thesis statement is in the first paragraph when the writer claims in the last sentence "I believe higher education is broken". That is an argumentative statement many people can disagree with. The next pillar is evidence, which is based off facts, unsupported opinions,  and supported opinions. The author provides facts in paragraph four by quoting sociology professors in that "36 percent of college graduates showed no improvement in critical thinking, complex reasoning, or writing after four years of college". Next he states more evidence in passage five with his opinion on success of people who never completed nor attended college. The author attempts to convince you with his evidence because he's listing facts with his view point, causing the reader to slowly come to agreement. Another form of evidence is in paragraph six by referring to author Daniel Park in his book, A Whole New Mind: Why Right Brainers Will Rule The Future. Quote that the author of the essay used was "free agent economy". Refutation is in paragraph nine. The writer says "Of course, some people want a formal education". He then explains how he doesn't think everyone should leave college, for example those looking for a career in the health care field. Refutation is in the passage because he is challenging their position and their opponents.  Finally, the conclusion will reinforce the authors statement. The conclusion is in paragraph ten. He uses a few common stereotypes of college drop outs to make the argument that those people would be doing those types of activities if they are in college or not. Those who take the opportunity to move their education outside of college make the world better.  The author makes his conclusion restating the same argument that higher education is broken.  

    I believe that the author appeals to his audience by explaining how college is not for everyone and even if some do not have a formal education does not mean they can not go far in life. Within some circumstances most people need an education based on their profession of choice. It can be compared to judging a book by its cover, For example, when you look at someone without a college degree does not mean that they are not sophisticated enough for a professional job? Depending on the career, most people need a high school diploma, and can be taught on the job with minimal expense.  The author explains that not all people want to spend thousands of dollars on school tuition which causes young adults to have to spend years paying off  debt. So why go to college and spend money?  Your profession may not require it.

Russian probe arguments

The Russian probe videos were very interesting to view each arguments and see there side to it. In the  Tomi  Lauren Russian probe video, she seemed very agiatated with in the political stand point of it. She didn't use any statistics in her argument, therefore she used mainly pathos and ethos since no logos was used. She shows great authority and confidence within her arguments. She states how we are basically loosing money and time within the Russian probe. Tomi uses pathos due to all of the emotion she has about this topic, you can almost see the fumes rising. She had a well thought out argument but to me it was too much of an attack and comparing her statement with all Americans, stereotypical if I might add.
  Sara Sanders arguments had some good key point she used Logos and Ethos. In my opinion I did not see or get emotion from her argument, more of logic and authority. She used statistics based off of what happened, yet she was not all forth coming about trump and what his next move is. She would typically change the subject or disregard what the opponent was asking. She had total confidence in her self, making it easier for the readers or watchers to side with her and listen because they assume she is right due to her confidence.
  "NYT: How FBI's Russia probe began" uses Logos and Ethos. They start with using the proof that was given to them whether they add a spin to it or not this makes it more acceptable to believe their side of the story. They stated how Russia has political dirt on Clinton, and it so happened to come up while the Australian diplomat was converting with George Papadopoulos in may of last year. New anchors making these claims causes the argument to look more and more believable. This is how majority of the News makes arguments, they make sure to be truthful and knowledgeable to prove their side.
  Finally the last video I watch was "Russia probe beings with Papadopoulos". After watching this video it reminds me a lot of the one I talked about previously. It states the same about George and the Australian diplomat had a conversation at the bar and happened in may of 2016. Yet this video states that their were emails leaked from Clinton and that is the reason the Australian diplomat came forward, therefore causing a spin into the problem. This video uses Logos and ethos, the argument has all of it key points and has all the statistics needed for an argument. They argue by having knowledge and majority of people will not want someone who seems to bluff otherwise they shall not side with the argument. There will always be a spin in a news article or propaganda, although you just have to make sure all the facts are there.

Short story about me

My name is Karissa Owens, and I love long walks on the beach! I'm kidding, I hope you like a little humor to a blog! Let's get serious now. I work as an anesthesia tech in a local hospital. I assist the anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists. I took a break from school for two and a half years and now I am juggling being a full time student and worker. My goal in life is to graduate college and work within the health care field. I enjoy spending my time with friends and family as much as I can but allowing the required time for school.