The responses from the last blog were really interesting to read! I especially liked the many and varied approaches to the video and to the poem--it goes to show how unique you all are in your interpretations of what is presented to you; let this be a reminder that everyone has a unique experience with different pieces of literature, media, stimulus, and conversation. Katy mentioned wanting to devote some class time to the Disney video and I truly hope that we can! I will try!
For this week's blog, please respond to one of the following (or the video, or someone else's comments):
1. “Lack of logic annoys. Too much logic is boring. Life escapes logic, and everything built on logic alone is artificial and limited. Therefore is a word that the poet must ignore, that exists only in the mind” (Andre Gide). To what extent do you agree?
2. Why are fallacious arguments often plausible and convincing? When, where, and by whom are they formulated? Are there circumstances under which the use of informal fallacies can be justified, for example, in public advertising campaigns aimed at persuading us to donate money for good causes?
3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of reason and logic in trying to have a logical debate, argument, or conversation with someone who is not educated in logic/reason? Where do you see the pitfalls of this interaction? Where do you see the advantages? What ways of knowing are present in this imaginary (or perhaps, much too real and recent!) interaction?
4. Man has such a predilection for systems and abstract deductions that he is ready to distort the truth intentionally, he is ready to deny the evidence of his senses only to justify his logic.
-- Fyodor Dostoevsky, 1821-81
No comments:
Post a Comment