It's All About the Money

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/opinion/occupy-the-classroom.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

            A brief synopsis: The best way to close the economic gap between the rich and poor and to solve inequalities among different races is to invest in early education (even before the age of five). Kristof says this will not only lessen those gaps, but also provide more money in the long run. Many other notable scholars agree, and many studies confirm this concept.
            Kristof used a very logos-based argument. He drew in many figures and statistics from several valid studies that all confirmed what he was arguing, and he had some effective appeals to authority that were interesting and convincing. He also explains another stance on the topic but refutes that his idea is more important, an essential technique to any persuasive essay. While a logos-based political argument isn't typically enrapturing, and this one isn't any different, it certainly does its job. It's hard to ignore all the solid facts (or at least what he makes it seem like solid facts). This is why the article stands out as a solid persuasive essay, but it doesn't much entertain the reader, and it therefore probably won't draw in much of an audience to read the argument in the first place. The article may, however, attract the attention of the government because it reasons with the one thing the government is interested in: money. Kristof informs that early education reforms will provide an eventual 7% profit, and, to the government at least, this is more convincing than any pathos or ethos argument could be.

Clash of Culture

            A key aspect of both the movie and the focus of each side's argument was the idea of culture and how to define it. The deaf family insisted that their is a distinct "deaf culture," and it would be detrimental to take remove a child from that culture by implanting a cochlear implant. The hearing family countered that by keeping their child deaf, they were limiting his/her ability to get involved with the culture of hearing people. I'm inclined to agree with the latter opinion.
            Throughout the movie, I tried to keep an open mind, knowing that my own discourse would provide me with an immediate bias. However, even my open mind could see that the deaf family was hurting, not helping, their child by preventing her from receiving the cochlear implant. I for one don't much see the difference between the culture of hearing people and that of deaf people. Both groups go through mostly the same experiences, but they just have different ways of communicating. With a cochlear implant, the child would be able to participate in both means of communicating, and it's as simple as that. It's as if the child had an opportunity to learn both English and another foreign language like French or Spanish, and their parent prevented her from learning the foreign language and therefore from gaining its cultural values. Wouldn't you want your child to be enriched by both cultures? The same applies in this scenario.
            By limiting (and that's exactly what it is: LIMITING) their child to only "deaf culture," Heather's parents are restricting her to a smaller pool of choices and experiences. Sure any deaf person can be succesful, and sure a deaf person can be happy, but with a cochlear implant both these things would be simpler, and there's no denying this. Heather's parents both admit that they struggled growing up, and Heather's dad admits that he can get no higher on the coorperate latter. Why would they want to put their ownn child through the same obstacles and limitations? It just doesn't make sense. As parents, it is their responsibility to give their child the best life they can. It may be difficult to raise a child to experience both cultures, but as parents it is their duty to try their best. And shouldn't they place this burden on themselves rather than forcing the burden upon their child?

Existential Dread

            What could be more terrifying than failure? Perhaps being lost for eternity floating in space or trapped in a tomb for the remainder of one's supply of oxygen. Perhaps having one's lower half being blown off in war and witnessing their own insides before blinking off into oblivion or other dismemberment or mutilation. But these occurrences are not frequent in a common man/woman's life, and certainly not within my own, and are therefore made trivial. However, failure is prevalent in every decision and every action every person takes. Some may say that such frequency dulls its terror, but I say the opposite: for every right decision you make, there lies an alternative that threatens to take down all that you have accomplished, and no one can be perfect all the time. Even the luckiest man cannot escape failure forever.
             Therefore I worry about when my house of cards will come falling down and what wind will cause it. What is the ultimate butterfly effect of my actions, and what repercussions will come as a result? I will never know, and neither will anyone else. We can only hope that we make the right choices and live with those decisions, but that doesn't stop me from worrying.