Debate 3 Article (not to be marked)

Debate # 3 – Gertrude’s Betrayal.

On Monday, Dec 15 at approximately 10:10 am at Rockland District High School in room 204 in Rockland, Ontario, two teams of three debated that Gertrude has betrayed Old Hamlet and Hamlet. The affirmative side of the debate includes Adam Young, Mat Brown and Stuart Gendron. The negative side of the debate includes Alex Van Der Mout, Tyler Keith, and Jon Hughes-Khatib. The judges presiding are Megan Marshall, Jayme Bedell, and Stephanie Wilson. The objective is to win the overall opinion of the three judges and score the highest grade possible. The negative side overall won the debate.

The affirmative side started the debate claiming that because Hamlet was lied to, he was betrayed. They claimed that betrayal is any form of deception. The negative side claimed that he endured only felt betrayed by his mother’s re-marriage. They then furthered their argument by stating that while Gertrude may not have been close to Old Hamlet. They also assert Gertrude’s qualities and that she worked for Hamlet’s benefit. Also the ghost of Old Hamlet showed that he was not betrayed when he asked for Gertrude to not be harmed.

The affirmative side’s rebuttal claimed that Gertrude betrayed Hamlet when she told Claudius of his plans. They claim that the ghost would not know if Gertrude helped murder him. Also, that Hamlet insulted his mother because of her betrayal. The negative side rebutted by claiming that ghosts could go back in time. Also, that betrayal is a lack of trust, and that Gertrude never lied. She therefore did not betray.

The affirmative side’s second argument claimed that Gertrude was not in love, not faithful and did not mourn. Therefore she had no feelings and betrayed Old Hamlet’s feelings. The negative side’s second argument claimed that Gertrude just secured her political rank and drank the poisoned wine. If Gertrude betrayed Hamlet, she would have known the wine was poisoned.
The affirmative side’s rebuttal claimed that a ghost does not prove anything. Also, that Old Hamlet was in love with Gertrude. He was blinded by love and thus thinks she is innocent. The negative side’s rebuttal claimed that there is no proof of the affirmative’s arguments. They also claim that because of their religions, they could not lie.

The affirmative side’s final argument asserted that Gertrude was selfish and that she ignored Hamlet’s needs. The negative side claimed that she does not have a baby, which would cause Hamlet to lose his royal status. They claim that she knows it is poison and tries to stop Hamlet from drinking it.
The affirmative side rebutted that Gertrude may have deceived, she married someone who wanted to kill her son, and thus that she may not have betrayed Old Hamlet, but did betray Young Hamlet. The negative side claimed that Gertrude did not know about Claudius’ desire to kill Hamlet. Also that she was caught up in deception.
In the concluding statements, the affirmative side of the debate did not conclude and instead only shot insults at the negative side. The negative side however concluded their arguments. They concluded that revenge and grief were factors which caused Hamlet’s behaviour. They claim that since Claudius killed Old Hamlet, Young Hamlet would of course seek revenge. They claim that if there was no reason for revenge, he would be insane, but he was seeking revenge and is thus not insane.
In the concluding statements, both side summed up all arguments.

Firstly, both sides insulted each other. This is a form of appeal to ridicule. The negative side of the debate committed appeal to belief when they claimed they could not lie due to their religions. The only other evident logical fallacy committed was post hoc ergo propter hoc, when either side asserted that events lead up to and caused the betrayal.

Overall, both sides presented good arguments. The negative side however sometimes presented opinions as rebuttals. This did not prove anything. Even due to this, the negative side won due to better arguments.

Debate #2 Article (To be marked)

Debate # 2 - Miller’s definition of modern tragedy is appropriate to the modern age.

On Friday, Dec 11 at approximately 8:30 am at Rockland District High School in room 204 in Rockland, Ontario, two teams of three debated that Hamlet was actually mental and therefore not responsible for his actions. The affirmative side of the debate included Mary Collins, Ilayda Williamson, and Michaela Blaser. The negative side of the debate included Jessica Barton, Melissa Watson, and Kelsey Campbell. The judges that presided were Nick LeBlond, Yanick Lee, and Jennifer Ross. The objective was to win the overall opinion of the three judges and score the highest grade possible. Although both teams presented strong arguments, the negative side won. Hamlet was mentally stable.

The affirmative side started the debate by listing the events which lead to Hamlet’s insanity. They claimed that he talks to no one, spoke morbidly and just plainly needs help. The negative side claimed that he endured many emotional events and intense revengeful nature. They then furthered their argument by stating that while Hamlet may have seemed insane, he was actually just undergoing the grief process.

The affirmative side’s rebuttal claimed that there was a hasty generalization, and that some can changed internally due to grief. They furthered this by asserting post dramatic stress syndrome; a type of insanity caused by grief, and then furthered this by claiming that perhaps he may have been insane before the events. They then claimed that Hamlet could not create a plan if he was grieving. The negative side rebutted by claiming that because he was also revengeful he could concoct a plan. They also claimed that there was no evidence of their arguments.

The affirmative side’s second argument consisted of a list of types of insanity along with symptoms of each. They asserted that Hamlet fit these descriptions. The negative side’s second argument claimed that emotions do not prove insanity, that the mother sees that Hamlet is not insane, and that studies show grief can last longer than a year.

The affirmative side’s rebuttal claimed that the ghost was a hallucination and that the guard’s were superstitious. They claim the mother was in denial. Also they claim that love, which Hamlet feels for Ophelia is a euphoric state and that he is also irritable. This is a sign of mania schizophrenia. The negative side claims that since the hallucination was seen multiple times, it is a ghost. Also, since Hamlet is grieving, one cannot assume he is insane. The free for all followed. During the free for all, the audience supported the negative side of the debate. The affirmative side’s arguments seemed to crumble.

The affirmative side’s final argument asserted that although Hamlet may not qualify for medically insane, he is under definition legally insane. Due to this he is not responsible for his actions. The negative side asserted that his mother’s betrayal, father’s and lover’s deaths caused Hamlet to grieve. Also that Hamlet may be an auditory learner, which would explain why he spoke aloud.

The affirmative side rebutted that Hamlet thinks of suicide and is thus insane. The negative side asked whether superstition would make a person see a ghost.
In the concluding statements, the affirmative side of the debate did not conclude and instead only shot insults at the negative side. The negative side however concluded their arguments. They concluded that revenge and grief were factors which caused Hamlet’s behaviour. They claim that since Claudius killed Old Hamlet, Young Hamlet would of course seek revenge. They claim that if there was no reason for revenge, he would be insane, but he was seeking revenge and is thus not insane.

Firstly, during the Affirmative side’s first rebuttal, the negative side’s use of hasty generalization was ousted. The claim stated that it is a hasty generalization to state that many people would change due to grief. The affirmative also claimed that the negative side committed the following: guilt by association, rhetorical question and appeal to pity, with the statement; would you allow (better) a single, broke father to rob a bank to save his ill preteen child than a normal robber? The affirmative side also pointed out post hoc ergo propter hoc. All of these claims are correct.

Secondly, in the first argument from the affirmative side committed post hoc ergo propter hoc, when they listed events that they claim caused Hamlet’s insanity. They followed this with a rhetorical question in the first rebuttal; how can he concoct a plan if he is going through intense grief? In the affirmative’s conclusion they committed appeal to ridicule when they insulted the other team.

Overall, the affirmative side committed multiple undetected logical fallacies; the negative side committed multiple fallacies, but were mostly detected by the affirmative side. Even due to this, the negative side won solely on argument.

Hamlet Activities

ISU

Week 12-14

November 17 - Logical Fallacy/ Rhetorical Device Test - I chose King's speech for the test. I kind of underestimated the test in general. I got to the test and blanked on some of the definitions :(.

The rest of the weeks we watched Henry V, Hamlet and now, The Crucible. We also discussed the definitions of various types of tragedies.

I started my ISU, pretty much right after discussing tragedy. My thesis "Tereza and Tomas defied the gods by committing the 7 deadly sins. Therefore they had to die."

We watched Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, an old like 1940-ish movie. It was well, interesting to say the least. There was a lot of fill in the blank plot gaps.

Week 11

Presentations,lectures on Shakespeare, and Pep Rally (which I missed). An overall basic week.

All Presented Rhetorical Devices

Anaphora - repetition of a same sound or group of words near the beginning of successive sentences, clauses, or lines

Antirrhesis – an argument is rejected because it is evil, incorrect, or simply insignificant.

Assonance - The use of similar vowel sounds repeated in successive or proximate words containing different consonants. Day, Ray, Rave, Dave etc.

Bdelygmia - Is a ramble on, or expression of hate towards a person or thing. Winter is dark, cold,grey, depressing and it sucks.

Catachresis - outlandish comparison is made between two things. As tall as the CN tower.

Categoria – Opening the secret wickedness of one's adversary before his face. Reproaching a person with wickedness to his face.Direct exposure of an adversary's faults.

Commoratio – Repeating an idea several times in a different way.

Encomium - a formal practice of writing or speaking words in a tribute or praise, or an elaborate eulogy of someone or something. Ex. At an award ceremony, where the winner would give their co-stars long encomiums, as a way to say that they couldn’t have done it all without them and they deserve some of the credit. (acceptance speech)

Energia - A general term referring to the “energy” or vigor of an expression, or a clear, lucid, vivid description. (lots of detail)

Enthymeme - An enthymeme is an argument in which the meaning is implied.

Epiphora - When one or more words are repeated at the end of two or more consecutive clauses, phrases, or verses.

Epiplexis -Asking questions to reproach, rather than to elicit answers. If you can do x, can I?

Epizeuxis - repetition of the same word over and over again. Ex. Really, really, really want...

Euphemism -the substitution of a mild, indirect, or vague expression for one thought to be offensive, harsh, or blunt

Hypocrisis – parody. An exaggeration used to mock.

Invective – an abusive, reproachful or venomous language used to express blame or censure. Ex. A knave, a rascal, an eater of broken meats etc.

Irony - an incongruity or discordance between what one says or does, and what one means or what is generally understood

Kairos – presenting an argument at the right or opportune moment.

Litotes - A figure of speech. Instead of making a certain statement directly the speaker says it more effectively. Usually using the words not. Ex. Brittany Spears is not unintelligent, but she’s not intelligent

Meiosis - an understatement of an event or person

Metonymy - a figure of speech in which one word or phrase is substituted for another with which it is closely associated.

Mondegreen – misuse of words, causing the phrase to take on new meaning.

Paradox – A statement that contradicts it’s self. Ex. I always lie.

Pathos – persuasion. an element in experience or in artistic representation evoking pity or compassion

Pleonasm - Pleonasm is the use of more words then is needed for the explanation of an idea. (cold ice)

Polyptoton – using different forms of the same word (ie face facing)

Prolepsis - anticipation of an argument. It is where an argument is answered before it is brought forth.

Rhetorical Question – a question posed for persuasion, without the intent for reply.

Synathroesmus - A list/grouping of adjectives or phrases about a particular noun. Low life, two faced, yellow bellied, insensitive idiot.

Synecdoche - A figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole (as hand for sailor), the whole for a part (as the law for police officer), the specific for the general (as cutthroat for assassin), the general for the specific (as thief for pickpocket), or the material for the thing made from it (as steel for sword).

Tapinosis - when words or sayings are being thrown at a person/concept/object, to make it seem less good and make it less credible.

Trope - rhetoric devices that use a play on words:

Week 10

Rhetorical Device Presentations... nothing else.

This Post is for Physics!

This is the video journal completed for my SPH3U mousetrap car project, Brandon Ferguson is my partner for this project. The audio may be of poor quality. This is what happens with a webcam on a laptop. Also we apologize for the background noise at the end. Certain people decided to start talking in the Cafeteria at 5pm. :O

Standardizing Arguments

Taxpayers face big hike.

2. It is reality, the economy is down.
3. It could be worse than before.
4. It is hard to find cuts, because the province dictates certain needs.
5. Art, Culture and Heritage will have less funding.
6. Expect cuts in the budget.
7. Savings may be used, however there is debate.

Therefore,

1. Taxpayers may be paying much more. (Puddicombe)

Transport flies off bridge in Toronto

2. A transport trailer detached itself from a truck.
3. It fell off the 427 overpass onto east bound lanes of the Queens Way.
4. Five vehicles were involved. Fours were trapped under the trailer.
5. Four were injured and two were airlifted to hospital.
6. A 53 year old man died of injuries later on in hospital.
7. No more are trapped under the wreckage.
8. The driver of the truck had minor injuries.
9. Emergency crews immediately responded.

Therefore,
1. One man dies after injuries sustained when a trailer fell off a 427-Highway overpass onto the road below. (Cherry)

Bibliography
_____Cherry . Tamara. "Transport flies off bridge in Toronto," Ottawa Sun 05 Nov 2008. 5 Nov 2008 http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/11/05/7311651.html
_____Puddicombe. Derek. "Transport flies off bridge in Toronto," Ottawa Sun 04 Nov 2008. 4 Nov 2008 http://www.ottawasun.com/News/OttawaAndRegion/2008/11/04/7294921-sun.html

a little regret...

I feel some regret for posting a previous post labelled "..."... when I wrote it I was really frustrated and angry. I based it solely from rumours, overheard conversations and a feeling of anger. I'd just like to apologize.

Week 9 O.o

I'm a little sick today... nauseous, head ache etc. I want my ISU marked! It's been the 2 weeks! :O I got my laptop back. By the way... use Citation Machine!!! We passed in our essays... got a few work periods etc. We chose two topics; rhetoricical devices and fallacies.

Enthymeme & Burden of Proof (Onus Probandi)

The powerpoint will be posted when I upload them to my filehost.

... cont.

Today has been a very hectic day... waking up 3 minutes before the bus ... moustrap car (unit project physics), english class.. I really just wanted to be home sleeping. My laptop is supposed to come in today... and thus ... I did not go to yoga. I wanted to be home. O.o I'm still a little mad over english... I don't like mind games like that. I realize there is a reason.. but its jeopardizing marks.

...

I'm really not very happy about class today. The evaluation of group is really unfair. We feel that all should have the same mark for reseacrh, but because of "No 2 people can have the same mark"... we all have different marks. I may have an overall 5/5... but i dont think its fair for the others. Apparantly it only will count for 0.5% of the class... but we're (grade 11s) already 10% below our desired mark. Which brings me to my next point. The fact that we're apparantly being compared to the best of the grade 12s... Thats definately not fair. My mark should not be based on them, but on me. Only me. They all have another year experience, and that year is the most important in high school. In grade 10, we were given easy, busy work. Now, in grade 11, we're given real work. We have all of 1 month experience with this, they have a year (minimum). They have much more experience than us. My mark is not a toy, I need a high mark (especially in grade 12 english) to get into desired universities. Im sorry, but this mark toying is bullshit.

English Test

Click On Title!!

Week 8

Movies for our Criticism Test ... Wizard of Oz (w/Judy Garland) and Unbreakable.
Wizard of Oz, Psychoanalytical Criticism is easy
Unbreakable, Scapegoat is easy

Having trouble to start essay :(

Week 6

More Presentations .... Was at Cross Country Thursday ... Nothing else to say

ISU

ISU << <<

Week 5

Finish the projects and a week of presentations.. so boring... lots of work ... the presentations were supposed to be teaching us... but I nearly fall asleep! At least we know what not to do.. unfortunately WE SCREWED UP.. got nervous.. didn't know our subject well enough... etc etc. :(

One breakthrough,,, and it becomes easy!

I had one breakthrough with the arguments for my ISU and suddenly the outline became really easy!

Outline – ISU – The Doors Of Perception (Aldous Huxley)

T - "The mind is most fulfilled/peaceful not when worrying of spatial matters but of being and meaning."

R – As demonstrated by Aldous Huxley in his essay “The Doors of Perception”, a person feels most comfortable when worrying of meaning.

E- “Before us the cars were rolling by in a steady stream—thousands of them, all bright and shiny like an advertiser's dream and each more ludicrous than the last. Once again I was convulsed with laughter.”

E- “A large pale blue auto-mobile was standing at the curb. At the sight of it, I was suddenly overcome by enormous merriment. What complacency, what an absurd self-satisfaction beamed from those bulging surfaces of glossiest enamel! Man had created the thing in his own image—or rather in the image of his favorite character in fiction. I laughed till the tears ran down my cheeks.”

E- “I was so completely absorbed in looking, so thunderstruck by what I actually saw, that I could not be aware of anything else. Garden furniture, laths, sunlight, shadow—these were no more than names and notions, mere verbalizations, for utilitarian or scientific purposes, after the event.”

E- “When the brain runs out of sugar, the undernourished ego grows weak, can't be bothered to undertake the necessary chores, and loses all interest in those spatial and temporal relationships which mean so much to an organism bent on getting on in the world. As Mind at Large seeps past the no longer watertight valve, all kinds of biologically useless things start to happen. In some cases there may be extra-sensory perceptions. Other persons discover a world of visionary beauty. To others again is revealed the glory, the infinite value and meaningfulness of naked existence, of the given, unconceptualized event. In the final stage of egolessness there is an ‘obscure knowledge’ that All is in all—that All is actually each. This is as near, I take it, as a finite mind can ever come to ‘perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe.’”

R- The human mind is designed through time to view spatial matters; this is what separates humans from animals. However to be truly happy, one must return to the time when meaning and being are held above all.

E- “Instrumental music, oddly enough, left me rather cold. Mozart's C-Minor Piano Concerto was interrupted after the first movement, and a recording of some madrigals by Gesualdo took its place.

‘These voices,’ I said appreciatively, ‘these voices—they're a kind of bridge back to the human world.’

And a bridge they remained even while singing the most startlingly chromatic of the mad prince's compositions. Through the uneven phrases of the madrigals, the music pursued its course, never sticking to the same key for two bars together. In Gesualdo, that fantastic character out of a Webster melodrama, psychological disintegration had exaggerated, had pushed to the extreme limit, a tendency inherent in modal as opposed to fully tonal music. The resulting works sounded as though they might have been written by the later Schoenberg.

‘And yet,’ I felt myself constrained to say, as I listened to these strange products of a Counter-Reformation psychosis working upon a late medieval art form, ‘and yet it does not matter that he's all in bits. The whole is disorganized. But each individual fragment is in order, is a representative of a Higher Order. The Highest Order prevails even in the disintegration. The totality is present even in the broken pieces. More clearly present, perhaps, than in a completely coherent work. At least you aren't lulled into a sense of false security by some merely human, merely fabricated order. You have to rely on your immediate perception of the ultimate order. So in a certain sense disintegration may have its advantages. But of course it's dangerous, horribly dangerous. Suppose you couldn't get back, out of the chaos...’”

E- "If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things through narrow chinks of his cavern."

E- 'This is not drawing," he cried, "this is inspiration!" "I had meant it to be drawing," was Constable's characteristic answer. Both men were right. It was drawing, precise and veracious, and at the same time it was inspiration [...]”

E- “The essential Not-self could be perceived very clearly in things and in living creatures on the hither side of good and evil. In human beings it was visible only when they were in repose, their minds untroubled, their bodies motionless.”

E-“ Like mescalin takers, many mystics perceive supernaturally brilliant colors, not only with the inward eye, but even in the objective world around them.”

R- Once a human has experienced this ‘inner world’, there will be a desire to return, to feel the feeling of true happiness.

E- “To be shaken out of the ruts of ordinary perception, to be shown for a few timeless hours the outer and the inner world, not as they appear to an animal obsessed with survival or to a human being obsessed with words and notions, but as they are apprehended, directly and unconditionally, by Mind at Large—this is an experience of inestimable value to everyone and especially to the intellectual. For the intellectual is by definition the man for whom, in Goethe's phrase, ‘the word is essentially fruitful.’ He is the man who feels that ‘what we perceive by the eye is foreign to us as such and need not impress us deeply.’”

E- “The outer world is what we wake up to every morning of our lives, is the place where, willy-nilly, we must try to make our living. In the inner world there is neither work nor monotony. We visit it only in dreams and musings, and its strangeness is such that we never find the same world on two successive occasions. What wonder, then, if human beings in their search for the divine have generally preferred to look within!”

Difficulty with nonfiction!

Wow, it is extremely difficult to create arguments for my thesis! >| This really sucks.

Reader-Response Criticism

Dummies Guide

PowerPoint

ISU Thesis

"The mind is most fulfilled/peaceful not when worrying of spatial matters but of being and meaning."

English Project

WTF? I cant add .doc files... :( this is lame!

Week 4

We worked on our projects... again... had one spare etc etc.. the usual.
Except we all suddenly realized that we had nothing done on our projects! CRAP .. lots of work,, and its done!

Week 3

We worked on our projects, however we haven't been in the library for a while. We presented scholarships. Kind of useless right now, I'm not interested in applying for scholarships until my grade 12 year. I was away on Tuesday (16), helping with grade 9 day. I haven't read a lot of my books, however i find another book I'm reading more interesting. I wonder if it will serve sufficient for my ISU...

Week 2

We started working on our criticism projects. Seems like there's not enough to fill 70 minutes. I picked up both my ISU books and have started to read them. We talked briefly on scholarships.

Accountability Agreement

Accountability Agreement

Focus: What do you want to accomplish in this class or during this year?

In ENG4UE, I want to accomplish the following:

I want to raise my knowledge of essay writing techniques, allowing me to create an essay with a higher quality.
I want to broaden my reading palette.
I want to ready myself for the Advanced Placement Exam.
I want to pass the class with at least an 85%.
I want to understand all aspects of this course.
I want to prepare myself for any courses in university after high school.

Contributions: What contributions will you make to this class or to the school this year?

In ENG4UE, I want to be able to contribute to my class by:

I will help others when I can.
I will work equally on all group assignments.
I will be reliable; I will help others and keep promises.
I will tell others what they missed in class if they are absent.

Accountabilities: For what will you be held responsible?

I will be held responsible for:

I will regularly attend class.
I will regularly contribute to class discussions.
I will hand in all assignments on time.
I will come prepared to class daily.
I will give my full effort on all work.
I will give my all to preparing myself for the Advanced Placement Exam.
I will be held responsible for completing all assignments with a full understanding.

Supports: What help, and from whom, will you need in order to achieve your accountabilities?

I will require the aid and support of the following people for the following:

I will ask for help on homework and assignments from my mother, Louise and my father, Kevin when needed.
I will ask for help with corrections of spelling and grammar and I will ask questions from my group members (at that time) and Mr. P Murray.
I will ask for help or guidance mainly on the topic of essays and secondly on other literary concerns from Mrs. Carr.
I will require proper resources from my school Rockland District High School.
I will need access to literature appropriate for studying for the Advanced Placement Exam.

Measurements: How will you know what success looks like?

I will know what success looks like by:

I will pass the class with an 85% or more.
I will have improved my knowledge on essay writing and effectively used it to my advantage.
I will have understood the concepts of all units in this course.
I will leave ready for the Advanced Placement Exam.
I will leave this course prepared for a first year university literary course.

Consequences: How should you be rewarded if you succeed? How should you be punished?

Should I succeed I will:

I will pass the class with a desired mark.
I will pass the Advanced Placement Exam.
I will fully understand the concepts of the units in this course.

Should I not succeed I will:

I will not pass the class with a desired mark.
I will not have improved my knowledge and understanding of essays.
I will not be prepared for the Advanced Placement course.
I will not fully understand every unit in this course.

Should your name be listed above and you have signed below; you have agreed to give aid on the topics and requirements listed:

Week 1

We didn't a lot. We were told about our units and ISU. We chose groups and topics… as well as our ISU books.

Blog Change

Edublogs asked me again for a second time to reset my passsword, therefore I changed to Blogspot :D