Sunday, February 20, 2011

Extra Credit Opportunity

I'm almost done reading your responses to Paine and while you all did a very good job, it's clear that very few of you feel that what he says is still relevant today.  It looks like I should've chosen something more relevant to today's issues (Obama, JFK, Chavez, Malcom X?).  I don't want to make next year's students read irrelevant texts, so next year I'd like to use a different text for our final assessment... which brings me to my request. 

If you have come across any persuasive texts that you think are particularly good for students of American Literature to read, please let me know. I'm open to just about anything as long as it's school appropriate and 4 pages or less.  You might look for texts that have universal themes, but contemporary application.  You might also consider texts that students wouldn't otherwise be asked to read in school, but which you feel are important to understanding the American experience.  You are not limited to the speeches on this site, or this one, or this one,  but I thought they might be a good starting place.

I am offering extra credit to students who provide a link to the text and an explanation as to why they think it should be used.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to tell you which text I choose, as some of you may have friends enrolling in the class next year.  This is your chance to help create the curriculum for next year!

Thursday, February 17, 2011

SSR

Since so many of you lost your independent reading handout... and since it's due 3/4... and since you'll probably need to be working on it over the long weekend...I've tried to post the handout here. 
But the blog is being silly and won't let me cut and paste into a blog post.  It will, however, let me post it as a comment (does anyone know why?  I'd love to solve this problem.)  So, read the first comment for the directions.

Sources of articles about our topics

If you find any good online places to find articles about the topics we're researching, please post them in the comments section.  Who knows, the credit fairies might just reward you for your helpfulness.  I've started our list:

New York Times
pro/ con articles on controversial issues
Santa Cruz public library  (you need a library card and pin number-- which you got when you were in 9th grade.)  Check out opposing viewpoints link.
List of organizations connected to a variety of controversial topics.  This will not lead you directly to articles, but might lead you in the right direction.
Harbor Library.  Yup, that's right!  Our own library has great resources.  Check out the links on the left side for "News Online" and "Research Tools"

Let's hear about the sites you find!

Do you get locked out of the blog?

A number of people are telling me that they can't access the blog.  Here are the most common problems and solutions:
1) Problem: You forgot what email address you used or your password.  Solution:  Write it in your planner.
2) Problem: You click on the invitation in your email to access the blog, but have never become a follower.  Your invitation expires, and then you can't access the blog.  Solution:  Click on the button that says "follow" on the right hand side.  Follow the directions.
3)  Problem:  You've tried the solutions above and still can't make it work.  Solution: In the short term, you can have a friend email you a post by clicking on the little envelope under the post.  In the long term, send me an email and ask me to re-invite you.  Then, make sure you follow the directions for problems #1 and 2, so it doesn't happen again :)

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

contests with prizes!

As we're starting to talk about public speaking, I thought you should know that there are a number of contests out there that deal with public speaking. 
  1. This one is a short essay about the benefits or problems of using visual aids... and it has a $1000 prize!  You don't actually give a speech, just write a 300 word paper.
  2. This one requires you to give your speech as a historical character.  If anyone wants to do this for their final speech, so that they can enter the contest, just let me know and we'll modify the assignment a bit.
  3. The local Lions club has an annual speech contest.  We're a bit late for it this year, but you might want to keep it in mind for next year.
  4. Public Speaking that relates to California history. You'd have to make sure your speech was focused on Ca history, but hey, for $500, maybe it's worth it.
  5. A site that has info about speaking contests on a variety of topics from cattle to forensics.  (Not a bad site to check out in general because it's a database of college scholarships.)

If you find any others, please post information in the comments.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

HOMEWORK: Contemporary speech analysis

Choose one of the following:
Obama after Arizona shooting
video

Mubarak's speech about political change in Egypt
(I can't find a video, but if anyone does, please post)

Obama's state of the union 2011
video

Brown's state of the state address 2011
video

Jan Brewer on Arizona's AB1070 
(I can't find a video, but if anyone does, please post)


Bachman's response to State of the Union
video

When possible, I've given you both the text and video.  It's worth looking at both, since how one holds their body can do a lot to instill confidence in the viewer.

Read the speech and write an evaluation of the speech:
a) Start with an introduction in which you identify the speaker, the reason for the speech, the intended audience, any necessary context of background information, and the main idea of the speech, along with your opinion on the quality of the speech.
b) Then write several paragraphs, in which you support your overall opinion of the speech's quality, with claims about its ethos, pathos, and logos.  Paragraphs must include evidence. (Excellent paragraphs have 3 CDs, good ones have 2, mediocre ones have 1.... I mention this because in other homework assignments some people are getting a little lax on the evidence.)
c) Don't worry about a conclusion, just tie back to your overall opinion of the speech at the end of your final paragraph.

Notes:
  • If there's another speech that you want to do, which was given within the last few months, just let me know.
  • As you're evaluating the speech, it's likely that you will consider the issues of the speech, which we will discuss next class, however, for the write up, please focus on ethos, pathos, and logos.

I can't wait to talk about all of this next class!

And for those of you who asked, here is the complete text of Martin Luther King Jr's Letter From Birmingham Jail.

Monday, February 7, 2011

logic puzzle solutions


Solution to the Puzzle of the Hyena's Alias: The Hyena's alias is "James Wilson". There are several ways to solve this puzzle, but perhaps the simplest is to realize that, if the fourth informant is correct, then the Hyena's alias must be either "John Moore" or "James Wilson". This is because each of the first two informants must be right about one of the names but not both, therefore one must be right about the first name and the other right about the surname. Then, the third informant's information allows us to eliminate "John Moore": since we've already ruled out "Taylor" as the last name of the alias, the third informant must be right that the first name is not "John".
Source: J. A. H. Hunter & Joseph S. Madachy, Mathematical Diversions (1975). The puzzle is based on one from page 49.

Solution to the Puzzle of the Masked Men: Benjy shot the guard. There are only eight possible distributions of truth-values, given that either all but one of the statements is true or all but one is false: four for each of the two possibilities depending on which of the four statements is the odd man out. So, to solve the puzzle, you can go through these possible distributions of truth-values until you've eliminated all but one.
An easier approach is to recognize that since Denny denies what Benjy said, their two statements must have opposite truth-values. This means that the other two statements are either both true or both false, thus eliminating four possible distributions. Suppose that Benjy spoke the truth and Denny was wrong. Then Charlie must be the guilty party, since Benjy accused him truly. That means that Charlie's own statement must be false, in which case Alfie's statement must also be false. However, since Charlie is the guilty party―and only one of the robbers shot the guard―Alfie is innocent, so his statement would be true. It's impossible for him to be both innocent and guilty, so the assumption that Benjy spoke the truth and Denny didn't must be mistaken.
Therefore, we can conclude that Benjy was wrong and Denny spoke the truth. So, Charlie isn't guilty after all. Suppose that Alfie and Charlie's statements are both false: then Alfie must be the guilty one, since he falsely claims innocence. However, if Alfie is guilty, then Charlie's statement was true, not false. Thus, the only remaining possibility is that all the statements were true except Benjy's. So, it's true that either Alfie or Benjy is guilty, since Charlie spoke the truth. However, it's not true that Alfie is guilty, since he correctly claimed innocence. Therefore, the guilty party must be Benjy.
Acknowledgment: The puzzle was suggested by one from Marilyn vos Savant's book Of Course I'm for Monogamy: I'm Also for Everlasting Peace and an End to Taxes (1996), pp. 164-165.


Solution to the Puzzle of the Dead Presidents: Johnson.
If the lie detector is accurate, then each of the five criminals said one truth and one falsehood. So, let's start by assuming that Kennedy's first statement is true and his second is false, and see what happens.
If Kennedy's second statement is false, then either Reagan or Johnson is the lookout. However, given that his first statement is true, Johnson is the mastermind. Thus, Reagan must be the lookout. Since Johnson is the mastermind, it follows that Kennedy isn't, which means that Nixon's second statement is true. Hence, Nixon's first statement is false, but that means that Nixon is the lookout. This contradicts the previous conclusion that Reagan is the lookout. Therefore, our original assumption must be wrong, which means that Kennedy's first statement is false and his second true.
Since Kennedy's first statement is false, Johnson is not the mastermind, and since his second is true, neither Reagan nor Johnson is the lookout. Because Kennedy's second statement is true, Ford's second statement is false, which means that his first is true. Since Ford's first statement is true, Reagan's second statement is false, which means that his first is true. So, Nixon is not the lookout, and his second statement is false, meaning that Kennedy is the mastermind. Since Nixon is not the lookout, it follows that Johnson is not the wheelman, by Modus Tollens from Ford's first statement. So far, we have been able to conclude that none of the following is the lookout: Kennedy (since he's the mastermind), Reagan, Johnson, and Nixon; this leaves only Ford. Thus, Johnson's second statement is true and his first is false. The only way for Johnson's first statement to be false is for neither Nixon nor Johnson to be the safecracker. So we now know that Johnson is not the mastermind (Kennedy), the lookout (Ford), the wheelman, or the safecracker. Therefore, Johnson is the triggerman.
By continuing this reasoning, you can determine the remaining two positions in the gang, but I'll leave this as an exercise for the reader.

Friday, February 4, 2011

Thoreau's Civil Disobedience.

This website has the complete text, with notes. The notes are mostly paraphrase, but you might want to check it out.

This site has critical interpretations of the text.  If you click on the different segments of the text, it also has some pretty detailed text notes, explaining references, etc. Are you starting to get the idea that this text was a pretty big deal?  This text has inspired many famous people.  Can you think of anyone in particular?

If you're interested in learning about Thoreau, please do.  I encourage you to share anything you learn in the comments.

If all you want is the absolute minimum in order to complete the assignment, use the excerpt here (beware, it's still pretty long):

I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe — "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which the will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure.

This American government — what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed upon, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievious persons who put obstructions on the railroads.

But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at one no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? — in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.
....
It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support. If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting upon another man's shoulders. I must get off him first, that he may pursue his contemplations too. See what gross inconsistency is tolerated. I have heard some of my townsmen say, "I should like to have them order me out to help put down an insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico — see if I would go"; and yet these very men have each, directly by their allegiance, and so indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished a substitute. The soldier is applauded who refuses to serve in an unjust war by those who do not refuse to sustain the unjust government which makes the war; is applauded by those whose own act and authority he disregards and sets at naught; as if the state were penitent to that degree that it hired one to scourge it while it sinned, but not to that degree that it left off sinning for a moment. Thus, under the name of Order and Civil Government, we are all made at last to pay homage to and support our own meanness. After the first blush of sin comes its indifference; and from immoral it becomes, as it were, unmoral, and not quite unnecessary to that life which we have made.
...

I meet this American government, or its representative, the State government, directly, and face to face, once a year — no more — in the person of its tax-gatherer; this is the only mode in which a man situated as I am necessarily meets it; and it then says distinctly, Recognize me; and the simplest, the most effectual, and, in the present posture of affairs, the indispensablest mode of treating with it on this head, of expressing your little satisfaction with and love for it, is to deny it then. My civil neighbor, the tax-gatherer, is the very man I have to deal with — for it is, after all, with men and not with parchment that I quarrel — and he has voluntarily chosen to be an agent of the government. How shall he ever know well that he is and does as an officer of the government, or as a man, until he is obliged to consider whether he will treat me, his neighbor, for whom he has respect, as a neighbor and well-disposed man, or as a maniac and disturber of the peace, and see if he can get over this obstruction to his neighborlines without a ruder and more impetuous thought or speech corresponding with his action. I know this well, that if one thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could name — if ten honest men only — ay, if one honest man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this co-partnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in America. For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done forever.
....

I have paid no poll tax for six years. I was put into a jail once on this account, for one night; and, as I stood considering the walls of solid stone, two or three feet thick, the door of wood and iron, a foot thick, and the iron grating which strained the light, I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated my as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. I wondered that it should have concluded at length that this was the best use it could put me to, and had never thought to avail itself of my services in some way. I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through before they could get to be as free as I was. I did nor for a moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone and mortar. I felt as if I alone of all my townsmen had paid my tax. They plainly did not know how to treat me, but behaved like persons who are underbred. In every threat and in every compliment there was a blunder; for they thought that my chief desire was to stand the other side of that stone wall. I could not but smile to see how industriously they locked the door on my meditations, which followed them out again without let or hindrance, and they were really all that was dangerous. As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my body; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that the State was half-witted, that it was timid as a lone woman with her silver spoons, and that it did not know its friends from its foes, and I lost all my remaining respect for it, and pitied it.
....
The night in prison was novel and interesting enough. The prisoners in their shirtsleeves were enjoying a chat and the evening air in the doorway, when I entered. But the jailer said, "Come, boys, it is time to lock up"; and so they dispersed, and I heard the sound of their steps returning into the hollow apartments. My room-mate was introduced to me by the jailer as "a first-rate fellow and clever man." When the door was locked, he showed me where to hang my hat, and how he managed matters there. The rooms were whitewashed once a month; and this one, at least, was the whitest, most simply furnished, and probably neatest apartment in town. He naturally wanted to know where I came from, and what brought me there; and, when I had told him, I asked him in my turn how he came there, presuming him to be an honest man, of course; and as the world goes, I believe he was. "Why," said he, "they accuse me of burning a barn; but I never did it." As near as I could discover, he had probably gone to bed in a barn when drunk, and smoked his pipe there; and so a barn was burnt. He had the reputation of being a clever man, had been there some three months waiting for his trial to come on, and would have to wait as much longer; but he was quite domesticated and contented, since he got his board for nothing, and thought that he was well treated.
He occupied one window, and I the other; and I saw that if one stayed there long, his principal business would be to look out the window. I had soon read all the tracts that were left there, and examined where former prisoners had broken out, and where a grate had been sawed off, and heard the history of the various occupants of that room; for I found that even there there was a history and a gossip which never circulated beyond the walls of the jail. Probably this is the only house in the town where verses are composed, which are afterward printed in a circular form, but not published. I was shown quite a long list of young men who had been detected in an attempt to escape, who avenged themselves by singing them.

I pumped my fellow-prisoner as dry as I could, for fear I should never see him again; but at length he showed me which was my bed, and left me to blow out the lamp.

It was like travelling into a far country, such as I had never expected to behold, to lie there for one night. It seemed to me that I never had heard the town clock strike before, not the evening sounds of the village; for we slept with the windows open, which were inside the grating. It was to see my native village in the light of the Middle Ages, and our Concord was turned into a Rhine stream, and visions of knights and castles passed before me. They were the voices of old burghers that I heard in the streets. I was an involuntary spectator and auditor of whatever was done and said in the kitchen of the adjacent village inn — a wholly new and rare experience to me. It was a closer view of my native town. I was fairly inside of it. I never had seen its institutions before. This is one of its peculiar institutions; for it is a shire town. I began to comprehend what its inhabitants were about.

In the morning, our breakfasts were put through the hole in the door, in small oblong-square tin pans, made to fit, and holding a pint of chocolate, with brown bread, and an iron spoon. When they called for the vessels again, I was green enough to return what bread I had left, but my comrade seized it, and said that I should lay that up for lunch or dinner. Soon after he was let out to work at haying in a neighboring field, whither he went every day, and would not be back till noon; so he bade me good day, saying that he doubted if he should see me again.

When I came out of prison — for some one interfered, and paid that tax — I did not perceive that great changes had taken place on the common, such as he observed who went in a youth and emerged a gray-headed man; and yet a change had come to my eyes come over the scene — the town, and State, and country, greater than any that mere time could effect. I saw yet more distinctly the State in which I lived. I saw to what extent the people among whom I lived could be trusted as good neighbors and friends; that their friendship was for summer weather only; that they did not greatly propose to do right; that they were a distinct race from me by their prejudices and superstitions, as the Chinamen and Malays are that in their sacrifices to humanity they ran no risks, not even to their property; that after all they were not so noble but they treated the thief as he had treated them, and hoped, by a certain outward observance and a few prayers, and by walking in a particular straight through useless path from time to time, to save their souls. This may be to judge my neighbors harshly; for I believe that many of them are not aware that they have such an institution as the jail in their village.

It was formerly the custom in our village, when a poor debtor came out of jail, for his acquaintances to salute him, looking through their fingers, which were crossed to represent the jail window, "How do ye do?" My neighbors did not this salute me, but first looked at me, and then at one another, as if I had returned from a long journey. I was put into jail as I was going to the shoemaker's to get a shoe which was mender. When I was let out the next morning, I proceeded to finish my errand, and, having put on my mended show, joined a huckleberry party, who were impatient to put themselves under my conduct; and in half an hour — for the horse was soon tackled — was in the midst of a huckleberry field, on one of our highest hills, two miles off, and then the State was nowhere to be seen.

This is the whole history of "My Prisons."
....
The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to — for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well — is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which I have also imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.

Patrick Henry

Sorry I missed today's class.  I'm sure all went well, though as you are an awesome bunch of students.

Read Patrick Henry's speech, listen to an actor read it out loud, and learn a bit about the man and the situation which provoked him at this website.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011