CHAPTER 11

Neil makes the distinction that the problem with television is not the fact that we are being entertained, but the results of a world based on the thought-process of television. Postman states that if we continue to fill our lives with the incoherency and triviality of television, we will begin to lose recognition of these specific downfalls. This distinction is important because it shows that Postman's purpose was not to discourage entertainment itself, or the watching of television to do so, but he wrote with the intention to warn viewers that it is unsafe to rely on television for any other use. He reveals its fallacies and dangers when television attempts to take a serious informational or educational role, as it distorts the truthful, logical thought process that the print-based world established. He does not state that "garbage television" or pointless amusement is dangerous in the least bit.

WHAT?

Even before the day started, a pit sat at the bottom of my stomach. Going through an entire school day without talking one bit seemed to be a nearly impossible task. Walking through the doors, I bit my tongue. No "hello", just wave. I waved a lot. And laughed. Whiteboard in tow, I walked silently to each of my classes, yet I did little other than carry the tool. Figuring out a way to describe my thoughts accurately through pictures was much harder than making hyperbolic expressions. However, more often than not, I did not attempt to communicate at all, I let the frustration win. Understanding my peers was a trip too. At one point during fourth hour, Laura drew a bunny opposite a heart with an equal sign in between. Bunnies equal love? I like bunnies? Did I miss something? Had Mr. Dumar made some sort of a comment about those adorable rodents? I really just couldn't figure it out. So I joined suit and drew cats all over mine. All the time. Lunch was strange. I drew more pictures. A submarine. A unicorn. You know, the normal things. By the time 7th hour came, I was so thankful. My tongue felt weird. It needed to move. I felt trapped, weighted. When I could finally talk, I didn't erupt with commentary as I had expected, but I could feel a definite new freedom. While the concept of "the medium is the message" had once been vague and confusing, the experiences of the day made it ring loud and clear.

PLEASE, MR. POSTMAN

Neil Postman reveals similar attitudes toward technology within both his speech and chapter one. Postman suggests in each that the problems that we currently face and will face in the future have a common root: the very nature of humanity. In chapter one, Postman reveals that man has faced challenges when creating any new form of communication, everything from clocks to the alphabet, and that challenges and consequences will also be faced when shifting toward higher and higher degrees of digitization. In each, however, Postman reveals that these consequences are far greater than we realize, and that the 'adaptations' that are probable do not reflect what is socially healthy.
Postman uses the concept of our definition of humanity to reveal this. As simple inventions such as eyeglasses have become more and more complex- verging on human cloning, both ethics and our definition have shifted also. Postman reveals that our concepts of eternity, spirituality, and interpersonal connections are being altered as technology develops. Clocks monitor each moment with startling accuracy, morphing us into incessantly time-conscious individuals with little concept of time that cannot be measured or numerically represented. As eternity fades, so does our concept of our creator and our position as the created. We begin to place ourselves as immortal and improvable, even perfectible.
Postman also reveals how acceptable communication has been altered throughout history. Written word was viewed as a strange commodity in its early forms, according to anthropologists, as the ancient people's viewed it as a conversation with oneself or an unseen audience. However, it as an adaptation humanity quickly adopted. In the same way, Postman relates that humanity will soon find the absurdity of talking to machines as a viable and healthy form of communication. Postman reveals that these changes already are happening during his time- through the television and the answering machine. Advancements such as texting, facebook, twitter, and others show how accurate these predictions truly were.

BEEP

1. Chavez's first six words state that "civility is important". Chavez acknowledges throughout her article that it is important for politicians and citizens as well, to remain polite to each other and respectful of one another, regardless of their appearance, race, gender, or sexuality. However, she goes on to contrast this idea with the claim that words themselves have nothing to do with politics. She argues that the context of words, the way in which words are said, are truly what should be monitored.
2. Chavez uses the word bellicose to hint that politics have never truly been civil. The words they use relate directly to war conflict and terminology. Even though these words and phrases have become acceptable and benign, they truly reflect an aggressive attitude toward political opponents. This shows how modern politicians often contradict themselves, claiming certain words to be correct and others harmful, when in reality, many of the words they continue to use reflect the same hostility.
3. Chavez is attempting to persuade readers to take the context of the words into consideration when deriving the meaning. She states that it should be the meaning intended that offends others, not the word itself. She uses the example of the word "queer" which in previous generations simply meant odd, now criticizes a specific sexual agenda. Instead of having to avoid the word queer with all costs, the public should be more concerned with the way it handles their specific views on the issue, regardless of the words they use to describe it. Chavez seems to state that words are simply words, but it is what we intend to use them for that holds the true power.
4. I agree with Chavez, I think that the attitude of politicians is what needs the changing, not their specific word choice, as context is just as important as definition.

YOU WANT ME TO RECYCLE WHAT?

1. Semrau clearly demonstrates the point of his article through the statement, "Quite simply, use what you have until it can no long function."

2. Through keeping his intentions secret till the very end, Semrau opens the mind of the reader to considering his suggestion. Semrau initially speaks his opinion of recycling in general terms. He then transitions into the story of his career and current life situation. The narrative of Semrau’s life prior to the revelation of his desire to donate his body to science prepares the reader to understand the reasons for this decision. These reasons also do not appear that of a crazed environmentalist, but of an honest individual. This narrative opens the mind of the reader toward accepting the 75-year-old’s surprising decision, and possibly even causes personal consideration. Semrau tactfully addresses the ethics of his decision through revealing honest, nearly sentimental reasons for his decision to donate his body. Semrau also presents statements about recycling and reusing that are familiar and agreeable. By doing so, he makes the steps toward accepting with his bold claim easier to take. Semrau lays down the logic of his argument without the reader realizing they are being persuaded. Regardless of the reader’s prior opinion of the issue, the shock of Semrau’s conclusion is enough to get one thinking matters through for a second time.

IT'S GOD/A BOY!!!!!!

Luther clearly articulates the theme of salvation and all of its glory entering the world through Christ on Christmas day in his hymn, “Savior of the Nations Come”.

Luther supports this theme with the literary tool of contrast. Christ’s singular glory is contrasted by His humble beginning throughout the hymn. Christ is immediately glorified during the first line “Savior of the Nations, come,” as he is portrayed as the mighty Redeemer of all people.

The second verse carries this similar theme, revealing that Christ was conceived only through God, not by men, therefore exalting Him further.

The third verse introduces the contrast, “Though by all the world disowned, Still to be in Heaven enthroned,” as Christ’s glory is ignored by those He came to save. Yet Luther reiterates Christ’s glory through the second line which reveals that Christ will receive ultimate glory in heaven.

Throughout the rest of the hymn, Luther reinforces the concept of Christ’s holiness through his diction. He uses strong words such as “triumph” and “victory” to portray Christ’s purpose of salvation. These words magnify Christ’s strength and power.

Luther also describes the manger as brightly shining, providing the reader a mental image of Christ’s radiant purity.

SERMON REVIEW

In Borghardt's sermon, Christ was mentioned a total of forty-nine times, being the subject thirty-one of those times. The verbs Borghardt used were as follows: makes, slain, took died, was slain, lives, died, rose, reigns, slain, put, wear, take, died, rose, died, put, wants, got, came, makes, blesses, is, grabs, holds, is, reigns, died, lives, reigns.

Borghardt's sermon's theme was that the forgiveness we have through Christ's death and resurrection has resulted in eternal salvation without fear or pain. Edwards preached the antitheses of the prior theme, stating that man should be obedient out of fear of God's immense and eternal wrath. Essentially, Borghardt encourages believers to stay firm in the faith in pursuit of Christ's mercy and forgiveness. However, Edwards discourages sin through describing the horrors that sinners face before God. Borghardt's theme is closely linked to the turths of the Gospel, where Edwards focuses primarily, if not exclusively, on the message of the Law.