Directions: Watch the video below and answer the proceeding questions. The direct link to the video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88.
- Who does the speaker identify as her audience?
- What is the speaker's hook? How does that hook work with her argument?
- What is the context for her argument? How does she center the audience in the argument?
- What do you imagine was her academic/thesis question? What is the argument/thesis?
- What are some of the parts of the body of the argument? What are some examples she gives to support her argument? How does she make those examples relevant to the audience?
- What is her conclusion?
Due before class on Thursday, September 25th. Be sure to perform all of your homework readings before performing this blog, through the readings from September 23rd.
Reply to a classmate: in the spirit of embracing wrongness, find a post that says something different than what you said (in any large or small way), and consider how your classmate labeled the various parts of the argument. Pick one part of your classmate's responses that you agree or disagree with and detail for your classmate why you agree or disagree. When I say detail, I mean be specific. If you and your classmates all said precisely the same thing, then consider what you all might have missed in the video and then describe that for your classmate in your reply.
Reply due before 5pm on Friday, September 26th.
Kathryn Schulz identifies readers, listeners, audience members, and the human culture in general as her audience. Her hook was when she discussed the road trip her and her friend took, and she asked the question about the Chinese characters on the sign. This hook worked with her argument, because she was showing that it is okay to be wrong. The context for her argument was when she explained, how at a young age we were taught that being wrong wasn't acceptable. She centers the audience in her argument by asking them questions and getting them involved in what she has to say. I imagine that her thesis question would be "why do human beings always feel the need to be right?" One part of the body of the argument is when she says " we freak out at the thought of getting something wrong", because we were taught at the young age that we must be right all the time. One example she uses to support her argument about human beings not liking to be wrong, was when the doctor operated on the wrong side of woman's body, because " for whatever reason, [ the surgeon ] simply felt that he was on the correct side of the patient."( Kenneth Sands, senior vice resident for healthcare quality, Beth Israel Deaconess medical center). Kathryn Schulz's conclusion was that it is okay to be wrong. Do not hesitate to know your wrong, and when you are wrong it's not the end of world, just move on to your next idea.
ReplyDeleteIn this video i think that Schulz identified the studio audience as her audience an the people watching the video. Schulz's hook i thought was her explaining to everyone about the road trip she had went on with her friends which i think definitely grabbed peoples attention especially when she talked about ho she had seen the Chinese symbols on the signs. The hook i think definitely worked for her argument because it showed how in today's society how people have the want to always be right and needing to be right and not wrong like in Schulz's story.I think the thesis to this video would have to be about people thinking they always have to be right about everything or feeling the need to be right and how to be wrong is something to be frowned upon in a way. An example that she gives in this video is when she talks about the coyote and the roadrunner and compares the coyote running off the cliff to how we realize that were wrong but we don't realize it until after the fact.I think that her conclusion to this video is that once you step of the box ,once only then will you realize and start to realize that its okay to be wrong and find the true meaning of being right.
ReplyDelete1. Kathryn Schulz identifies the TED conference and individuals who feel that they are generally right as her audience.
ReplyDelete2. Schulz uses the story of her road trip and how she thought she was right about a road sign as her hook. This ties in to her argument because she genuinely thought she was right and didn't know she wasn't until her friend brought it to her attention. This is a great example for her argument that people tend to think they are right in their beliefs and try to avoid being wrong.
3. She provides context for her argument by explaining how society today is greatly based in the belief that being wrong is bad. She describes how we are taught this at a young age. She explains how society accepts that making mistakes is part of human nature, but, in the present tense, we think we are right until proven wrong. This shows how her argument is relevant to us today. She centers the audience in the argument by providing relevant examples and engaging the audience by directly asking questions. She even shows how the very audience failed in a previous convention but continues to move forward. This is a direct example of her argument.
4. I think her thesis question could have been why do we (society) automatically feel we are right? The argument is that people generally feel we are right but that being wrong is natural and can help us better understand our environment.
5. She begins her argument by hooking in the audience with her story. She then establishes that we have a false belief of being right and how this belief is instilled in us at a young age. Then she shows how this is a social problem and how it has affected how people think and interact with each other, but finally shows how we can embrace being wrong and how it can help us take a better look at the world. Some examples she uses to support her argument are: the coyote thinking he is fine until he looks down, the grade schooler's paper and how we might automatically have a negative opinion of it, the doctor feeling he was right and subsequently performing a surgery on the wrong side, and the television show and how we unknowingly enjoy being wrong. These examples are made relevant because they are very basic and everyday examples that we can relate to but Schulz shows how they undeniable relate to her argument.
6. Schulz concludes that stepping outside of our bubble of rightness and accepting being wrong can help us rediscover wonder.
I feel Kathryn Schulz identifies the audience as her intended audience, and her actual audience is the general population because we all have human nature and have the same feelings about being right and wrong.
ReplyDeleteI feel the hook was related to her road trip she took with her friend. The hook works with her argument of “error blindness” because she explains how she misunderstood the meaning of a specific sign; for the last few years she thought it was a Chinese symbol. Her friend pointed out that she was wrong and Shulz learned it was just a picnic sign, but prior to that Shulz thought she was right the whole time.
The context for her argument was given by several examples, one of which was a cultural reason. She explains that we are taught at a young age of how being wrong feels bad, how we judge someone who we may think is wrong and how we grow to try and be perfectionists because of those feelings. She also addresses it as being a social problem as well. When someone may disagree with us we tend to make our own assumptions as to why a person can’t seem to see why we are right, we may assume they are just ignorant. I feel Shulz centers the audience by actively keeping them engaged in the argument, she asks questions, she gives real life examples and by letting the audience know that being wrong is a fundamental part of which we all are. She also goes on to say that being wrong is a source to productivity and creativity, which I think greatly help center the audience to her argument.
I feel Shulz academic/thesis question could have been why do we like the feeling of being right. I feel the argument/thesis could have been how can we accept the feeling of being wrong and step out of our comfort zone.
A part of her argument was that if we trust too much on being on the correct side, then it can be dangerous to ourselves and others, she gave a great example of that by telling the surgery story of the surgeon who operated on the wrong leg simply because he thought he was right. I feel Shulz concluded her argument by reiterating how being wrong can ultimately help us be more productive and creative in general and that if we can be comfortable with stepping outside of being right then something else may happen, we can have a rediscovery of wonder.
The speaker, Kathryn Schulz, identifies everyone at the conference as her audience, and also anyone who could be watching. The hook she uses in the beginning is the road trip story were she talked about mistaking the picnic table sign as a Chinese character. She mistook something, for something else without realizing it. The context for her argument is situations like this that we all experience. By relaying these situations through stories of herself and others, she centers the audience. I think the thesis question is - Is it possible to step outside the feeling of always being right? Then, the thesis itself would be - It is possible to not be stuck in the feeling of always being right, and this is the single greatest move you can make. An example she gives that is relevant to the audience is "unfortunate assumptions." Unfortunate assumptions assume the person we’re talking to is ignorant, an idiot, or evil. This causes us to treat each other terribly. Her conclusion is that it is okay to be wrong, and we should embrace that feeling instead of being afraid of it. It is us being able to "look out into the work and it’s vastness and say, wow, maybe I’m wrong."
ReplyDeleteThe speaker Kathryn Schulz identifies anyone who could be listening as the audience. She uses one of her own past experiences as the hook. She describes a road trip she took with her friend in college to Portland, Oregon and how along the way she kept seeing what she believed to be a "Chinese character" but was really just the symbol for picnic area. The context of her argument is that we all experience moments in life we were are wrong yet most people do everything to avoid thinking about being wrong. I believe her thesis question is why do people have such a hard time believing its okay to be wrong. Parts of her argument that really stood out to me are when she mentions how people go through life in this bubble believing they are right about everything. Then, we experience "error blindness" meaning we don"t have anything internally to tell us we're wrong until its too late, She makes the point that in today's society, we go through life learning that "the way to succeed in life is to never make any mistakes." Therefore, we freak out at the possibility that we have done something wrong because we have been taught to believe that getting something wrong means there is something wrong with us but our ability to mess up is not a defect, its normal. Her conclusion us that in life, we mess up, we come up with another idea and tell another story, Its a fact of life. Schulz ending statement is to "step out of that tiny terrifying space of rightness and look around at each other.....and be able to say 'wow. I don't know, maybe I am wrong.'"
ReplyDeleteHer audience was the people at the conference and the people watching the video. The hook is her funny road trip story about the Chinese [picnic] signs. This worked for her argument because she positively gained knowledge when she was wrong. She explains that in todays society we strive to be perfect and error free. But this is not reality. The truth is everyone makes mistakes and we will never fix that. Her thesis is most likely "Being wrong is apart of life and we need to accept that as a society in order to continue to more forward". She states that the beauty of the mind is that we can see the world as what it isn't. That being wrong is apart of human nature and it makes us who we are. I feel she really connected with the audience when she talked about how people imagine something happening but something else happened instead. I'm sure everyone can relate to those situations. She finishes by saying that people will always get stuff wrong in which allows us to explore and open our minds to bigger and better things.
ReplyDeleteThe audience to this lecture is anyone in the auditorium and any outside viewers such as ourselves watching the video. Kathryn Shulz hooks the audience by telling us a story about a time she was on a road trip and kept seeing picnic area signs but at the time she believed them to be a "Chinese character". In her lecture she uses a lot of real life experiences and relates to the audience to keep them hooked. Her thesis was probably something along the lines of how does being wrong effect human nature.Throughout the speech she uses many real life stories and examples to show us what she is talking about. In the end she gets to the point of its ok to be wrong as long as we embrace it and learn from it.
ReplyDeleteI believe Schulz also wanted to explain to people that being wrong is a natural part of life. Because we are human there will always be times when we are wrong. This does not mean we are never right either. What she was trying to get across was just because we get one thing wrong it doesn’t mean we have to give up. We can push through it and still succeed in life. Her hook was a way to draw in humor to us being wrong sometimes, because being wrong is not all serious or bad. I do agree with you on how we should embrace being wrong and how we should learn from it.
DeleteKathryn Schulz identifies her audience as the listeners and members of the TED talk conference. She also later refers that the wants her message to be for those that are caught up in being right, or are afraid of being wrong. Her hook is a story from her personal life where she mistakes road signs for “Chinese symbols.” She opens up this way because she want to start with herself as being someone who makes mistakes, and making it easier for an audience to relate. This also opens up for her argument that it is okay to be wrong and it is a part of life to be appreciated. She also relates the wrong feeling to be similar to Looney Toons cartoons, where Wiley Coyote is in pre-plummet after chasing Road Runner. What she wants to convey through this in her speech is that feeling of being right just before you realize you’re wrong. She says “it’s like being on solid ground when you’re not.” She moves to several other references, both political and historical, to support that feeling in her speech. Schultz also explains that in blindness that we have to being wrong we sometimes mistreat others. When we believe someone else is wrong, in our rightness, we assume they are ignorant, an idiot, or outright evil. She says that each of us views the same thing in different ways and neither view-point is wrong or right. It’s this difference that helps our society evolve, and is a beautiful thing about humanity. She shows how humanity views the universe as an example of how we can all see the same thing and imagine a painting or a map. Kathryn Schultz concludes with the theme of the conference “rediscovering wonder.” She relates the theme with being wrong as a natural part of life, and in order to really see life for all the different things it is, we have to let go of being right.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the way that you have summarized the speaker and what she has said. I believe that we have all relatively stated the same thing about what the speaker was making an argument about. But I especially liked what you had to say about it because I believe you have been the only person to state the main point the speaker was trying to get across, and that was that if we didn't except being wrong and willing to admit it we wouldn't be able to all the different things in life.
DeleteThe audience for the speaker is the people who always has to be right and can't admit when they are wrong. Her hook was how she kept seeing what she thought was a Chinese symbol, and how when she found out it was a picnic table she was able to laugh at how wrong she was. That hook was a great way to make people feel welcome and know that she has a funny side and that it is ok to laugh at yourself. The speaker’s context was how the coyote kept chasing the roadrunner and when he came to a cliff he was still thinking he was right, until he fell off the cliff. She centered the audience by allowing them to feel her frustration about how so many people think they are correct all the time. She made them laugh and think back to her original Chinese symbol. I believe her thesis is “why do people have to always be right, when they are wrong”. Her arguments are that people will stand their ground even if they fall off the cliff like the coyote. She addresses the audience based on the convention she was attending. Her conclusion was to take a minute and look and see if you are one of those that can’t see when they are wrong because they are stuck in the I am always right moment.
ReplyDeleteI believe Schulz also wanted to further her audience to those who've been wrong and believe being wrong to be a negative aspect of life. Schulz outlines in her first example about road signs, that although she had been wrong and made a mistake, she learned from the situation. She also pointed out how the situation had a humorous aspect to it. Kathryn Schulz would also like us to understand that being wrong is a natural aspect of life. We should appreciate when we're wrong because that also reminds us that we are human and it is something that connects us.
DeleteKaren Shultz addresses society as a whole for her audience, as it is human nature to have the desire to be right and to have worth placed on our positions. She hooks her audience with a story of personal experience where in she mistakes the picnic signs for Chinese symbols. The context of the argument is laid out by examples the audience can relate to, by the learned concept taught from childhood that it is unacceptable to be wrong, and the idea that we should reexamine being wrong to be an opportunity for growth. She centers the audience by providing them with situations, stories and perspectives to persuade them to view being wrong in another light. I believe her thesis question is "why do we as humans so strongly fear being wrong?" It doesn't have to be where "being wrong means there is something wrong with you." It can reinforce the notion that it is human to err, and we can use that to our advantage to explore our creativity and improve upon ourselves and the world around us. Examples used are the surgeon's mistake in performing surgery incorrectly, oil in the Gulf and the torpedoing of the global economy. She also uses stories that take her audience to the situation and has them asking questions of themselves. We as a society associate being wrong with inadequacy, and to succeed is to never make mistakes. Taking ownership and learning from our mistakes is where success truly lies. Succeeding at a level of how we treat and view ourselves and one another is success. Moving forward after mistakes and learning from what we gain is success.
ReplyDeleteI agree that society is her audience because everyone does have that desire of being right and have similar feelings around being wrong.
DeleteKathryn Schulz identifies the auditorium and anyone who watches the video as her audience. Her hook for catching the attention of the audience was by using personal experiences, which was her road trip with some friends. While on this trip she explained her confusion with the picnic sign. She had believed it was a Chinese symbol. This hook worked because she was trying to show her audience that we are not always right and that it’s okay to be wrong. The context for her argument was when she explained from young ages we are taught to be perfectionist and if you made a mistake you were in trouble. One of the ways she centered the audience in the argument was by asking them a series of questions to involve them in the conversation. I would imagine her thesis question to be; as humans, we always have a need to be right and we are afraid of being wrong. An example to support her argument was of the coyote and the roadrunner. She compares it to the coyote running off the cliff then realizing what just happened. This represents us, how we don’t realized we are wrong until afterwards. Kathryn Schulz’s conclusion is in the end everyone is wrong at some point, and we need to accept that and move on to a new thought.
ReplyDeleteYou are right in saying that we are all wrong at times and we will never change that, but I do believe that we can relearn how to react to being wrong and pass on our teachings to our children and future generations in attempt to have the occurrence be more accepted. One step at a time we may learn to adjust our way of thinking and viewing our world and those that we share it with.
ReplyDeleteThe speaker identifies everyone as her audience. People who have been wrong in their lives would be the hook. By using herself as an example, with the Chinese symbol on the side of the road. She uses a cool, calm, fun and trusting presentation. Why do people have to right all the time would be the thesis question. The argument would be that no one is right all the time. She gives three examples of assumption that people have when they believe they are right. The assumption that people are ignorant, idiots, or evil. Her conclusion was letting everyone know that it is okay to be wrong and not know, and that we should step out of that little box of being right all the time because it is tortures and a very unhappy way of living.
ReplyDeleteI don't think "People who have been wrong in their lives would be the hook." It's part of the lecture for sure. Her hook is (as you also stated) her story with the Chinese symbol. That would then lead to her topic of people being wrong in their lives.
Delete