TOW #24- "The Prince"

Throughout the entire book, Machiavelli shows his knowledge for politics through the studies of previous rulers and governments. Displaying this knowledge in his writing, Machiavelli uses references to previous principalities and states as concrete, historical evidence to show the qualities that lead to the downfall of such governments, and how to avoid the same fate. An example of Machiavelli's usage of history is seen when he famously discusses cruelty and compassion in Chapter XVII. Stating that "Cesare Borgia was accounted cruel; nevertheless, this cruelty of his reformed the Romagna, brought it unity and restored order and obedience" (95). This example of the Duke of Valentinois expands upon Machiavelli's point that cruelty and fear is, at times, needed to provide the best for the state and the people. Using concrete examples, especially ones of history, help Machiavelli in his arguments of how to avoid the deathly downfall that other principalities have reached.

Machiavelli, in his famous book, The Prince, uses comparisons and references to previous rulers and governments in order to provide concrete evidence for his arguments; thus, his arguments are more persuasive. The effective argumentation that Machiavelli uses, along with his straight-forward claims and descriptive content, has made a lasting impression on the world. Many rulers have followed Machiavelli's points in order to create the best state possible. Though some of his ideas are morally and politically questionable, Machiavelli makes readers question, even until today, to what extent a ruler must go so that his state may thrive.

TOW #23- IRB "Freakonomics"

Freakonomics, written by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, well-respected economists known for their unique perspectives, divide the book into different chapters. The one called "Why Do Drug Dealers Still live with Their Moms?" illustrates the "conventional wisdom" where experts and journalists often fabricate information and knowledge intentionally for their self-interest and convenience. Their purpose in writing the essay is to inform people of how facts can sometimes be tainted with one's selfish motives, and how it leads to misconception. By doing so, their audience, who are regular citizens with no expertise, is able to learn the true statistics. They mix a balance of logic and analogy to effectively accomplish their goals. When providing an example of conventional wisdom, they write, "In the early 1980...Mitch Snyder took to saying that there were about 3 million homeless Americas... More than 1 of every 100 people were homeless? That sure seemed high, but...well, the expert said it...Ultimately, when Snyder was pressed on his figure of 3 million homeless, he admitted that it was a fabrication" (90). This informally presented incident is very familiar; we often hear bizarre statistics that claim similar "fact." However, this is the same logical process that most people go through. First they are in disbelief, but then soon give in to the expertise, simply because we assume they have more knowledge over us. The two authors clearly show a flaw in this logic that we misuse every day. Also, when talking about the story of Sudhir Venkatesh, who goes in to live with drug gangs, he uses an analogy to explain why many drug dealers who merely earn $3.30 choose to stay in their depressing situation. It is said that they are likely to be arrested about 5.9 times, and has a 1 in 4 chance of being killed in the four year period. For their main audience, who are unlikely to understand the situation in the slums, it is hard to understand why they are paying money to stay in such business. However, they explain that it is "for the same reason that a pretty Wisconsin farm girl moves to Hollywood. For the same reason that a high-school quarterback wakes up at 5 a.m. to life weights." The dealers are aiming to earn $100,000 like their leader does and rise up the social ladder. In addition, their lack of education and job availability forces them to turn to these drug dealing jobs. With their compelling stories and thorough explanations, they accomplish their goals for writing this chapter.

TOW #22- Visual Text

The poster known as "Rosie the Riveter" has been utilized in the 1940s during World War II, during the feminist movement. Flexing her muscles, the woman in the picture is tough and strong, a combination that was unusual in the 1940s when this poster was made. Yet, through its depiction of a resilient woman and its usage of four simple words "We Can Do It!" the poster accomplishes its purpose of rallying the war spirit while motivating women to join the work force. However, this poster's power does not simply stop after World War II; even today, the poster illustrates the power women have, leading to a battle for gender equality along with motivating and encouraging women of today.

The depiction of a strong woman is one that differs from the idea that women are inferior and weaker than men; thus, this shocking, drastically different portrayal of a woman encouraged women to take a more active role in society. During World War II, many women joined the work force and took the jobs of the men who were at war. With an increase in employed women, the poster shows that women loved the depiction of an independent, tough woman. In addition, the color scheme of the depiction is red, white, and blue, reflecting a patriotic attitude that the woman should have: they are doing work and labor for the good of their country. Lastly, the facial expression and the hairstyle of the woman shows that the woman depicted in the poster does not agree with the idea that women are weak. The bandana shows a hairstyle that, rather than being meant for aesthetic reasons, is practical and suits the job. The facial expression of the woman is determined, guiding women viewers to imagine themselves as the female shown in the poster.