Smart Mobs

Tuesday in class we spoke about this ideal of the smart mob and the implications that it has for our society. Technology has greatly transformed our society and the general flow of knowledge within different circles of life. The Internet and text messaging have allowed us to transfer large quantities of information to great numbers of different individuals within a matter of seconds. A friend of mine is living in Australia and it is amazing how we can Skype with each other with very little noticeable delay.

The advancement of knowledge were once a mostly individual effort. Sure there was some collaboration between scientist and student/apprentice but most of the great discoveries were made by individual who dedicated there lives to research a particular topic. Today devices such as the Internet have allowed collaboration and the transfer of information between many individuals working concurrently on a given project. Information can be shared around the world in just a few seconds where in days gone by it could have taken months or even years to receive correspondence.

The smart mob dynamic appears to improve the overall accuracy of the facts being presented. While medias such as Wikipedia do allow for the possibility of sabotage, most users I believe hope to aid in increasing the accuracy of the work. After all what we perceive as scientific fact are merely the observations of others before us that we have agreed to believe. Over time we have modified them to improve upon the accuracy of most of these concepts there by creating a more perfect fit model due to various observations and opinions. The smart mob, thanks to technology, has merely expedited this process.

Group Projects

Today in class we talked about working in groups and working on group projects. We talked about the different roles that are often present within groups such as the controller, passive aggressive, mute, etc. I thought that these stereotypes were quite typical and began to think about what role I usually played in group settings.

I would characterize myself as either the controller or the mute guy depending on the situation. I tend to stay in the background as long as someone has asserted themselves as the leader and don't offer much input as long as I believe that the project is progressing in the appropriate direction. I would rather not cause conflict or take charge unless it is absolutely necessary for the completion of the project.

I don't believe this approach is the best but I believe that it does keep the group more focused at times without one more person adding to the mindless chatter within the group. I typically try to avoid being the passive aggressive or pseudo productive types by not over-promising and under-delivering or by criticizing others work when I have made no other comments beforehand.

Group projects are always interesting especially if you get stuck with the slacker, but being able to identify the strengths and roles of each member makes for a much better experience.

Technically Humanistic

Carolyn Miller argues for the humanistic value of Technical Writing in her essay, "A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing. She describes the necessary ability for professionals such as scientist and engineers to be able to effectively communicate through their writing. More importantly she speaks of the importance for the writings of these individuals to take on a more rhetorical or persuasive context. Though most scientific writing is meant strictly to be factual and unbiased, all scientist and engineers must obtain good persuasive writing skills if they hope to maintain a good living.

Most projects completed by either scientist, engineers, or the like in some shape or form require the writing of proposals and other presentations. Being an effective writer can make the difference between getting a job, grant, or other source of funding. The ability to persuade people who may have little or no technical background that your project is the best and to convince them that you have the necessary skill to complete the task are great assets.

I also agree with her intro and conclusion remarks that technical writing should be allowed to fill a humanities requirement for the technically minded students. A well rounded education is an asset, but if more time was dedicated to the more relevant areas of writing where the engineer or scientist could master the skills necessary for communal communication the educational experience would be more effective. I believe that this course would be more effective if taken at the freshman or sophomore level at the latest.

Why do we need instructions?

Instructions are that little bit of information included at the bottom of the box with some assembly required, or the words in that little book in the glove box of your car that no one ever looks at before they get behind the wheel before they go riding down the road trying to find the switch for the headlights in the dark. Instructions come in many forms and describe processes as simple as building a Lego building to assembling the space station. Instructions are the grossly ignored documents that could potentially save you from a severe headache or even death if they are actually read and observed.

However, many times poor instructions can often be more of a hindrance than a help. For instance, I am sure we can all think of a friend who is terrible at giving directions. They couldn't find their way out of a wet paper bag with a hole in it. You can probably also think of a time where you tried to assemble a product using the hieroglyphic descriptions provided by a company in Taiwan. Needless to say these types of instructions can quickly frustrate the user and lead to a lack of performance.

The author of a set of instructions needs to take great care to ensure that the instructions he writes can be easily understood. A carefully written set of instructions is difficult to find especially for simple tasks. So if your like me, pull out all of the pieces, throw away the directions, and start putting the thing together. You'll either invent something new or figure out how the thing is supposed to be assembled, and when you get stuck take it apart and start over (maybe this time with the directions). Reading the directions may however prevent headaches and personal injury. The choice is up to you!

The Situation

As Lloyd Bitzer states in "The Rhetorical Situation", rhetoric is often formed in the response to a situation. This situation can take many forms from the extreme of a presidential response to a terrorist attack or natural disaster, to a coaches pep talk before the big game, to simply a response to a question or problem. These situations vary tremendously in magnitude however each have one thing in common; they demand a rhetorical response.

The rhetoric of a leaders response to a crisis greatly contributes to public perception of the leader. For instance, even though President George W. Bush was not the most eloquent speaker his response immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks prompted a sense of action in the American people to rally behind the cause. Conversely, though President Barack Obama has the eloquent speaking skills of a great rhetorician, his public perception greatly declined with his response to the recent Gulf oil spill. Thus we can see that rhetoric is not purely speaking, but that rhetoric is directly linked to the situation. They are inseparable.

Bitzer writes that the situation is composed of 3 main part, the exigence, the audience, and the constraints. Considering the two examples above the exigence is the instance that demands a response, specifically, the terrorist attacks and the Gulf oil spill disaster. The audience however is relatively the same for both situations as it comprises the American population. Finally, the constraints differ from situation to situation caused by the type of event and who is primarily effected. I agree with him that these three parts all serve an important purpose.  The rhetorician must be able to navigate these parts of the situation effectively if the audience is to appreciate or accept the value of his words.