Considering Genre

G., Alberto. "MPj04394190000[1]".  1/22/2006 via flickr. Attribution 2.0 Generic

In this post I'll be thinking about the genre I choose for project one.

1. I'm choosing to do a Quick Reference Guide, because I think this will be a good way for me to familiarize myself with the new genres in a way that isn't too unfamiliar or overly ambitious for a first project.

2. I would like to use lots of quick but detailed summaries of events with graphs and images from reputable sources. In this debate statistics are important, so I think including these things will be meaningful and helpful to the readers.

3. I'm a little concerned that with the nature of this topic it will be easy to veer away from my intended major of psychology and psychiatry, but it is very difficult to find a modern debate about mental health so I have to be extra careful to stay on topic. I'm anticipating a bigger time crunch because I've taken on more socially and academically this semester so I'll have to be careful to budget my time.

Cluster of Stakeholders

My mind map can be found here!

I used a different color for each stakeholder, and continued down the line with their bias, what they stood to gain and lose, etc. based on a change in legislation for either gun control or, to remain in the scope of my major, mental health resources.

Evaluation of General Sources

Mizunoryu. "Silhouette Gun". 12/18/2006 via Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.

Here I'll be evaluating the sources I've found that pertain to the social debate I've chosen, whether mental illness plays a more important role in the recent rise in mass shootings than the laws (or lack thereof) that currently surround possession of guns. My sources can be found here and here. 

Both of the URLs of my sources end in .com, which technically signifies a commercial intent but over time has diminished in meaning. Additionally, both websites are news sources.

I can identify authors of both of my sources. The author of my first source has a Ph.D. in Philosophy and has written for many online news sources as well as edited and co-edited several books in the field of Philosophy.
The author of my second source is a third year law student, who serves as editor in chief of Harvard Law Record.

Both of my sources were last updated in February of 2013, well after the epidemic of mass shootings began (including Sandy Hook) but still without the information of the past few years. They contain working links to sources that back up their claims on statistics.

My first source seems to promote a philosophy, the author almost argues with himself as he weighs both sides of the debate. He considers both sides carefully before deciding that "people kill people" is a fallacy. My second source however seems opinionated- he does back his argument up with valid sources and statistics, but he has a definite stance from the beginning.

Neither of these sources contain graphics.

These sources are biased I feel, the second more so than the first, but they both contain links to websites with facts and statistics that verify the claims and references to past events that they make.

As I've mentioned before, both sources contain links to verify references they make. I've clicked the links and they all lead to valid and reliable sources.

In conclusion, these sources will obviously not be the only ones that I use because of their bias, but the authors seem credible enough to openly think on the topic with validity.

Reddit and What I Found There

AJC. "Reddit Alien". 11/16/2012 via flickr.  ShareAlike 2.0 Generic.

In this post I'll be discussing my findings on Reddit threads in the field of psychiatry.

1. On these threads, no one seems to be arguing but they are engaging in a meaningful discussion. There are lots of topics- one of the threads asks what is the most meaningful thing a patient has ever said to a psychiatrist or vice versa. There are some very deep entries on that thread that I find fascinating. On another thread, people discuss different psychological oddities within themselves and the process of becoming a psychiatrist. It's a very broad spectrum for anything within the field really.

2. The threads I mentioned above can be found here and here, although I found the latter to be the most profound. This is the thread where psychiatrists and patients listed the most insightful things they had been told. I love this because it's just who I am. I think the human mind is fascinating. I think there is so much we don't know. And I think the way humans behave speaks volumes about how our minds work, which differentiates from person to person. I just love learning and thinking about human behavior and even the disorders that come along with it. My only explanation for why I love this subject matter is that I just love it.

3. The reddit threads were deeper and more profound than I expected. Again, I came away from it wanting to know more and do more with the subject matter. I didn't think there would be discussion of specific people with mental and personality disorders that posters had come across in their lives, but there was and again, I found it fascinating.

Evaluation of News Magazine Stories

Niaz. "File:Debate Logo.svg". 1/11/08 via Wikipedia.  Free Documentation License.

In this post I'm going to evaluate the debates as they pertain to psychiatry in articles that I've found in Time and The Nation online magazines.

1. Not to play the Trump card (ha) again, but I think this first debate is really quite important- whether or not Donald Trump fits the psychological stencil of a narcissist. It is said that he both does and does not. He lies to make himself seem impressive and tolerates criticism very poorly, immediately resorting to personal insults. But at the same time, your textbook narcissist will have a charm, a charisma that draws you in before they reveal the person they really are. But Trump has no such appeal. He struts about, brazenly insulting anyone and anything he finds the least bit distasteful (which I've already discussed here) without any attempt at fooling anyone into thinking that he's an honorable person. He never starts a debate, or anything for that matter, with humility. Not only this, but no doctor has every diagnosed him, although some psychiatrists claim they have diagnosed him with narcissistic personality disorder without having to meet him. There are two schools of thought here.

The second article argues that raising the minimum wage would raise average happiness levels in all of america. Senator Barbara Lee, who is also a psychiatric social worker, argues that poverty leads to premature deaths, poor academic performance, and a stigma surrounding those who rely on the help of the government. Additionally, people growing up in poverty are more susceptible to mental illnesses than others, studies show. This argument surrounds the paper of Adam Smith, who made the same points regarding poverty as Senator Lee. The counterargument here of course is that correlation does not imply causation and raising the minimum wage may still do nothing.

2. I would say that there are no sympathetic people in the first story, as it centers around Trump. The closest thing that I can find to sympathy is the opinion of those psychiatrists who think he fits the narcissist bill, I agree with them but sympathy is not the word I would use.

In the second story the most sympathetic people are those in question, living in poverty. They evoke sympathy from me because I too believe that the minimum wage is far too low and I know they are living in terrible conditions that humans shouldn't be in, especially if they are working hard.

3. The least sympathetic character in the first article is without a doubt Trump. I have several reasons for no being able to sympathize with him. Firstly the obvious- he's obscenely rich, racist, sexist, and seemingly without the understanding that the presidential race is not a reality television show. But that's not all. I've had the unfortunate experience of knowing a narcissist and with that comes the knowledge that depending on the severity of their personality disorder, they destroy everything and everyone they get close to. Trump would make a dangerous leader because he has a large yet very fragile ego- it's only a matter of time before the leader of another country insults him and he will start World War Three. And finally, Trump has so much money and property that his life is as good as it's going to get, there's no reason for him to run for president other than he thinks it's a game. So no, I can't find any sympathy for him.

In the second article, I don't see anyone I can't sympathize with. I don't necessary feel sympathy for any of those arguing for or against Adam Smith's paper, I can see both sides of the argument as correlation does not imply causation although I do think the minimum wage should be raised. I don't disagree with these people, but again, I wouldn't use the word sympathy.

Twitter and What I Found There

ClkerFreeVectorImages. "Twitter Bird". 8/4/14 via pixabay. Creative Commons CC0.

In this post I'll be discussing the feeds of different twitter accounts pertaining to the profession of psychiatry.

1. Many of the feeds seem to be discussing mental health and illness, and the stigma that surrounds it.  They also seem to have an emphasis on help anyone can get to overcome things like addiction, depression, even help parents can get for children with OCD. They also promote talks given by scientists, as most of these feeds come from the psychiatry field of esteemed universities.

2. The two best psychiatry feeds I found can be found here and here. They are feeds for the psychiatry component of Columbia and Yale respectively. I liked these conversations because they talk about the help psychology majors can give to the world and don't sugar coat services that different people from different walks of life may need. Speaking as someone who's mental health has had rougher patches, I can understand the side eye you get when you tell someone that you're going to counseling appointments. I also happen to be an advocate for the idea that mental illness is no different than physical illness and should be treated as such, so I can appreciate what the people and doctors in these feeds are advocating for.

3. What I found was better than what I expected and I've left this research with a greater respect for my desired field. I've realized how open these feeds and people are about the help and resources that they offer, and additionally the intellect that they share through scientific talks and forums. It's reinforced in my mind that the purpose of psychiatry is first and foremost to help people, which feels like a very noble thing to me. I want to be a part of this now more than ever.

Evaluation of New York Times Stories

Haxor, Joe. "File:Nytimes hq.jpg." 12/23/07 via wikimedia commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

Today I'll be evaluating two vastly different articles in both nature and importance. The first is about the brave story of a woman who was shot in the head by her father as an honor killing and survived to act in an Oscar nominated movie where she plays herself in her own story. The second is a list of Donald Trump's twitter insults.

1. The protagonist of the first story is Saba, the 19-year-old Pakistani woman shot in the head by her father because she married her boyfriend against her families wishes. Other important characters include her father, and her uncle who assisted her father in shooting her. Because she is now the main character of a movie she's brought the problem of honor killings to light and saved potential lives. She brings the bravery into this bleak story.

I suppose the second story has a main character although I would hardly call him a protagonist. It's none other than Donald Trump (or maybe his assistant), sitting behind a keyboard yelling at everything and everyone from the United States Government to Amazon to a podium in the oval office. The whole article is a ridiculous testament to the man's hatred for anything he encounters. Additionally, I personally thought this would be hilarious in word cloud form (which I think I was right about) so I turned his insults to current and former presidential candidates into one for my own amusement, which cannot unfortunately be linked due to the nature of the document but I am more than willing to share with anyone who is interested.

2. Our story with Saba takes place in Pakistan, which is a very important detail because the culture there is entirely different. According to the statistic in the article, honor killings take place there every 90 minutes. In the US this is basically unheard of, and I believe that if we as a culture were more aware of the problem, we would have done more to stop it. Saba was very pressured to pardon her father and uncle so they walked free, which is something that never would have happened in the United States.

Donald Trump's insults however take place on Twitter, which I would argue is also important. Although everyone knows who Trump is, on the internet you have a sort of anonymity, and even if your identity is apparent, a detachment from what you are writing. It's not as though Trump is speaking to a large crowd and saying these rude things. Even though that would not be out of character for him, I still think the setting caters to a lack of responsibility.

3. The only disagreement in Saba's story is that her father believes he's done the right thing, and the conflict that arose before Saba pardoned him. Now, there seems to be none but the residual tension from Saba's unwanted marriage. But on a larger scale, there is no disagreement. Saba is seen as a hero, which in my humble opinion is the way it should be.

Technically, there is no disagreement in Trump's story either. Yes, Trump disagrees with just about everything and everyone he sees, but nobody is disagreeing with him. It's just Trump, screaming pointlessly into a faceless void- which is honestly no different than an actual Trump rally.

Course Projects

As far as course projects are concerned, I'm the most nervous about choosing the right formats for the rights projects in a way that works best for me personally. I'm a little intimidated by the specificity aspect, as I've been notoriously vague in the past even when I think I'm being specific, which is frustrating for me.
I'm the most excited to use the public argument format! Although I've been notoriously vague in the past, I also notoriously love to argue my point until my opponent caves. I've been told I would make a good lawyer because of this, so I think I will do well with this topic.
I would like to plan which projects I would like to do with which projects, to make sure that I don't end up with two that don't work well together. I would also like to have all my technical options laid out so that I don't have to scramble to download any software that I might need. This will challenge my time management skills because many of these formats require a process, and since I normally procrastinate this will be a turn of events for me to start the project before a few nights before the due date.
To be perfectly honest I haven't had that much preparation for something like this in my high school english classes because they were primarily analyzation of works, and very little projects or creative formatting, so this will be new to me!
Lastly, I would say that I don't have questions so much directed at the course as I do directed at myself. I need to tell myself how I will plan this out, which formats will be the easiest and hardest for me, and the like.

Reflection
After reading other peers' posts, I feel much better knowing that I'm not the only one with little software editing experience and little experience coming in from high school. I feel much more comfortable knowing that I'm not the only one who doesn't entirely know what's going on as soon as I walk into the class. But the assignment sheets have been very helpful and we will learn and grow together! You can find my comments here and here.

Investigating Genres

In this post I'll be investigating the purpose and effectiveness of the quick reference guide style of writing.
This style usually serves the purpose to inform as thoroughly as possible while still being concise and to the point. This gives people who lack the time and/or attention span to read a long, in-depth article on the situation the opportunity for the same knowledge, more or less.
It's usually found in small articles on the internet, these articles are usually written about the latest trend or viral issue in today's society. This format is really built for that subject matter, as people want to stay current without spending too much time reading up on an issue. This gives them a literal quick guide to the latest debates and happenings around the world.
I would say the audience for this genre is young people, probably those under 35 who want to understand why things are happening, for example the Starbucks red cup controversy. Older people may not care, but young people want to know in case it comes up in conversation with their peers. This genre allows them the knowledge without any large time commitment.
The key features of this genre are small, informative paragraphs with additional summary points and graphics or sometimes embedded videos. These provide quickly readable examples that don't sacrifice the brevity of the article.
Based on this, I would say this genre is a conversation update tool. I say this because most of the topics provided in examples (vaping, Syria and Starbucks) are things that come up in everyday conversation, especially in young people and these articles are an easy thing to read to update one's knowledge. It's an easy way for young people to know what they're talking about.

Reflection:
Upon reading my classmate's post, it became clear that we read some of the parts of the QRG differently. I thought that the general audience was young people, but others seem to think it has a varied audience, or people who care specifically more than others. We did tend to agree that QRGs are found almost exclusively on the internet. I did feel better about my post though, because after reading these I found that my classmates and I agreed on many aspects. You can find my comments here and here!

My Writing Process

Fisher, Rachel. Procrastination. 1/19/11 via flickr. Public Domain Dedication License. 

I consider myself to be a procrastinator. Although I did identify with some of the characteristics of heavy revisers, such as the act of writing allowing me to lay my ideas out more clearly, I am not as careful as heavy revisers seem to be. I wait too long to begin an assignment and thus multiple drafts are sacrificed and I end up trying my best to write a first or second draft that looks polished enough to be final.
As I mentioned before, I do think that my traits contain some of that of the heavy reviser, but the fact that I wait so long outweighs my borderline characteristics and places me in the procrastination category.
I think this style has more weaknesses than strengths as the sacrificing of drafts is also a sacrifice of quality and changes that I could have made. I do consider myself to be a relatively strong writer so I have had success with this method grade-wise, but I would have done better if this I had a different style of writing. I also feel that although some people work well under pressure, I don't necessarily share that trait and would most likely do better with another style.
It would most definitely say that a different approach would be beneficial to me, because then I would be able to write more drafts and think more carefully about what I want to say. The work that I would have produced would be higher quality and more thought out.