Perry's Scheme & Project II

Writing an argument is different from speaking an argument. When writing, you're trying to win by persuading the readers that you have valid points and that those points are better suited for a certain situation. You do that by appealing to the readers using Ethos, Pathos and Logos and by proving that you understand the opposing views. When writing an argument, you have to be two people. First, you have to be yourself so you can express your views and your side of the argument. Second, you have to be your opponent so you can better persuade your readers to accept your views. You have to literally argue with yourself. Writing is also less personal.
When speaking an argument, you don't have to be two people. Unless you're giving a speech about an issue, you will have an opponent to argue with. It's more personal because you can look your opponent in the eye when you're arguing. You're speaking to someone and you're having a conversation. You can also tell how you're doing by observing your opponent's facial expressions and body language. But you have to be able to work under pressure when speaking an argument. You never know what your opponent might do.
But whether you're speaking or writing an argument, you're trying to appeal to your audience and get them to take your side on a certain issue. You're persuading them and convincing them that your views and ideas are the better ones.

I don't think I stand on just one part of the spectrum of Perry's Scheme. I might be at the "Pre-Commitment" stage because I see the necessity of making choices and committing to something but I don't always commit. I tend to do the assignment that appeals to me most and sounds most interesting. And I tend to avoid and procrastinate on the subjects that I have no interest in or that I find tedious and annoying. That is not the case for this class. I find this class very interesting and project II was fun. The topic I chose was interesting and that motivated me to write. It's so much better than to doing Chemistry homework.

Project III

I am most interested in the first option for project three (Rhetoric in Action). I found it to be the most interesting one because we're asked to pick a significant topic and argue for its significance and for social change. It's very personal and that helps with my arguments. I find it easier to argue about something that I truly care about rather than a random topic. I like it because this essay is about changing how people think and making a difference. I also chose the first option because it had a very in depth description of what the project is about. The other two were kind of confusing.

I like the essay portion of this project but I'm not so excited about the "action" part because in order to act on my suggestions, I would have to pick a topic that I definitely support. That makes the topic choosing portion more difficult. But it shouldn't be too difficult because there are thousands of topics to choose from.