Priest1

Antonio Priest Professor Bolton ENG 101 September 30, 2013 Intelligence This Intelligence That

Intelligence gets looked at in different ways on a daily basis rather its inside of a school or outside of school in the streets or even in the media. A lot of people of people find wordy essays or in depth conversations as boring or just to much while some praise the art of intellectualism. Many argue that intelligence is a bad thing and looked down upon and quite possibly should be more universal. Authors Gerald Graff and Grant Penrod discuss intelligence in their articles. Penrods article AntiIntellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids argues the opinion that intelligence is frown upon, and that kids get ridiculed for being intelligent meanwhile Graffs article Hidden Intellectualism in which he discusses his personal story regarding intelligence and how it shouldnt just be all about book smarts. Both Graff and Penrod provide interesting claims and adequate reasoning, but Graffs essay use of Logos compared to Penrods arguable position, and pathos would leave Graffs essay is to be more effective.

Graff appealed to the readers rhetorically using Logos in Hidden Intellectualism. He uses Logos early on in the essay by saying I offer my own adolescent experience as a case in point. Until I entered college, I hated books and cared only for sports. The only reading I cared to do or could do was sports magazines, on which I became hooked, becoming a regular reader of Sports Magazine in the late forties, Sports Illustrated

Priest2 when it began publishing in 1954, and the annual magazine guides to professional baseball, football, and basketball.(199) Graff use of logos was to possibly connect with readers by starting out with his story surrounding his experiences with intelligence. Graffs use of sports magazines, and actual sports goes along properly with his actual essay argument. Graff used a few fallacies in this essay such as hillbilly whites who had recently fled post war joblessness in the South and Appalachia.(200) Also, Graff said things such as clean cut boys and calling a few of the people in his neighbourhood hoods. Although, Graff and Penrod had strong views toward the subject matter they both used different approaches. To describe others views on intelligence Penrod would use fallacies and pathos such as Regardless of the causes of anti-intellectualism, the effects are clear and devastating; Society looks down on those individuals who help it to progress (757). Penrods strength in his essay was announcing his stance and a clear and arguable. Penrod used quotes from other anti-intellectuals to help with his arguments like Man how I hate nerdsif I ever had a Tommy gun with meI would most probably blow each one of their heads off (754). He also described some of the things that were said in regards to some of the intelligent people as extremism. With words like extremism and constant quotes from people that called intellectuals things like geek or nerd you can tell that he took a more perturbed stance when composing this text. The word usage and quotes alone would possibly get anyone whos been belittled for being too intelligent up in arms, so the argument came across quite clear. Penrod also talked about (noted dropouts) who are the celebrities who found fame or higher position in the world without higher education or any drive toward intelligence (755). Much like Penrod, Graff had an argument and a stance, but it didnt come across as strongly as Penrods did. Graff seemed more laid back towards the subject matter compared to Penrods up in arms stance. In the End Graff wrote Give me the student anytime who writes a sharply argued, sociologically acute

Priest3 analysis of an issue in Source over the student who writes a life-less explication of Hamlet or Socrates Apology (205). Clear position, but a lot of times passive stances or approach tend to get took lightly. Graff mentioned media in his argument where as Penrod talked about celebrities like Christina Aguilera, Kid Rock, LL Cool j, and Sammy Sosa (755). Graff discussed his interests in more mainstream magazines such as Sports Illustrated, Vogue, and The Source. The argument was maybe the people that arent of the wordy intellectuals would have a better chance writing about something that they know such as sports or magazines. The approach was quite understandable but yet the stance was still laid back in comparison to Penrod when discussing media. In Conclusion, Penrods article Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids and Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism may hold valid points in the direction theyre going in but Graffs article was more effective due to his use of Logos and Pathos. Penrods clear arguable position leaves something to be looked at, but just wasnt enough. Graffs articles are possibly for the everyday person that may sit in a class bored or looks at their essay assignment in discuss due to it being uninteresting; Penrods article would be more driven towards the nerd that has gotten ridiculed before for his/her love for out of the ordinary activity or reading.

Work Cited Penrod, Grant. Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings and Handbook. 3rd ed. Ed. Marilyn Moller. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2013. 754-757. Print. Graff, Gerald Hidden Intellectualism. They Say I Say. 2nd ed. ED. Gerald Graff, and Cathy Birkenstein. New York: Norton, 2010. 198-205. Print

Priest4