My last post was about free information and the way a few
websites attempted to convince the audience of their side. Should we trust free
information? Or is this a way of luring the innocent into bear traps?
To start, we must ask a few questions:
1. What is the source arguing?
2. How is the author arguing his point?
3. Can I trust the source?
For the first question, both sources fall into two basic
categories: supporting the point or opposing the point. As for the second
question, freeinfosociety.com has multiple authors with multiple ideas, but
they are all driven by the same goal: Information is meant to be shared, and
they will do what they can to make skeptics see this goal. Their rhetorical
devices are much harder to find because it isn’t a formal argument, but they’re
there. The website itself allows the viewers to become part of an “everyman”
identity (the everyman being the quintessential human being that represents the
triumphs and struggles of the common people).
Because of these criteria, both sources can be trusted,
especially with the format and structure of their arguments. Either one shows
us new things about the same topic, and illustrates its points in a way that’s easy
to understand. There’s so much to learn out in the world that nothing we learn
is ever a waste, but rather just a tiny part of our identities. Sources like
these invite us to continue our education, long after high school is over.
Free or not free, I couldn’t ask for a better education from
both of these sources, because they have challenged me and expanded my views in
every way possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment