my internal evaluation

Internal Evaluation

Elliott Law Dr.Horton

English 1101 1 December 2011

My Internal Evaluation

Table of Contents

Analytical Cover Letter…………………………………………………1 Quality Comparison…………………………………………………(4-8) Least Successful Article Response………………………….……4

Most Successful Article Response…………………………….…6

“What’s the difference” Paragraph………………………….…..8

Revision Samples…………………………………………………(9-24)

Least Successful Article Response (with mark up)………….….9

Least Successful Article Response (final)………………….….12

Most Successful Article Response (with mark up)……….…..14

Most Successful Article Response (final)………………….…16

Most Successful Article Response (with mark up)…………..18

Most Successful Article Response (final)………………….…24

1

December 5, 2011 Matthew R. Horton, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of English Gainesville State College Oconee Campus 313b Oconee Classroom 1201 Bishop Farm Parkway Watkinsville GA, 30677 Dear Dr. Horton, My name is Elliott Law I am a freshman here at Gainesville State College. This semester at Gainesville state was my first real taste of the college experience. Although I experienced some culture shock when I first got here I believe I have adjusted now. Looking back on my first semester there are things I would have done differently and some things I would do the same when I first got to college, but looking back at my ability as a writer I believe I have made a great deal of improvement not only as a writer but as a thinker as well. To show how I changed though out this semester I set up a portfolio of my some of my most successful work this semester as a writer, as well as some of my least successful work. Though out this portfolio you will see how I transitioned into the writer I am today. Which is a deeper thinker, a more fluid writer, and much more capable of explaining my ideas to others. By channeling my writing through real life experiences that others can relate to. My transition was also achieved by learning how to be more aware of grammatical errors that could affect greatly effect the message I am trying to portray. Likewise the feat of learning how to revise my work more proficiently is also substantial. I must insist that you’re read my portfolio, in order to get a concrete idea of the improvement I am speaking of. Through my portfolio you will see my improvement first hand, and see how my capability of a writer enhanced from an English 1101 writer to a English 1102 level. Throughout the semester as a teacher you have inspired me to look outside the box when using my critical thinking skills. This skill is hard taught but opens a new world of opportunity for an aspiring writer like myself. This portfolio is important to me and will hopefully show you how much I have improved and how hard I have worked to be able to view the world though a lens. My least successful article response of the semester was my first one which was “Limitlessness is a Fantasy.” The article explored how in society today humans neglect the fact that we are limited creatures, and that there is a limited supply of resources on earth. Nonetheless we still use these resources greedily and expect someone, like a scientist, to come up to a solution to our problems when we run out of raw materials. The greatest challenge I faced when writing this article response the first time was organization of thoughts and not realizing the directions. It the first draft of this article I believe I overthought what I was trying to say which lead to a article response that seemed to be unclear. I based the majority of my article response the first time on analogies that are difficult for even me to understand when looking back on it. I seemed to also beat around the point a lot when I should have just exposed it so it would be clear to readers. When revising my work the most challenging thing was figuring out what I really wanted to say and making it clear so that readers do not have to make assumptions. It was difficult for me to

2

find what I wanted to say though my first article response. Through my revisions I believe I found the true meaning of what the article was saying and what I pulled from the article as a writer. I overcame my challenges by basically rewriting the majority of the article response. Though my revisions I found a deeper meaning to the article, which is the importance of seeking answers for you instead of waiting for an answer, and what being proactive might entail for the world. My most successful article response thought out the semester was “Concrete Beliefs” which was an article about “The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science.” I found it difficult at first to notice anything that was really “wrong” with this article response. So I decided to go back to the original article to see if I had missed anything which was substantial. One thing I noticed right of the bat was that my first sentence did not have the full P.O.V. in it. So I rewrote the sentence so the article response would start out with the theme of the original article. When re-reading the article I noticed something that I felt was important which I did not notice before. I realized that the cultural significance could be linked to the acceptance of other human beings and their personal views. This made me think about how much more peaceful the world would be if everyone accepted everyone else’s ideas instead of trying to convert them. I believe I was successful in my rewrite in getting my point across exactly the way I wanted to. I wanted readers to see the importance of this article and challenged them to picture what the world might be like if people were more accepting. In my most successful article essay I wrote about how a smart mans arrogance lead to his destruction. I used real life examples in this essay which made it personal to me. This article essay was successful because I used real life examples that people might be able to relate to. The essay also flowed nicely. Going back to the article essay I made changes that would allow the essay to read easier and I also took out descriptions that did not make sense. There are things in my article essay that I like and things I still want to change. I believe that over all I did get my point across to readers so they can understand the destructive powers of feeling superior to others. I believe that though my work in this portfolio you will see I am capable of great work. I believe that my work in this portfolio is low B work. You will be able to see my progression throughout the semester and how at the beginning of the year my critical thinking ideas were intelligent but very unorganized; they also only seemed to skim the surface and not dive deep into themes and ideas. Seeing this progression for yourself will allow you to see why I deserve a B. My editing skills are better than in the beginning of the semester and so are my thinking skills. I believe my revisions will show this. I really do believe I have become a much stronger writer. I knew how to question ideas before but not in an organized manner, this class has inspired me to do something I actually like to do which is writing and I believe my work shows that. When you look at my original least successful article response you will see a lot of ideas that only seem to skim the surface. These ideas have no real value behind them. Though my rewrite of this article response you can see real meaning behind my words, meaning I believe will be valuable to the masses. I only believe this is B work because I think as a writer you should always be pushing yourself to be better and to learn. If I were to get a 100 percent that would mean I am I perfect writer and

3

would have nothing to motivate me, this is another reason I believe I should receive a B. In the future I plan to continue to be motivated and to learn from previous mistakes. In the future I wish to pressure a career in writing whether it be movies, books, or journalism. I wish to always be improving and the only way to do that is to never be completely satisfied with your work. Sincerely,

XÄÄ|Éàà _tã

4

Limitlessness is a Fantasy:

The article Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No Limits by Wendell Berry describes how

today’s society has grown to believe we are “Limitless.” In the sense that we as humans only

have one earth, what is in it, nothing else. Like an artist with one canvas and one pencil. We

believe what we chose to do with that space is limitless. But somewhere in the middle of an

elaborate work of art we get lost in the detail and complexity of the drawing. Soon forgetting that

out pencil is dwindling and out space is running out. He explains in the article that the

limitlessness our society perceives is merely a fantasy and we are on a straight path to self-

destruction. As a result of humans being ignorant and wasteful, the problems we are creating

will soon catch up with the human race if they have not already. Wendell goes on to talk about

the massive overuse of fossil fuels and the reluctance of our society to change and find

alternative forms of energy. Human ignorance has caused us to believe that there is a limitless

about of fossil fuels and that “if” they were to run out some genius would have another plan for

limitless energy. Unfortunately that is not how the world really works once we run out of

something, like fossil fuels we are stuck. Just like the artist when his pencil runs out, and he

similar to all mankind will be stuck in the middle of an elaborate drawling with no other option

and nowhere to turn. Which Wendell believes will ultimately be mankind’s downfall.

Wendell’s point of view that humans are limited, but common culture and ignorance has

leaded us to believe we are superior limitless beings. This brings me to think about how we as a

society refuse to see our limits especially with drugs and alcohol. In a particular case I have a

longtime friend whose father is an extreme alcoholic. He is a sixty year old Vietnam veteran

who has been in and out of rehab for many years. He has also been drinking since he was

fourteen years old. When he as forty he had a son a daughter and a wife. His family caused him

5

to hide his drinking from them for many years causing his problem to get worse. After his

family recognized what he was doing he was sent to rehab and was evaluated by a doctor. The

doctor told him that if he continued to drink like this he would not live for another year. His liver

was destroyed form all the years of drinking extremely heavily. Once he returned he was a new

man he talked with his family more and did things with them. He ended up staying sober for two

and a half years, but just recently he began drinking again. I was at the house that day when he

came down the stairs so intoxicated he couldn’t even complete a sentence or walk. I remember

how upset my friend and his family were that he was drinking again. Did he not care about them

or living? Ever since that day he has been drinking still. He has torn his family apart and driven

them away. Jim was ignorant with his drinking and refused to see any limits. He believed he

had limitless time, but unfortunately time is the most limited resource of all for humans. Jim’s

refusal to see limits ultimately destroyed his world which was his family; and sadly will bring

about the end of himself as well as his time on this earth.

6

Most successful Concrete Beliefs Mooney, Chris. “The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science.” Mother Jones. Mother Jones

and the Foundation for National Progress, June 2011.http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney. 08 November 2011.

In the article “The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science,” written by Chris Mooney

he explores the human mind to reveal why people don’t believe real facts that are presented to

us. Mooney also reveals how humans pre-existing beliefs will determine if they decide to believe

something or not. One quote by Mooney that explains this is “you don't lead with the facts in

order to convince. You lead with the values—so as to give the facts a fighting chance.” This

quote reveals the authors point of view throughout this piece. Mooney believes that it is not fact

and reason that drives humans to believe something but our underlying values. Mooney believes

we use these values, to determine what facts we want to believe. If a fact doesn’t line up of aid

our original views we will choose not to believe it. Mooney quotes at one point in the article, “A

MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns

away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to

see your point."

Mooney’s point of view throughout the article is a very interesting and entraining one.

His point of view makes logical sense though, and is important to look at to get an understanding

of why people seem to “stick to their guns” on what they believe. Those men are not driven by

logic, but by values. Values that they must convince themselves and others are true. This is

culturally significant because it shows the logic behind why people won’t believe logic. Once

people have an idea that they have choose to believe, even when presented clear evidence, their

7

beliefs will cloud their judgment and they will only hear what they want to hear. This point of

view reveals to me that is nearly impossible to change someone else’s belief even with facts and

evidence. It should be important to society because it shows why people are so hard to convince,

and why we should not push are own belief on others. This way of looking at the situation allows

me to be more accepting of others beliefs, because no matter how hard we try if a person

believes something deep down our statements mean nothing.

8

What’s the Difference?

My most successful article response of the semester was based of the article “The Science

of Why We Don’t Believe Science” this article dealt with why so many people do not believe

factual information. For my article response I received an eight out of ten. The first paragraph

of my response to this article I wrote about the author’s point of view, and gave quotes from the

article to show readers what his point of view was. In my second paragraph I looked at the

authors point of view and tried to explain why it was culturally significant I came to the

conclusion that it was culturally significant because it shows readers that we can rarely change

others beliefs so why try, it is less controversial just to accept them.

In my least successful article response based of “Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No

Limits” which dealt with the belief that our society is arrogant and believes that someone else

will always find an answer. The first paragraph I described what I though the author was saying

instead of his point of view, and in the next paragraph I linked the cultural significance to a

closes friend of mines alcoholic father. I received a five out of ten for this article response.

The difference between both of these article responses is the quality of work and the

organization of ideas. The least successful had meaning but it failed to explain the author’s point

of view or the real cultural significance, while the most successful accomplished both of these

feats. I also did not follow directions on my least successful article response. I would end up not

starting my first paragraph with the point of view of the author, and leaving out the citation at the

beginning of my response. These were careless mistakes that I made throughout the semester.

My least successful article response lacked many of the attributes my most successful article

response had. A lot of the success I had on the most successful article response came strictly

from following directions

9

Limitlessness is a Fantasy: Berry, Wendell. "Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No Limits." Harpers Magazine. The Harpers Magazine Foundation, May 2008. Web. 18 August 2011.

The article “Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No Limits” by Wendell Berry, whose point

of view is that today our society is under the false impression that we have unlimited resources.

He blames this delusion that our society has on the over confidence of the American people that

believe “the American Way of Life will prove somehow indestructible.” He also supports his

point of view by explaining that humans consider themselves superior to other creatures. We

consider ourselves “limitless animals,” which Berry describes as a godly trait. describes how

today’s society has grown to believe we are “Limitless.” In the sense that we as humans only

have one earth, what is in it, nothing else. Like an artist with one canvas and one pencil. We

believe what we chose to do with that space is limitless. But somewhere in the middle of an

elaborate work of art we get lost in the detail and complexity of the drawing. Soon forgetting that

out pencil is dwindling and out space is running out. He explains “we have obscured the issue

by refusing to see that limitlessness is a godly trait.”in the article that the limitlessness our

society perceives is merely a fantasy and we are on a straight path to self-destruction. As a result

of humans being arrogantignorant and wasteful, the problems we are creating will soon catch up

with the human race if they have not already. Wendell goes on to talk about the massive overuse

of fossil fuels and the reluctance of our society to change and find alternative forms of energy.

Human arrogance ignorance has caused societyus to believe that we can consume as much

resources as we wish with no consequencesthere is a limitless about of fossil fuels and that “if”

they were to run out some genius would have another plan for limitless energy. Unfortunately

Formatted

Comment [GSC1]: This citation needs to be in front of all article responses. I did not add this the first time because I was lazy and did not read the directions for article responses

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5",Line spacing: Double

Formatted: Font: (Default) +Body (Times NewRoman)

Comment [e2]: In my first draft of this article response I did not include quotes directly from the passage that supported the authors P.O.V.



Comment [e3]: The first sentence in an article response needs to be the authors point of view. Although I did this before, I made the point of view this time around much more clear and understandable.


Comment [e4]: Although this analogy I had given before makes sense, it has nothing to do with the authors point of view, it is irrelevant.


Comment [e5]: The first time I said “ignorant” but when looking back to the article I understand that the author is saying that people are arrogant. Because we believe we are “higher animals”

Comment [e6]: This seems irrelevant now that I look back on it, because it is not “if” they run out, it is “when”

10

that is not how the world really works once we run out of something, like fossil fuels, we are

stuck. Berry believes that our greedy over consumption of raw materials needs to be realized by

our society in order to ensure the prosperity of mankind. Just like the artist when his pencil runs

out, and he similar to all mankind will be stuck in the middle of an elaborate drawling with no

other option and nowhere to turn. Which Wendell believes will ultimately be mankind’s

downfall.

Wendell’s point of view that as humans we are limited is important, because he sheds

light on the fact that our arrogance is the reason for our overconsumption of fossil fuels, which

might lead to our downfall. humans are limited, but common culture and ignorance has leaded us

to believe we are superior limitless beings. This brings me to think about how we as a society

refuse to see our limits especially with drugs and alcoholThe point of view is important to look

at, because it introduces readers to areas we normally do not observe. People are very reliant on

fossil fuels, but not many stop to think about how the world will be after they are gone. Some

questions that are drawn to me after taking a closer look at this topic are “How will we get to

work? Or How will we power all of our electronics we have grown so accustomed too?. His

point of view makes readers think critically about the present and future. We as a society are so

reliant on fossil fuels but we rarely think about what will happen when they are gone. Berry’s

point of view also highlights the fact that humans are arrogant, yet we rarely decide to conquer a

problem on our own. Our society believes that some “smart guy” will come up with a solution to

our problems and we do not need to worry about it ourselves. The importance of understanding

that sometimes we must seek an answer by ourselves is also significant; because without self-

motivated people in the world we would never progress. In a particular case I have a longtime

friend whose father is an extreme alcoholic. He is a sixty year old Vietnam veteran who has

Comment [e7]: Though out this article response I used an analogy of an artist with a pen, this is beating around the bush of the P.O.V. and might be confusing to some. I took a more direct approach to the author P.O.V. this time to give a more precise idea of his P.O.V.

Comment [e8]: Again the first time I wrote this article response I continued to pull in different directions. I am not sure where I was going with this because it does not show any significance to our society, in this case.

Comment [e9]: I added personal thoughts in the revision of this article response, which have a direct link to the authors P.O.V. Allowing readers to see real life scenarios which are important to consider when looking at this issue.

Comment [e10]: I basically re-wrote the majority of this article response so it can be read more fluidly and is not pulling you in two different directions like in the first.

11

been in and out of rehab for many years. He has also been drinking since he was fourteen years

old. When he as forty he had a son a daughter and a wife. His family caused him to hide his

drinking from them for many years causing his problem to get worse. After his family

recognized what he was doing he was sent to rehab and was evaluated by a doctor. The doctor

told him that if he continued to drink like this he would not live for another year. His liver was

destroyed form all the years of drinking extremely heavily. Once he returned he was a new man

he talked with his family more and did things with them. He ended up staying sober for two and

a half years, but just recently he began drinking again. I was at the house that day when he came

down the stairs so intoxicated he couldn’t even complete a sentence or walk. I remember how

upset my friend and his family were that he was drinking again. Did he not care about them or

living? Ever since that day he has been drinking still. He has torn his family apart and driven

them away. Jim was ignorant with his drinking and refused to see any limits. He believed he

had limitless time, but unfortunately time is the most limited resource of all for humans. Jim’s

refusal to see limits ultimately destroyed his world which was his family; and sadly will bring

about the end of himself as well as his time on this earth.

12

Limitlessness is a Fantasy: Berry, Wendell. "Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No Limits." Harpers Magazine. The Harpers

Magazine Foundation, May 2008. Web. 18 August 2011.

The article “Faustian Economics: Hell Hath No Limits” by Wendell Berry, whose point

of view is that today our society is under the false impression that we have unlimited resources.

He blames this delusion that our society has on the over confidence of the American people that

believe “the American Way of Life will prove somehow indestructible.” He also supports his

point of view by explaining that humans consider themselves superior to other creatures. We

consider ourselves “limitless animals,” which Berry describes as a godly trait. He explains “we

have obscured the issue by refusing to see that limitlessness is a godly trait.” As a result of

humans being arrogant and wasteful, the problems we are creating will soon catch up with the

human race if they have not already. Wendell goes on to talk about the massive overuse of fossil

fuels and the reluctance of our society to change and find alternative forms of energy. Human

arrogance has caused society to believe that we can consume as much resources as we wish with

no consequences. Unfortunately that is not how the world really works once we run out of

something, like fossil fuels, we are stuck. Berry believes that our greedy over consumption of

raw materials needs to be realized by our society in order to ensure the prosperity of mankind.

Wendell’s point of view that as humans we are limited is important, because he sheds

light on the fact that our arrogance is the reason for our overconsumption of fossil fuels, which

might lead to our downfall. The point of view is important to look at, because it introduces

readers to areas we normally do not observe. People are very reliant on fossil fuels, but not many

stop to think about how the world will be after they are gone. Some questions that are drawn to

13

me after taking a closer look at this topic are “How will we get to work? Or How will we power

all of our electronics we have grown so accustomed too? His point of view makes readers think

critically about the present and future. We as a society are so reliant on fossil fuels but we rarely

think about what will happen when they are gone. Berry’s point of view also highlights the fact

that humans are arrogant, yet we rarely decide to conquer a problem on our own. Our society

believes that some “smart guy” will come up with a solution to our problems and we do not need

to worry about it ourselves. The importance of understanding that sometimes we must seek an

answer by ourselves is also significant; because without self-motivated people in the world we

would never progress.

14

Most Successful Article Response Concrete Beliefs Mooney, Chris. “The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science.” Mother Jones. Mother Jones



he explores the human mind, to expose why in many cases people reject factual information

because of their pre-existing beliefs. reveal why people don’t believe real facts that are presented

to us. Mooney also reveals how humans pre-existing beliefs will determine if they decide to

believe something or not. In the article Mooney states, One quote by Mooney that explains this is

“Yyou don't lead with the facts in order to convince. You lead with the values—so as to give the

facts a fighting chance.” The quote backs Mooney’s point of view by restating the fact that

when we argue we do so with our morals and values and use only facts that reinstate them. This

quote reveals the authors point of view throughout this piece. Mooney believes that it is not fact

and reason that drives humans to believe something but our underlying values. Mooney believes

we use these values, to determine what facts we want to believe. If a fact doesn’t line up of aid

our original views we will choose not to neglect itto believe it. Mooney quotes at one point in

the article, “A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree

and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and

he fails to see your point." The quote above is very significant to Mooney’s point of view, and is

the foundation to his overall argument.

Formatted

Formatted: Font: Italic

Comment [GSC1]: I combined the first two sentences into one to allow the first sentence to be the complete P.O.V. of the author.

Comment [GSC2]: I changed the wording of the sentence so I would not have to use “this” this is to vague.

Comment [GSC3]: I wanted to re-write the sentence to avoid using “this” I rewrote this sentence to restate the point Mooney was trying to make.

Comment [GSC4]: Before I used “Mooney believes” a lot throughout the article response.

Comment [GSC5]: It is more of a neglect when given facts we do not want to hear. Someone could neglect something and still believe it.

Comment [GSC6]: I changed this sentence because this was the foundation behind Mooneys whole argument. The quote is the most important part of the article in determining his point of view and I wanted readers to see that

15

Mooney’s point of view throughout is culturally significant today because of all the

different opinions out there, whether it is an opinion on politics or on religion. the article is a

very interesting and entraining one. Opinions are everywhere in our society, we cannot get away

from them because everyone has them. The importance of his point of view is that in many cases

these opinions cannot be changed. His point of view makes logical sense though, and is

important to look at to get an understanding of why people seem to “stick to their guns” on what

they believe. Theose men are not driven by logic, but by values. Values that they must convince

themselves and others are true. The article This is culturally significant because it shows the

logic behind why people won’t believe logic. Once people have an idea that they have choose to

believe, even when presented clear evidence, their beliefs will cloud their judgment and they will

only hear what they want to hear. The importance behind the article is being able to realize that

no matter how hard you try to convince someone that something is “true” they will stick to their

pre-existing beliefs. With a new understanding readers can learn to accepts others and their

beliefs, which might lead society to be a more friendly place instead of a battlefield of

conversion.This point of view reveals to me that is nearly impossible to change someone else’s

belief even with facts and evidence. It should be important to society because it shows why

people are so hard to convince, and why we should not push are own belief on others. This way

of looking at the situation allows me to be more accepting of others beliefs, because no matter

how hard we try if a person believes something deep down our statements mean nothing.

Comment [GSC7]: Wanted to give real life examples of where the most extreme opinions lie.

Comment [GSC8]: Having an interesting and entertaining P.O.V. has nothing to do with the cultural significance

Comment [GSC9]: Again I wanted to avoid using “this” in my description.

Comment [GSC10]: I went back to the article and then decided that the real cultural significance in the article comes from being able to accept others for who they are, and the possibility that the new acceptance that could be created though not trying to change what others think could lead to a more peaceful and more productive society

16

Most Successful Article Response Concrete Beliefs Mooney, Chris. “The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science.” Mother Jones. Mother Jones



he explores the human mind, to expose why in many cases people reject factual information

because of their pre-existing beliefs. In the article Mooney states, “You don't lead with the facts

in order to convince. You lead with the values—so as to give the facts a fighting chance.” The

quote backs Mooney’s point of view by restating the fact that when we argue we do so with our

morals and values and use only facts that reinstate them. If a fact doesn’t line up of aid our

original views we will choose not to neglect it. Mooney quotes at one point in the article, “A

MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns

away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to

see your point." The quote above is very significant to Mooney’s point of view, and is the

foundation to his overall argument.

Mooney’s point of view throughout is culturally significant today because of all the

different opinions out there, whether it is an opinion on politics or on religion. Opinions are

everywhere in our society, we cannot get away from them because everyone has them. The

importance of his point of view is that in many cases these opinions cannot be changed. These

men are not driven by logic, but by values. Values that they must convince themselves and others

are true. The article shows the logic behind why people won’t believe logic. Once people have

an idea that they have choose to believe, even when presented clear evidence, their beliefs will

17

cloud their judgment and they will only hear what they want to hear. The importance behind the

article is being able to realize that no matter how hard you try to convince someone that

something is “true” they will stick to their pre-existing beliefs. With a new understanding readers

can learn to accepts others and their beliefs, which might lead society to be a more friendly place

instead of a battlefield of conversion.

Law 18

18

Elliott Law

Coach Horton

English 1101

17 September 2011

The Danger of Cosmic Arrogance: How Arrogance Can Be Destructive

Kenneth Brower, the author of the article “The Danger of Cosmic Genius,” wonders how

someone as smart as the protégé of Albert Einstein, Freeman Dyson, be so dumb about the

environmental issues. Dyson is known as one of the greatest minds in the world today, and has

changed how we think about many of the most prevailing fields in science. When I was reading

the article one thing in particular that struck me was in an interview Dyson had on the Charlie

Rose Show in regards to environmental issues such as mass climate change and global warming.

At one point in the interview the Dyson was asked “Do you think we have been kind to our

planet?” Dyson responded to the quote by saying “Yes. I would say so, on a whole, yes.” The

statement made by Dyson shocked the audience and brought him to say This statement surprised

the audience very much and brought Dyson to say “We have done a lot of damage to our planet,

but we also repair the damage. I grew up in England, and England was much more filthy than it

is now. You can go to London and your collar doesn’t get black in one day.” Dyson who is no

expert on environmental issues believes in the superiority of man to fix environmental issues.

This made me wonder, how could someone so smart be so arrogant?

Dyson’s arrogance reminded me of a close friend, whose father’s superior thinking

arrogance lead to the separation and destruction of their family., and enviably the end of himself.

I first started spending time with John when I was in middle school. I would go to his house all

Comment [GSC1]: Revised the sentence so it would not say “this”

Comment [GSC2]: It was not blatant arrogance at first it was his internal superior thinking

Law 19

19

the time afterschool to hang out with him and I became very familiar with him and his family,

which was his mom, his sister and his dad James. Back in middle school I remember John’s

family being very close. They would eat dinner together weekly, go to the movies as a family,

and go on family vacations. They were a perfect American family, James was a very smart man

who owned a landscaping company and that was very successful in the Atlanta area that he had

built up from the ground. The family had plenty of money, two healthy kids, and a number of

vacation houses which I go to with them. But though out middle school I noticed a change in the

way the family interacted. I thought nothing at first; he was a hardworking man who cared so

much for the wellbeing of his family. But as I continued to spend time over at their house I

noticed an unspoken distance in the family. In the end James superior thinking would lead to

arrogant ways which caused him to make his family feel unwanted.This is because James had

been drinking again. James in the end would let his arrogance take over who he was, and

inevitably destroy himself and his family.

Shortly after becoming aware of the severe problem James was sent to rehab where he

spent six months, his arrival home was a cheerful reunion for the family. James looked healthier

than ever and had much more energy too. . But little did they know the nature of his ways was

still unchanged. Although we all love fairytale endings that is not how this story would unfold.

After his arrival home James clearly needed help still to overcome his problem, this is when his

family stepped in. The family was content to be a whole again and I could tell John was happy

too. To help James the family would spend more quality time together going to Falcons games,

Braves games, and movies. In attempts to keep his mind off drinking, they began to eat as a

family again, trying to talk to James as much as possible to show that they were not displeased

with him, but wanting to help in his time of need. The family also would remove all the alcohol

Comment [GSC3]: Not needed

Comment [GSC4]: This sentence introduces the reader to what im going to be talking about and it gives a more clear description than the deleted sentence

Comment [GSC5]: I don’t need to build suspense or give a fairy tale ending. This stuff is irrelevant

Law 20

20

from their house before James would arrive home from rehab. John’s mother liked to drink

alcohol occasionally but felt drinking a few drinks was not worth the temptation that alcohol in

the house would have on James. Additionally John’s mother would take his keys away once he

returned home for the night, so he would not be tempted to go to the liquor store. She also made

shore the manager of their company watched him at work, to make sure he was not sneaking off

during the day.

Undoubtedly James’s family was doing everything in their power to help him stay sober,

but in spite of their best efforts with James, there offers were rejected. One by one I watched

James reject his family’s attempts at helping him, sometimes directly, sometime indirectly.

James made it clear he did not want the help of his family. James’s rejection to their offers made

the family feel unwantedThe only thing that was clear to me at this time was he did not want

help from his family. He believed he could tackle his problem on his own, and one by one he

began rejecting their offers. I first noticed the rejection when his family would take him to the

Falcons games, Braves games, or movies. Talking with John afterword’s, I would ask, “How

was the game?” and typically he would respond, “It was fun….I mean the game was fun.. It’s

just.. I could tell my dad didn’t want to be there…” Something I would witness first hand was

James indirect rejection of their conversations at the dinner table. John would be telling a story,

and his fathers would interrupt and say, “That’s nothing, back when I was a kid...ECT.” He

would indirectly reject the time with his family by putting himself on a pedestal, and belittling

what everyone else would have to say. James believed he was a better judge of his actions than

his family was. Comment [GSC6]: This sums up the paragraph better

Law 21

21

But the most direct rejection I had ever seen from James was the time he used his riding

lawn mower to drive one mile on a busy road to the liquor store; because his wife would not give

him his keys.

Despite all the family was trying to do for James in this time of need their offers were

openly rejected. James’s rejection would cause the family to feel unwanted, especially John.

All of the things James would do to show he didn’t want their help, caused his family to feel they

were not a part of James life anymore. Not being able to relate with his father anymore John

would grow distant from him. The distance he created was extremely hard for John who once

was so close to his father. I remember John being very angry in those days, when I would ask

about his father he would go on a rant about how much he despised his father. The outburst

would usually end in John punching something, like a wall. It was clear to me the rejection was

not the alcoholic in James talking anymore. He was not trying to deceive to get what he wanted.

James He was afraid of losing the leadership of the household by needing others help, so he

made it his mission to show the others that he was the hierarchy in the house hold, by putting

himself at the top regardless of what others said. James wanted to show that no one could tell

him what to do and that he was the boss. These actions clearly showed that he was over prideful,

in other words arrogant. James’s own pride in wanting to tackle his problem alone is the reason

for his disastrous decline.

So the answer to my question is simple it was a smart mans arrogance to others

suggestions, that brought about all these problems. It was a smart man who was more prone to be

arrogant in this case, because he is used to being a leader. Just like Dyson a brilliant leader being

to proud to say that he doesn’t know anything about the environment. As of today the family has

moved away and left James behind, his house was foreclosed on six months ago and no one has

Comment [GSC7]: This example shows why the distance was created

Law 22

22

seen him since. Which makes me wonder does our arrogance lead to bigger more complex

problems? I believe so, but it is hard to know for sure. What I do know is I have seen arrogance

destroy a once happy family. So I know what being over prideful can do. When we don’t hear

others ideas it is impossible to solve complicated problems like alcoholism or global warming.

So Because if the smartest man in the world Freeman Dyson can be arrogant, what’s to say the

rest of us are notcan’t? Although it was a terrible situation it taught me to be more open to others

suggestions especially in difficulttuff times when we need it the most. James’s situation has

become a valuable lesson to me. Don’t let your pride get the best of you in a difficult situation,

and, and learn to be modest when faced with hardships.

Comment [GSC8]: This is for readers to contemplate, not for me to give my opinion

Law 23

23

Works Cited

Kenneth, Brower. "The Danger of Cosmic Genius." The Atlantic. The Atlantic Monthly Group,

December 2010. Web. 08 Aug. 2011.

Formatted: Left

Law 24

24

Elliott Law

Coach Horton

English 1101

17 September 2011

The Danger of Cosmic Arrogance: How Arrogance Can Be Destructive

Kenneth Brower, the author of the article “The Danger of Cosmic Genius,” wonders how

someone as smart as the protégé of Albert Einstein, Freeman Dyson, be so dumb about the

environmental issues. Dyson is known as one of the greatest minds in the world today, and has

changed how we think about many of the most prevailing fields in science. When I was reading

the article one thing in particular that struck me was in an interview Dyson had on the Charlie

Rose Show in regards to environmental issues such as mass climate change and global warming.

At one point in the interview the Dyson was asked “Do you think we have been kind to our

planet?” Dyson responded to the quote by saying “Yes. I would say so, on a whole, yes.” The

statement made by Dyson shocked the audience and brought him to say “We have done a lot of

damage to our planet, but we also repair the damage. I grew up in England, and England was

much more filthy than it is now. You can go to London and your collar doesn’t get black in one

day.” Dyson who is no expert on environmental issues believes in the superiority of man to fix

environmental issues. This made me wonder, how could someone so smart be so arrogant?

Dyson’s arrogance reminded me of a close friend, whose father’s superior thinking lead

to the separation and destruction of their family. I first started spending time with John when I

was in middle school. I would go to his house all the time afterschool to hang out with him and I

became very familiar with him and his family, which was his mom, his sister and his dad James.

Law 25

25

Back in middle school I remember John’s family being very close. They would eat dinner

together weekly, go to the movies as a family, and go on family vacations. They were a perfect

American family, James was a very smart man who owned a landscaping company and that was

very successful in the Atlanta area that he had built up from the ground. The family had plenty

of money, two healthy kids, and a number of vacation houses which I go to with them. But

though out middle school I noticed a change in the way the family interacted. I thought nothing

at first; he was a hardworking man who cared so much for the wellbeing of his family. I

continued to spend time over at their house I noticed an unspoken distance in the family. In the

end James superior thinking would lead to arrogant ways which caused him to make his family

feel unwanted.

Shortly after becoming aware of the severe problem James was sent to rehab where he

spent six months, his arrival home was a cheerful reunion for the family. James looked healthier

than ever and had much more energy too. After his arrival home James clearly needed help still

to overcome his problem, this is when his family stepped in. To help James the family would

spend more quality time together going to Falcons games, Braves games, and movies. In

attempts to keep his mind off drinking, they began to eat as a family again, trying to talk to

James as much as possible to show that they were not displeased with him, but wanting to help in

his time of need. The family also would remove all the alcohol from their house before James

would arrive home from rehab. John’s mother liked to drink alcohol occasionally but felt

drinking a few drinks was not worth the temptation that alcohol in the house would have on

James. Additionally John’s mother would take his keys away once he returned home for the

night, so he would not be tempted to go to the liquor store. She also made shore the manager of

their company watched him at work, to make sure he was not sneaking off during the day.

Law 26

26

Undoubtedly James’s family was doing everything in their power to help him stay sober,

but in spite of their best efforts with James, there offers were rejected. One by one I watched

James reject his family’s attempts at helping him, sometimes directly, sometime indirectly.

James made it clear he did not want the help of his family. James’s rejection to their offers made

the family feel unwanted. I first noticed the rejection when his family would take him to the

Falcons games, Braves games, or movies. Talking with John afterword’s, I would ask, “How

was the game?” and typically he would respond, “It was fun….I mean the game was fun.. It’s

just.. I could tell my dad didn’t want to be there…” Something I would witness first hand was

James indirect rejection of their conversations at the dinner table. John would be telling a story,

and his fathers would interrupt and say, “That’s nothing, back when I was a kid...ECT.” He

would indirectly reject the time with his family by putting himself on a pedestal, and belittling

what everyone else would have to say. James believed he was a better judge of his actions than

his family was.

Despite all the family was trying to do for James in this time of need their offers were

openly rejected. James’s rejection would cause the family to feel unwanted, especially John.

All of the things James would do to show he didn’t want their help, caused his family to feel they

were not a part of James life anymore. Not being able to relate with his father anymore John

would grow distant from him. I remember John being very angry in those days, when I would

ask about his father he would go on a rant about how much he despised his father. The outburst

would usually end in John punching something, like a wall. James was afraid of losing the

leadership of the household by needing others help, so he made it his mission to show the others

that he was the hierarchy in the house hold, by putting himself at the top regardless of what

others said. James wanted to show that no one could tell him what to do and that he was the

Law 27

27

boss. These actions clearly showed that he was over prideful, in other words arrogant. James’s

own pride in wanting to tackle his problem alone is the reason for his disastrous decline.

So the answer to my question is simple a smart mans arrogance to others suggestions,

that brought about all these problems. It was a smart man who was more prone to be arrogant in

this case, because he is used to being a leader. Just like Dyson a brilliant leader being to proud to

say that he doesn’t know anything about the environment. As of today the family has moved

away and left James behind, his house was foreclosed on six months ago and no one has seen

him since. Which makes me wonder does our arrogance lead to bigger more complex problems?

What I do know is I have seen arrogance destroy a once happy family. So I know what being

over prideful can do. When we don’t hear others ideas it is impossible to solve complicated

problems like alcoholism or global warming. So if the smartest man in the world Freeman Dyson

can be arrogant, what’s to say the rest of us are not? Although it was a terrible situation it taught

me to be more open to others suggestions especially in difficult times when we need it the most.

James’s situation has become a valuable lesson to me. Don’t let your pride get the best of you in

a difficult situation, and learn to be modest when faced with hardships.

Law 28

28

Works Cited

Kenneth, Brower. "The Danger of Cosmic Genius." The Atlantic. The Atlantic Monthly Group,

December 2010. Web. 08 Aug. 2011.

my internal evaluation

Documents

successful work

fluid writer

aspiring writer

horton english

college experience

limited supply of resources

great deal of improvement

real taste