Assesment Two

1.                  Identify the nature of proof in Frank's monologue, citing evidence he used in Charlie's defense. 

In the artifact the scent of a woman I believe frank uses all forms of proof to state his points that Charlie is a good man.  Logos: specifically when Frank points out that Charlie is “not a snitch” and later “would not sell out his future” frank goes on to state point to the intellectual appeal that Charlie is a man of values.  Ethos: “Out of order? Who the hell you talking to?  I’ve been around you know?” frank refers to his military rank to show his experience with good men. Pathos: frank talks a lot about the school and how it is becoming a rat ship, a vessel for seagoing snitches when he says “boys inform on your classmates save your hide, anything more we are going to burn you at the stake.”   

2.                  Of the four styles of dramatic or vicarious proof, which did Frank exploit to turn attitudes around about Charlie? How did this style function in terms of reason? 

two of the four styles of dramatic or vicarious proof  Frank exploits to turn the attitudes around is anecdotal evidence and participation and demonstration. Anecdotal evidences are short narratives that make a point in a hurry.  Frank makes many short points about Charlie’s principles. “when the shit hits the fan some guys run and some guys stay, here’s Charlie facing the fire and here’s George hiding in big daddy’s pocket”. Frank uses participation and demonstration to systematically link Charlie’s noble actions to those of other men. The quotes above also are analogical, I think most of Franks points are related to other situations. We know from the film that while frank may not have known Charlie long he has known others like Charlie so he can conclude Charlie is a man who will not be bought.

3.  What cultural myths or images were employed to increase the appeal of Frank's argument? How did this influence his attempted shift of opinion? 

The cultural myth presented in the artifact would be the value of the challenge. This cultural myth suggests that a certain kind of wisdom can be gained only through trials and testing.  The myth also suggests that through this test we gain a new source of power, character and knowledge. Frank seems to appeal to this myth through the appeal of charlies character. Frank notes that Charlie is not a snitch and that he will not be sold out.  Frank also says why others may fall as the cradle breaks Charlie will endure and become stronger for it.  

4.      Which of Reich's parables apply or applies to Frank's reasoning? 

It is my opinion that frank uses Reich’s rot at the top parable to explain the lack of morals or ethics exhibited at prep school.  In franks statement “Mr. Sims doesn’t want it, he doesn’t need to be labeled still worthy of being a Baird man, what the hell is that..what is your motto here? Boys inform on your classmates save your hide or we’ll burn you at the stake.”  He then goes on to say “here’s Charlie facing the fire…and what are you doing? You are going to reward George.” 

5.      What was Frank's reasoning in terms of logical appeal?

This one was a little harder to put my finger on however I would have to go with Franks use of warrants and more specifically inductive reasoning or to work from a specific evidence to a general reason. About four minutes into the artifact frank gives a specific example when he says that he has come to the crossroads in life, he always knew what was right but never chose because it was too hard. Franks story alludes to the before mentioned principles of integrity, and courage-the stuff leaders should be made of. This inductive reasoning also allows frank make an appeal to the allowance of Charlie to proceed down the right path.

6.      Did Frank's paralinguistics impact his expression and the meaning of his words? Please give specific examples – three will do. The first instance of paralinguistic’s I noticed is when frank says I will show you out of order…his voice raises when he says you are “executing his soul” and second when he says he would take a “flamethrower” to the place. When Frank tells Harry, Jimmy and Trent to f**k off wherever they are he puts emphasizes on fact there are cowards not facing the fire. Frank also slows down his speech and over pronunciates a word for example “Baird Man, what the hell is that?”  

7.      Discuss Frank's approach with his argument in terms of the four process premises, from Needs to Consistency. 

From the beginning Frank does an excellent job of taking us an audience through a needs to consistency process. Starting with reassurance of worth Frank establishes Charlie’s worth testifying that he is no bum.  Frank also portrays Charlie’s sense of power and sense of roots through the implication of Charlie’s ingrained humble principles that keep him from being a snitch. Charlie is an outsider he is not like the others who come from money, Frank shows that this is a good thing and that this sense of roots are part of Charlie’s makeup. I would assert from the list of Maslow’s hierarchy or needs that Charlie would feel a sense of safety with Frank there, and Frank clearly exhibits his desire to protect and defend Charlie.   This feeling of Safety and belonging would lead Charlie to feel a sense of esteem and belonging. Charlie now knows even if he doesn’t necessarily belong with the Baird men that not a bad thing. He’s better than that. When looking the process of emotion I would say that each was a factor, Frank does an excellent job in instilling fear, and guilt into the Baird men’s eyes, stating that if they do not become better their cradle will fall.  It’s hard to pick up on the subtle changes in Franks voice anger/joy, you can hear anger as he raises his voice or curses. You can hear a sense of joy when he talks about Charlie. Franks also is very clear in the third premise of attitudes, opinions and beliefs, there are many times when he challenges the school, calling them a rat ship, or gives analogies of what represents a good man.  It’s hard not to sense the passion for what frank speaks about, every word is in a way animated, and punctuated.  Cognitively frank leads us along logically to really think about the matter represented, he challenges us to look inside and question if standing up and snitching is truly a integral choice.  Emotionally he influences us through his intonation of speech through his stories of way.  Behaviorally he asks us to act and let Charlie walk down the right road. He tells that behaviorally he wasn’t a man who chose the right choice because it was too damn hard, however Charlie is that man.  Behaviorally he exposes George’s cowardice as he hides behind his daddy pockets.  Lastly the fourth premise of consistency is used both way through Franks illustration of cognitive dissonance, painting the picture that the Baird school (loss of group prestige) “has strayed away from its principles the school has claimed to instill” creating discomfort of such an accusation would make them want to rectify the situation.  He also causes a point of dissonance between George and the board pointing out that he is not standing up to principles but hiding. Frank demonstrates consonance in his attempt to demonstrate predictability showing that Charlie “has chosen the path, the right path,..a path of principles” in this argument Frank claims that if the board will let him continue down his path he will continue to demonstrate integrity.