The Net-Self\/Self-Net and The Overshadow of Thought by Writing<\/p>\n
In the spirit of Ballenger, I shall question myself to a worthy essay. What was the most pressing news of this all? (Bellanger and Reid\u2019s work). How did their locations influence their interests? In the modern days of keyboarding to different planes of thought and experience, does the internet replace location? (In the sense, simply, of the internet being an \u201cenvironment\u201d which can influence you). Did the original creators of the internet intend for this? I\u2019ve read HTML is a systematic markup language; I have no idea what that means, but I\u2019ve also heard that we (our \u201cselves\u201d) are inseparable from our language. Did a Derrida say something along the lines of, \u201cThere is nothing outside the text\u201d? Then, has the internet\u2014made of its own unique doing by programming language, markup language, and other digital languages\u2014not effectively created a \u201clanguage-world\u201d incorporating our own language-created selves into it? What might we ask, then, what is to be made of the speculated relationships \u201cbetween\u201d these dimensions? (The Self and The Net). Being \u201cmade\u201d by language, can the Net be said to have a Self of its own?<\/p>\n
All the thinking and writing I\u2019ve just done for this last paragraph reminds of something I\u2019ve had a hunch about lately: Is writing overemphasized to the detriment of thought? As an English (Ed.) major, I understand writing as a core component of this academic program, yet it seems fair to me to make the following case for thinking, which I think isn\u2019t \u201cplayed around\u201d with enough in English classes (sadly, as we have much room for it!). Please critique me to no end in my faults and misunderstandings, though; I attest I am not the Almighty. Now, for the following.<\/p>\n
Language is a tool by which we can express our ideas. Writing is a manifestation of language. If we want to develop students\u2019 writing skills, should not the emphasis and developmental-work go into thinking as much as it attemptedly goes into writing? When we \u201cteach\u201d writing, do we want to develop the tool, or our abilities to use it imaginatively beyond formal perscriptions? I\u2019m mostly pressed to push this concern due one course I took my 3rd<\/sup> year in college. I\u2019ve taken many English and Writing courses before, but the one course which changed my capacities as a writer, which I can claim with much conscious conviction, was a Philosophy course. To be extremely brief, the course made me think (Surprise! I don\u2019t think I thought much before then, at least not as much as today I do). I thought of many topics, but the one I\u2019d like to mention here is knowledge.<\/p>\n I thought so much about knowledge, that I became critically invested in anything having to do with it. As you can imagine, being at a University, there was much knowledge now dressed up for me to give a renewed look of scrutiny with my mind\u2019s eye. Today, still an English Ed. major, I apply these critical faculties to what I learn in my classes. And again, simply to close short, I perceive that my emphasis on thinking has helped me to better take apart and go at writing formulations (amongst much else in the academic writing tradition) with the hunger to understand, not just to mime in hopes that I do well enough to pass a class. I feel empowered, actually, now that I see so many of the holes in the frameworks of the relatively shifty, \u201cgood\u201d writing doctrines we are taught; I understand enough not only to see that they\u2019re not God, however, they can be extremely helpful.<\/p>\n And all this writing of mine, what is of it? Thus far, a production of heavy, but highly satisfying thought. I would say there is a benefit to taking up my considerations here. I learned much from Bellanger and Reid concerning writing tips, as I\u2019m sure you all did, but I\u2019d like to present this as something of my own \u201cdifferent angle\u201d from which we can still consider writing, as they have, but in relationship to the thinking which produces it.<\/p>\n ;;- I thank thee for thou thoughts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Net-Self\/Self-Net and The Overshadow of Thought by Writing In the spirit of Ballenger, I shall question myself to a worthy essay. What was the most pressing news of this all? (Bellanger and Reid\u2019s work). How did their locations influence their interests? In the modern days of keyboarding to different planes of thought and experience, […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":36,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/36"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=167"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/techrhet.com\/3310\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}