I am so sick of people who are interested only in short term, only in those things that are immediately gratifying, only those things which make sense at first blush, only the immediately practical, only those things they already know about. How can you grow if you don't expand beyond the realm of your experience? Granted, there's nothing wrong with prioritizing those things you already know and can reap reward from immediately, because it leads to a sheltered, safe life with no excitement, which is, of course, something that a lot of people--justifiably--want. But at the same time, when you're 80 years old, if you've made a habit of shunning those things which are not short-term, familiar experiences, you'll probably look back at your life and wonder why you wasted it so.

I've observed that most of the people at my school simply are not taking advantage of the education that's available to them. We pay over $20,000 a year to attend this university, and yet so many of us simply drift through it, accepting what we're told and never extending beyond the confines of the class, the lecture notes, or the final exam. This phenomenon is not relegated to the slow-witted sorority bitches or self-important frat boys; it affects even some of the most intelligent members of the student community.

University, unlike High School, is not a place where you simply accumulate the knowledge that your professors throw at you. Most of them, the ones worth their salt anyway, expect to be questioned. They, like we, are human and thus fallible. Some of their assertions may be wrong. Some of the ideas they're discussing may be outside of their personal experience. Sometimes, they may be saying the wrong thing deliberately, just to encourage independent thought. If a professor tells you that things are a certain way, ask yourself, why they are that way. If it doesn't make sense, ask the professor about it, start a dialogue. It shouldn't just be the professor standing in front of the class teaching, it should be the students and the professor interacting, discussing ideas, expanding what both teacher and pupil know. Research a subject independently of the assigned work. We're here, not to collect dusty old ideas, but to build the skills necessary for creating new ideas, to take what has been learned before, and to move past it.

It may be more work. It may be more difficult. It may not always be immediately rewarding. But in the end, it will pay off to develop these habits. Even when you've finished the final exam for the class, still keep thinking about the subject matter, still keep applying it whenever you can. If not, why waste so much money at a fancy private liberal arts school? If you just want to be told what to think and believe, save your time and money and just go to your local community college. Those of us who really want to learn, to understand, and to grow will thank you for it.

One of my friends is in a public speaking class and has to write a speech addressing some moral issue. The assignment requires her to make an argument on some moral topic (e.g. morality of abortion, etc) and convince people that she's right and they're wrong. I'm not so certain about the idea of convincing the other people that they're wrong, but I don't necessarily take issue with that. What I do take issue with is that part of the requirements are to convince people no matter what, including the use of logical fallacies as long as they further the person's objective.

Logical fallacies are used because they can convince an uneducated person of an argument's veracity. That's why politicians and clergymen use them so frequently. But they are nothing more than tools for manipulation, not genuine arguments. When you must convince someone of something, and you don't trust their ability to evaluate arguments rationally, use an appeal to emotion or a straw man or some other logical fallacy.

But if you respect your audience, use only logic and rationality. Show them your ideas, why you have those ideas, and why those ideas are legitimate, then allow them to consider your thoughts and your reasoning for themselves. If you've constructed a powerful logical argument, they have no rational choice but to agree. If you haven't, then you haven't done your job well to begin with, and masking your inability to argue with a logical fallacy won't fix that.

In short, to manipulate, use a logical fallacy. To argue effectively, use logic.