Week 5- Question 1

The speaker that is most memorable to me is this guy named Alex. He is one of the most eloquent, charismatic and uses humor to get our attention. Although humor is always said to not be used in a speech, he is very carefully yet natural. He was talking about something for my communications class and the topic was so boring, but he made it really exciting. He used great gestures and had great tone. He kept everyone on their toes  because we did not know what he was going to say.

The worst speaker I ever heard was our past president. I just feel like he was reading what was written for him. He tried to be funny but fails miserably and often messes up his jokes. Also, i feel that he just relied on his writers to make his speech. 

Week 5- Question 2

Consider a well-known speaker, for example, the current President of the United States. What is the speaker's strongest characteristics as a speaker? Is it credibility, attractiveness, power or all three? In what ways could the speaker build ethos in these areas?

President Barak Obama is one of the best speakers I have ever heard. I believe he speaks about the topics and issues really care about. You can tell when he speaks that he cares about the people and has done his homework on all the issues he is fighting for. His strongest characteristic as a speaker is his confidence and knowledge about his topic.

Obama is the type of speaker that has all three (credibility, attractiveness, power). He has the support of the people, the desire to get our nation back to work and back on its feet, and he is using all of his resources to get that in motion. Not a lot of people are blessed to take on such big responsibility and still have the charisma and confidence to get their dreams for a whole nation to come true. Having all three is a power package to have in as a speaker and as a person.

I think that what he is doing is fine and is informing us all about his plans. He is giving us hope. I know there is always room for improvement, but I’m really confident in his ethos in all three.

Week 5- Question 3

Pick one concept from the assigned reading that you found useful or interesting and discuss it. (Choose a topic that has not already been covered in this weeks discussion).

For the first few weeks of school our discussions mostly focuses on how we can communicate through models, some basics on becoming a good public speaker and what kind of speaker we are according to the Greeks etc. This week I thought the concept of being a good listener was really interesting and that being a listener and part of the audience, we have our own responsibilities. I learned that we cannot blame all unethical speakers for our own conclusions and choices. It is our responsibility to get the right information, pay attention to both sides of an argument, and carefully evaluate and breakdown evidence and proposals of either side. In doing this we will wont “passively accept whatever we hear,” (Trenholm, 273).

Week 4-Question 2

Consider the pragmatic perspective. Does it make sense to think of communication as patterned interaction? How is communication like a game? How is it different from a game?

The patterned interaction makes a lot of sense because relationships can be looked at in a different light. In relationships you have no choice but to interact and sometimes that can take a toll on people. If you look at it through the Pragmatic Perspective there would be less fights or bad feeling towards each other like the example in the book about the couple. Also, this perspective can work depending on the situation and people involved. I feel the Pragmatic Perspective can be better practiced within a company or a small group of people.

Communication in a pragmatic perspective is much like a game because people have an innate sense to try and have and make the best for themselves. For example, dating is such a big arena for communication like a game. Daters are trying to figure out what the other person is going to do in order to make the next move and get to the next level. In contrast, this perspective doesn’t look at the desires and needs of the person and that is important factors in how people are retaining information and signals.

Week 4- Question 1

Consider the social constructionist perspective. How do we “build worlds” through communication? Think of some ideas we talk about in our culture that may not exist in other cultures. How do these concepts contribute to our happiness or success (of the lack of these) in our culture?

Considering the Social Constructionist Model, we as people use what we have learned and use what is in our environment to build our worlds. We learn, get accustomed to worlds that were already there and take oral traditions from our family and culture.

Apart from being brought up in the American culture I follow and practice a lot of the Filipino culture through out my everyday life. For example, when I see a grandma or grandpa or anyone in my family that is older than me, I would bless them. Blessing them would be me taking their hand and putting it against my head. It is a sign of respect and salutation in the Filipino culture. Some people would think that the gesture is weird and wouldn’t understand the reasons for me doing it. In America people would just say hi or hello and hug. We hug too but “blessing” before hugging and saying hello is the best and the most respectful thing you can do to an elder. Different cultures build different world’s thorough communication.

These things that I have learned through the two very different cultures I live in have really helped me in many different ways. I have learned to assimilate to both the American and Filipino culture when it comes to being courteous to others.

Week 4- Question 3

"Pick one concept from the assigned reading that you found useful or interesting and discuss it."

The Pragmatic Perspective according to the book is a system of interlocking, and interdependent “moves” which become patterned over time. This is seen as a game in communication and I thought it was really interesting that in the viewpoint of pragmatists in the Pragmatic Perspective, personality and culture are irrelevant. They don’t ask why people act the way they do and don’t hold into consideration the desires, intentions, and needs. The only things they are interested in are the patterns of interactions. They use the systems approach and that looks at the interdependent patterns of behavior and focus more at the structure, function, and evolution of communication.

Week 2- Question 3

The concept I chose from chapter one is the Five Caons Of Rhetoric. These are the basics of Communication and a great way of getting your feelings and belifes in a really effective way. The five stages are inventoin, style, arrangement, memory and delivery. The invetion step is to find your information and choosing a good subject that has a soution or conclusiton. Style is the way you talk about your subject matter. Arrangement is tha organization of ypour ideas in logical order. Memory is the skill of having all the previous steps seen all together in your speech or argument. Finally, delivery is your voice projection, and gestures. Having all of these canons will help you to be more thorough, have you speech or argument projected and understood better. 

Week 2- Question 1

“Think of a speaker you admire. Does his or her power to persuade come from ethos, pathos, or logos? Think about your own ability to persuade others. What personal qualities do you have that make you persuasive? Does Aristotle's classification scheme work for them, or do they fit into another category?”


The speaker that I really admire is President Barack Obama. He has such a way with words and evokes emotion in the message he sends. He is a great persuasive speaker because he uses logic. But he is also an ethos type of speaker as well because his personality and emotion come out of his speeches. He has so much charisma and confidence when speaking its undeniable that he is one of the best communicators of our time. But I really cannot place him any one specific category because he is a chameleon and can adapt to any group of people. He uses Pathos, Ethos, and Logos styles, and that’s what makes him a great speaker because he can put all the elements together and give powerful speeches.


When I speak I tend to persuade more in an emotional approach. I feel like the people I’m talking to can identify with me more. But of course still using logic and concrete facts to best explain what ever I’m talking about. Aristotle's classification theme does work for my approach and President Barack Obama’s.

Week 2- Question 2

"The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good. Comment on whether you agree or disagree. What, if any, is the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication?"

I disagree and agree with what the Greeks believed in because the person being morally good has nothing to do with the art of public speaking. Just because you have the ability to deliver a good speech and impact the people you are addressing it doesn't mean you live your life morally good and believe and practice good morals. I agree too because being a good person is a benefit to getting people to trust you and your beliefs. People can identify with you more.

We live in different times and the Greeks probably practiced that as a precautionary measure to get people to believe what the orator is preaching. In this day and age you never really know if a person is morally good or bad through their speeches and what not. I think if you have a way with words, know your topic, and can adapt to your audience then you are good at what you do

The connection between goodness, truth, and public communication is that if a person has a good reputation and is knowledgeable in the matters they are talking about then most likely people will trust them and want to listen to what they have to say. A person’s track record with communicating within their publics, their actions outside of public speaking, and the passion and delivery of a person are big factors in public communication.