Sources for Research Paper

 Sources:

http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/620795377

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/history.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=4&item=kkk

            
            http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0859146.html

          

            http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1657.html

            http://www.socialpc.com/SocialIssues/The-Modern-KKK.html

           http://www.life.com/gallery/25151/image/85938998#index/0

"Bonding Over a Mascot" Response

To begin, this piece has a very interesting personal connection to me because I have grown up a big Florida State fan my entire life. My father played golf for FSU, so over the years I have attended multiple games and am very well-versed in the issue this article covers.

I believe that a possible research question Lapointe could have posed to launch his research would be, "Why were some universities able to successfully appeal against the NCAA to keep their mascots, while many others weren't?" I think this is a possible question because it would lead the author to understand how these few schools received permission from the actual tribes to use their name and heritage. The article then focused on Florida State Seminoles because F.S.U is a perfect illustration of this matter due to their rich tribal history and ongoing association with the university.

The purpose of the article was to inform readers of an issue that not only affected the sports world, but also sent shock waves into the  political world about "socially-correctness". Since the purpose is to not only approach to sports fans but also those with political curiosity, Lapointe had to do research to apply to both these audiences. At times he spent time describing the atmosphere at sporting events, and the traditions that go on during games (the Tomahawk Chop, Renegade planting the spear.) Meanwhile he also appealed to his political audience by citing the specific NCAA rule in question and giving specific responses of modern day Seminole tribe on the issue as a political matter.

"Is Google Making Us Stupid" Response

In my opinion Nicholas Carr is correct that the internet, and more specifically Google, is revolutionizing the way humans comprehend and study all forms of rhetoric. What I strongly disagree with is that this digital revolution is in any way making us "dumber" than our more studious ways of before. I believe Carr's example of Socrates and his views on the popularity of writing translate exactly to what we are going through today. While it is believed there will be a major shift in how we communicate and read, there is no evidence to prove this "speed reading" will be a bad thing. Socrates claimed writing would make people forgetful and lazy. I think we can all agree today that writing as a form of literature has had enormous positive effects on our lives through history (imagine if the Declaration of Independence was simply spoken aloud rather than written down!) In the same manner I believe that humans "skimming" literature rather than delving deeply into it could have positive effects. Perhaps we will be more well-rounded and aware on a wider variety of issues, rather than only strongly informed on a couple topics. I believe people will always intensely study the matters that are truly important to them, so maybe this new style may just make people more rounded in areas they never were before. In the end, I agree with Carr that we are becoming more dependent on the internet and Google, which will change our overall literary behaviors. However, at this point there is no way to prove that it is in any way making us "dumber" as a species. In fact, this new rapid style may make us smarter than we ever were before in totally new ways.