Honors Journal Entry 4

4.  The book’s structure & rhetorical strategies/style

The way the book is set up is, its split into three parts: Part One is basically about the environment of Montana and how it has changed over the years, Part Two is about past societies that have failed due to environmental related issues, mainly climate change, environmental damage, Part Three discusses modern societies that are facing problems, and Part Four serves as a conclusion, and presents us with possible solutions for these problems. The book is in first person. I don't know how to define a rhetorical mode. Author’s style is sort of like being informational while being straight to the point.

Honors Journal Entry 3

3. The author’s persona, tone, and intended audience

The persona that the author adopts is basically a person that found a problem and tells us what are the causes and what are some of the solutions. The author manipulates the tone to serve his purpose by telling us the problems and what are the causes. Tn the first chapter of the Part Four or the book, he quotes one of his students: "Here is his reasoning: 'One supposition of this view must be that these societies sit by and watch the encroaching weakness without taking corrective actions. Here is a major difficulty. Complex societies are characterized by centralized decision-making, high information flow, great coordination of parts, formal channels of command, and pooling of resources. Much of this structure seems to have the capability, if not the designed purpose, of countering fluctuations and deficiencies in productivity. With their administrative structure, and capacity to allocate both labor and resources, dealing with adverse environmental conditions may be one of the things that complex societies do best (see, for example, Isbell [ 1978]). It is curious that they would collapse when faced with precisely those conditions they are equipped to circumvent.... As it becomes apparent to the members or administrators of a complex society that a resource base is deteriorating, it seems most reasonable to assume that some rational steps are taken toward a resolution. The alternative assumption—of idleness in the faith which we may rightly hesitate.'" The intended audience for this book is pretty much students who want to learn how societies collapse because of the environment around them. 

Honors Journal Entry 2

Identify the author’s purpose and thesis, and add your reactions.
The thesis is that some societies will end up destroying the very source of their livelihood, and the purpose is to show why that is true. So far I like it. I like the way he words things, like in the first paragraph where he talks about Montana versus the past sociesties that he had mentioned, “In the case of the past societies that I shall discuss—Polynesian, Anasazi, Maya, Greenland Norse, and others—we know the eventual outcomes of their inhabitants' decisions about managing their environment, but for the most part we don't know their names or personal stories, and we can only guess at the motives that led them to act as they did. In contrast, in modern Montana we do know names, life histories, and motives. Some of the people involved have been my friends for over 50 years. From understanding Montanans' motives, we can better imagine motives operating in the past.”

Honors Book Review: Collapse By Jared Diamond

As part of my honors assignment to read a book about a certain topic that has to do with the class. The book I read for honors is a book called collapse by Jared Diamond.

The book talks about societal collapses involving the environment more specifically of climate change, hostile neighbors, and trade partners. It is basically talking about how we are ruining our planets environment. A lot of the main topics that he addresses are Deforestation, habitat destruction, Soil problems, Water management problems, Overhunting, Overfishing, Overpopulation, and so on. The way the book is set up is, its split into three parts: Part One is basically about the environment of Montana and how it has changed over the years, Part Two is about past societies that have failed due to environmental related issues, mainly climate change, environmental damage, Part Three discusses modern societies that are facing problems, and Part Four serves as a conclusion, and presents us with possible solutions for these problems.

Before I read I looked at some reviews at the book first and I found a lot of positive reviews. The reviews that really got me to read this book were from The Guardian, “He admits to having started out on this inquiry assuming it would prove to be straightforward abuse of their physical environment that precipitated their demise… Diamond is at pains to stress the objectivity he has brought to bear on a sequence of collapse scenarios that often continue to generate serious controversy, and for the most part (until the final chapter) leaves it up to the reader to draw down any conclusions from these scenarios that may be relevant to our own societies today,”[1] and from The Economist, “Now Mr Diamond, a professor of geography at the University of California, attempts to tackle the opposite question, that is, why some societies collapse. Again, he focuses on long-term environmental factors rather than on short-term political ones. Since Mr Diamond is a restless traveller, a ravenous researcher and a sparky writer, the result is gripping.”[2]

I personally really enjoyed this book. I liked the way that is divided up, and I how he words things, like in the first paragragh where he talks about Montana versus the past sociesties that he had mentioned, “In the case of the past societies that I shall discuss—Polynesian, Anasazi, Maya, Greenland Norse, and others—we know the eventual outcomes of their inhabitants' decisions about managing their environment, but for the most part we don't know their names or personal stories, and we can only guess at the motives that led them to act as they did. In contrast, in modern Montana we do know names, life histories, and motives. Some of the people involved have been my friends for over 50 years. From understanding Montanans' motives, we can better imagine motives operating in the past.”[3] I also liked hoe he didn’t just tell us what is wrong with our environment he showed us by providing examples and comparisons. If you like to read a book that makes you think a lot and is very well written and well put together, I would suggest reading this book.

---

[1] Jonathon Porritt, The Guardian, Friday 14 January 2005 http://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/jan/15/society

[2] The Economist Jan 13th 2005 http://www.economist.com/node/3555894

[3] Jared Diamond, Collapse, 2005 Page 42

EOL Post #2

Nasturtium Flower
1.What color is the leaf? Green

2.What is the shape of the leaf? Aristate

3.Describe the leaf tip. Round

4. Describe the leaf edge. Entire

5.What size is the leaf?

  Measure:

  a – the widest point of the leaf - 1 inch

  b – the length of the leaf - 1.5 inches

6. Describe the arrangement of the veins. Pamate

7. Is there a petiole? If there is, measure its length. No

8. Is the lower side different from the upper side? No

9. What is the surface of the leaf like? Smooth

EOL post #3

Yellow flower plant
1.What color is the leaf? yellow
2.What is the shape of the leaf? digitate
3.Describe the leaf tip. pointy
4. Describe the leaf edge. ciliate
5.What size is the leaf?
  Measure:
  a – the widest point of the leaf - 1/12 inch wide
  b – the length of the leaf - 1/4 inch long
6. Describe the arrangement of the veins. Sometimes these are easier to see on the lower side of the leaf. Veins are not visible.
7. Is there a petiole? If there is, measure its length. No
8. Is the lower side different from the upper side? No
9. What is the surface of the leaf like?
Smooth

HONORS: Journal Entry 1, The author’s credibility and background

Do you think this author has the authority or experience to speak about this issue?

Well, based on what I read so far in the book, the Mr. Diamond seems like he does a lot of research. In prologue he talks about these two farms, Huls Farm and Garder Farm, “…I visited two dairy farms, Huls Farm and Gardar Farm, which despite being located thousands of miles apart were still remarkably similar in their strengths and vulnerabilities. Both were by far the largest, most prosperous, most technologically advanced farms in their respective districts” (page 11), and later goes on explaining how each farm is like and where the farm is now. So I do think that the author has the authority/experience to speak on this issue.

What are the author's credentials? What might bias the author's argument?

According to Wikipedia, He earned a Bachelor of Arts from Harvard College in 1958 and a PhD on the physiology and biophysics of membranes in the gall bladder from the University of Cambridge in 1961, so that might be his credentials. So far the author hasn’t really make an argument for anything, I think later on the book he will but so far it seems that he says thing just straight forward. Like in the prologue he says that, “Let me make clear: in drawing these parallels between Huls and Gardar Farms, I am not claiming that Huls Farm and American society are doomed to decline. At present, the truth is quite the opposite: Huls Farm is in the process of expanding, its advanced new technology is being studied for adoption by neighboring farms, and the United States is now the most powerful country in the world. Nor am I claiming that farms or societies in general are prone to collapse: while some have indeed collapsed like Gardar, others have survived uninterruptedly for thousands of years. Instead, my trips to Huls and Gardar Farms, thousands of miles apart but visited during the same summer, vividly brought home to me the conclusion that even the richest, technologically most advanced societies today face growing environmental and economic problems that should not be underestimated.” (page 12)