It should be a rhetoric-which relates form to matter, instrumentality to product, presentation to content, agent to audience, intention to reason. It should not make technology the operation of a machine, in which che message is a massage; it should not cake its form from its medium
To me, this is talking about the necessity of a medium and the way that we look at something and the means of creating it and what lies between me and this idea, item, place, etc.
Such an education inevitably involved the full range of human motive, our agoniscic contentions and impulses of pure play as well as the ostensible purposes, or arguments, at issue
I think that this is an interesting and important idea of our motive and impulses and how we are raised and taught within them, either intentional or unintentional.
cosmetic_arcs
I like this term and description of "arts."
a continued series of shifts.
I think that this idea is prevalent in many different aspects and situations as more may come up and learn, and that there is going to be change throughout time.
The We Defense argues that there are two kinds of rhetoric, good and bad. The good kind is used in good causes, the bad kind in bad causes. Our kind is the good kind; the bad kindjs used by our opponents.
This seems almost contradictory in a way, as opinions, values, and views can change as we learn. What if the "bad rhetoric" is the good kind in another perspective?
vir bonus dicendi peritus
translates to "A good man skilled in the art of speaking."
So for a child, it matters where you live. It matters how much foul air you breathe in on days when there are no fires at all. It matters whether your family can afford an air purifier at home or whether they can whisk you away when ash rains down from the sky
Emphasis on the right for clean air, and that whether or not a family can afford an air purifier impacts their health.
They’re also filling the lungs of California’s children with smoke, with potentially grave effects over the course of their lives
Looking at what I study with one of my majors in Communication Sciences and Disorders, I recognize and understand the struggles that they may have in the future with breathing as well as speaking due to the wildfires.
The death of Ella, who was Black, shed a new, harsh light in Britain on howpollution disproportionately affects minoritiesand deprived families.
The impact of of air pollution based on who it may impact the most
The United Nations Environment Programwrote last yearthat if air pollution were to be declared a cause of Ella’s death, it would be “the first time that air pollution has ever been explicitly linked to a named individual’s death.”
The United Nations Environment Program emphasizes the main point that air pollution being linked to Ella's death would be the first of its kind.
Ambient air pollution, which contributed to Ella’s death, “accounts for an estimated 4.2 million deaths per year due to stroke, heart disease, lung cancer and chronic respiratory diseases,” according to the W.H.O.
Pollution related deaths come from more than people with asthma, but also strokes, heart disease, lung cancer, and chronic respiratory disease.
An asthmatic, she had been taken to the hospital nearly 30 times in less than three years and suffered numerous seizures
Does this relate and increase how it impacts the pollution aspect compared to if it had been someone without asthma?
he first person in Britain to officially have air pollution listed as a cause of death,
How would this relate and compare to other countries in general? Or in more specific areas in places that have higher amounts of people dying from pollution?