Mar 24
Journal Seven Entry
In Thursday’s class, we were finished discussing some of the aspects of Chapters 8, 9, and 10 and some of the qualities that Representative Raskin obtained as he lead the impeachment team. Dr. Sandridge and the class are discussing the midterm reports that we would have when it comes to our personalized leadership development project and how we can utilize the leaders whom we sketch (the 3–5 individuals) that would help us develop our leadership projects. In the last part of this project, we would lay out our individualized leadership plan for the assumptive world. Whether these actions would be obtaining an internship obtaining a study abroad program, or even some emotional soul-searching actions through the exploration of new hobbies or projects to embody your assumptive world project.
We also cover the idea of how important The Education of Cyrus has had in grooming and teaching leaders in learning how to become a more well-rounded leader. Through the discussion, we talked about the importance of leaders understanding their followers’ names and being more human, and in making an effort to become more humanistic. When it comes to when Cyrus implied the personalization of his leadership towards his followers. Dr. Sandridge in Tuesday’s class wanted us to complete an “Impeachment Manager Trial Application”
We discussed what it took to be an arraignment administrator and a portion of the characteristics that one should need to turn into a fruitful chief. My greatest focal point was the characteristics is that a significant number of these assignments of either making the group, from employing the Chief Legal Counsel and attorneys would require a huge measure of reasonableness. For me with regards to the characteristics of a denunciation supervisor you should have a feeling of reasonableness as well as a feeling of fairness in your good instinct of the making out of contemplations and contentious explanations. I accept that Representative Jamie Raskin worked effectively in reflecting such because to persuade the crowd that in all honesty doesn’t comprehend your standards and goals you need to think in theoretical hypothesis you additionally need to move in a manner that would challenge your standards.
We discussed what it took to be a prosecution supervisor and a portion of the characteristics that one should need to turn into a fruitful director. My greatest important point was the characteristics is that a large number of these assignments of either making the group, from recruiting the Chief Legal Counsel and legal advisors would require a monstrous measure of common sense. For me with regards to the characteristics of an indictment director you should have a feeling of reasonableness as well as a feeling of fairness in your savvy instinct of the making out of contemplations and contentious thoughts. I accept that Representative Jamie Raskin worked effectively in reflecting such because to persuade the crowd that honestly doesn’t comprehend your standards and goals you need to think in unique hypotheses you additionally need to move in a manner that would challenge your standards.
We talked about what it took to be an impeachment manager and some of the qualities that one must have to become a successful manager. My biggest takeaway was the qualities is that many of these tasks of either creating the team, from hiring the Chief Legal Counsel and lawyers would require an immense amount of practicality. For me when it comes to the qualities of an impeachment manager you must not only have a sense of practicality but a sense of impartiality in your sound judgment of the composing of thoughts and argumentative reasonings. I believe that Representative Jamie Raskin did an excellent job in reflecting such because to convince the audience that quite frankly does not understand your principles and ideals you have to think in abstract theory you also have to move in a way that would challenge your principles.
In Thursday’s group, we were done examining a portion of the parts of some of the chapters and a portion of the characteristics that Representative Raskin got as he lead the arraignment group. Dr. Sandridge and the class are talking about the midterm reports that we would have with regards to our customized initiative advancement task and how we can use the pioneers whom we sketch (the 3–5 people) that would assist us with fostering our administration projects. In the last piece of this venture, we would spread out our individualized authority plan for the assumptive world. Whether these activities would get an entry-level position acquiring a concentrate abroad program, or even some enthusiastic soul-looking through activities through the investigation of new side interests or undertakings to typify your assumptive world venture.
In our Tuesday class, Dr. Sandridge wanted us to go into detail about what exactly our assumptive world project would be specific and unique from other people. For some of our projects, Dr. Sandridge challenged many of the ideals and foundations of each of our assumptive projects and wanted us to be able to succinctly define what we want our project to be. He did not want us to have a project that would be a simple model of what other people are doing, but something that sets our assumptive world project apart from everyone else. We also talked about the idea of persuasion and rhetoric and the art of being able to change someone’s mind.
I would agree that the most effective way to persuade and adjust people groups’ perspectives is through the use of the allure of mankind and to become friendly with your desired person to persuade and alter their perspective. A considerable lot of the conversations that we have in regards to persuading individuals, are to leave with the most enticing theme! I accept that it is basic to leave with the most grounded and most enthusiastic sound factious moment when it comes to the influence of individuals. Aside from giving your legitimate and factious focus with regards to your case to persuade individuals, you ought to have a way of talking.
How can we change peoples’ minds?
I would say the best way to convince and change peoples’ minds is through the application of the appeal of humanity and to become personable with the individual that you want to convince and change their mind. Many of the discussions that we have regarding convincing people, is to leave with the most persuasive topic! I believe that it is critical to leave with the strongest and most emotional sound argumentative point when it comes to the persuasion of people. Apart from providing your logical and argumentative points when it comes to your case to convince people, you should have a style of speaking.
Whether this style would make you appear more personable or whether it makes you appear more direct and succinct. (Almost like a trial lawyer). My style is primarily sound with passion and empathy through the word delivery of the logistic points that I would have included within my case. Dr. Sandridge had us do an exercise in which how we can deliver our address and done, with the quote of “People think smokers are losers.” I thought many of us would have a more universal tone and delivery, but to my shock, we had a level of versatility of how our tone and dynamic are when it comes to our deliveries. When it comes to the aspects of literary cannons we begin to talk about the discussions of principles and set morals that an individual and an organization may hold. Representative’s Opening Remarks provides several different kinds of tones, deliveries, and syntaxes.
When it comes to the style that Jamie Raskin had in delivering his closing remarks and even his opening remarks it represented its versatility and the way he makes his address. the range that he had in his delivery and his style and even tone it’s what can capture the audience. It can allow for the audience to become moved by his passion and when he had teared up or when he began energetically to express raw emotions about the sacrifices of the US Capitol Police.
Whether this style would cause you to show up more charming or whether it causes you to show up more straightforward and brief. (Practically like a preliminary legal counselor). My style is strong with energy and sympathy through the word conveyance of the calculated focuses that I would have included inside my case. Dr. Sandridge had us do a practice where how we can convey our location and done, with the statement of “Individuals think smokers are failures.” I considered numerous us would have a more all-inclusive tone and conveyance, however to my shock, we had a degree of flexibility of how our tone and dynamic are with regards to our conveyances. With regards to the parts of an artistic gun, we start to discuss the conversations of standards and set ethics that an individual and an association might hold. The opening remarks give a few various types of tones, conveyances, and punctuations.
He presents the trial in a call to attention-like approach where it’s an address that’s not 100% angry or stern, but it calls to the humanity of the Senators and even the American people. He frequently poked holes in the logic of the opposing side’s arguments. His ability to be able to apply the same points and critical ideas that the defense made and used them against was one of the most effective ways of persuasion. It is safe to say that it would be easier to convince someone who disagrees with you strongly by speaking to their ideology and beliefs than testing their theory right in front of them with their theory being proven wrong right in front of them.
It reminds me of those comedy show clips where a host would be asking iconic questions to trump supporters about certain factual points and theories as they place the blame on these points on the democratic party and that they are proven wrong by utilizing their points and beliefs of the party to point exactly that their party or base are doing that mere thing that they blamed the opposing party of. This is a perfect example of how Congressman Raskin can get the room’s attention and their argument to start to be weakened.
