I chose this artifact for my English Major showcase as I believe it is one of the most important pieces to display from all that I’ve done in my English career so far.  While it is comprehensive the depth of work, organized thinking, source referencing, and creativeness shown in this artifact, demonstrates a strong piece completed in the English major by me, and shows the depth and level of thinking required by this department.  This artifact represents numbers one and five of the six learning outcomes of the English major quite perfectly.  For number one this fits because it is an open letter to a specific audience being parents of victims of gun violence.  In the letter I must use certain rhetorical strategies and methods as well as collected data and professional information to appeal to this audience in order for them to see my point of view.  A point of view they most likely don’t align with.  This paper is supposed to simulate a professional scenario in which I formally address these people, so the learning outcome couldn’t be better shown.  As for number five, this is represented too because in a way this is a creative piece.  It is my own solution from a plethora of research and sources that speak to this coming from humans and human experience.  I take everything I have analyzed and researched and try to come up with a proposal for solution to this audience who are already bound to disagree.  My solution is one of compromise, trying to appease both sides, so it takes a good deal of effort to come up with something semi feasible and realistic.  As you can see though, I achieve this to a great degree.

Josiah Titus
ERH 302
Maj. Iten
November 29, 2019
HR: Works Cited

Proposal of Civic Solution
Open Letter
The Compromise with Guns and children’s lives

December 5, 2019
Dear Parents of victims of gun violence,

I want to first say I understand your pain. I get why you want strict gun control and guns to overall be removed from the societal picture. A gun or guns is the thing that caused loss in your life and brought about utter tragedy. Guns were the weapon that were used to take your sons and daughters from you and now you know you will never see them again. A gun is what caused all the ugliness to occur and is how it started and ended and why what was precious to you is lost forever. A gun did that, and so to you it is an object of mal intent, a machine for violence and killing that was used incorrectly for deadly purposes in the hands of someone who wasn’t thinking clearly. And it was so easy, all they had to do was walk right up to the unarmed victims and openly fire. They had no defense but to run and scream hoping to be saved somehow. The person holding the gun was responsible, but I understand that to you and from your way of thinking, without the gun no bullets would have flown, no shots fired, and nobody killed twenty feet from the shooter. Maybe they would have had a fighting chance, maybe one instead ten would have died or none at all. The gun ensured that didn’t happen though, it was destruction from all angles. Your pain and way of thinking is not misunderstood, it is not necessarily misplaced.

Yes, your pain is seen and heard. But let me say this. While I intend to showcase my evidence for a proposed solution for compromise to the issue of gun control, I do know that understanding of where you are coming from is needed, as well not just shutting you down. You want protection for your young ones, you want security from the threat of guns available and ensured. You want to know that your children are safe when they go to school and that no guns will hurt them or kill. You feel like that should be guaranteed, and you are right. It should be. I though am here to show you, that yes while guns can harm others, can be in the wrong hands, can be handled improperly and yes, can kill people, there can be arrangement made to ensure our kids are kept safe, are actively protected, with guns aiding and helping that cause.
There is on average 28 school shootings a year in the US according to statistics. Shootings in schools are as reported a matter of defense . Let this statistic and report sink in. They aren’t all Columbine level and not every single one includes death, but every year around 28 public schools with kids are attacked in some manner by a person with a gun. And the kids are always left defenseless. Notice what I said in paragraph one. They are shot with no defense. That’s what we want, a way of defense.

I have a proposal for civic solution. You want kids to be safe daily from the threat of guns, and that there shouldn’t even be a worry of going to school and guns being present in a malicious way. Guns to you cause a feeling of insecurity, no control and the chance of mishandling. Well this is exactly where my solution that entails compromise for both sides can be implemented. A huge part of the issue here that you can probably agree with is the fear of the unknown. Guns to you maybe, and especially your kids away at school, are unknown. Not in the way that their some alien never being seen, but they are complex tools that many lack experiences with or have little knowledge of. Let’s look at an example to explain this.

A young person who is sixteen will never be able to properly handle or operate a car until they have experience or knowledge of it and drive it hands on. You can show as many pictures to them as you want, but it won’t accomplish the same thing to any extent. You must be educated and informed in order to comprehend what you don’t understand. A lot of society doesn’t understand guns. What they fear is usually what they aren’t familiar with, and I completely get that. It’s ok. But in order to help mend this, like with the car example, we must familiarize and educate ourselves on what we aren’t used too so that it isn’t so foreign and scary to us anymore, and I think we can all understand that. What I propose specifically is that we introduce proper gun use and handling to our school system through a security system of armed people. If properly trained security, who had reliable background checks, and who had been put through rigorous testing were armed and stationed at our children’s schools throughout the nation, not only could this help to eliminate viewing guns as only tools for mal intent, but it could significantly lower the chances of school shootings or gun mishandling in schools within the US.

First off you need to pick trustworthy people to be able to perform this job correctly, well, and who flawlessly pass all the background checks. A big part of this solution for compromise is having a tedious process to ensure no mistake is made in who is chosen. This wouldn’t be a volunteer, sign up sort of basis. It’s calculated selection of who we think have the qualifications to protect kids against gun threats at any and all costs. These people will be the ones handling guns and subsequently will be the security protecting the kids. I get it, you might see this as redundant because guns are still around the kids. I will tell you this though, that the statistics report that the overwhelming death of kids by guns is due to a shooter or the naïve, ignorant child having access to guns that are not stored properly-not guns that are being handled by responsible adults in a controlled environment . This wouldn’t be a factor as the security would prevent the shooters and no guns would be stored at the school, only carried by proper personnel. Rest assured to be clear again, the janitors would not be carrying. The only ones doing so would be a handful picked for only that reason. Your side as I understand from my research sees only mistake and miscalculation that can from this. You see the right to bear arms not as a means of protection but as, if I carry a gun openly then I am meaning to kill someone if that chance is happened upon-that’s why the gun is carried .

Around 1,300 children are killed by gun violence in the US every year mostly involving school shootings . That’s 1,300 families on average that lose a child that wasn’t properly protected one way or the other. That’s why this solution is not to be imposed on the world, it’s to be integrated with our school systems so that children take priority. That’s where it happens the most, where it’s most prevalent. The next step of this solution would be to put these selected people through rigorous training and testing. The nobody off the street who weighs three hundred pounds in fat is not the candidates for this process. Ex-military, police, and people with security experience would be most looked at but the standard for training would hold for anyone recruited. It would be ensured these people were in good physical shape and were of course psychologically sound which plays into the background checks a bit. The majority though of what the training would entail is teaching them and testing them on how to use guns and handle them flawlessly. They would need target practice, assembly and disassembly testing, accuracy exams, active shooter training, active shooter protocol, teamwork training and gun malfunction adaptability training. All parts would need to be not only passed but excelled at.

Lastly you would need these trained professionals to be aware of the risks but be ready. Coordination of defense plans would need to be flawless, and active scouting, scanning, and observation techniques would be utilized as opposed to some unarmed guard waiting at the booth near the school’s entrance. Monitoring the hallways actively, one guard posted outside every classroom, and routine walks of the premises would be the expected execution of this plan. Special utilities and equipment would be purchased for more optimal surveillance and patrol operations on school grounds. I think you can agree, this epidemic has reached this height of seriousness. We can’t have a loose system, we need skill, optimization and accuracy to the highest degrees.

You see the catch to all this if I pause for second is that you might be saying this has already been done or attempted before. Sure, there have been security measures laid out here and there, but nothing to the extent of the precision I describe in this. Training with guns and detailed plans for the case of an active shooter have not been around for long at all. In fact, it was really only in the late 1990’s that this began, and various testimonies prove it, that most run of the mill guards hired don’t know how to properly handle firearms . What I’m trying to communicate to you parents overall here, is not just the exact methodology for how to execute this plan, but to show you that unfamiliarity leads to mishandling and death. If people are well equipped that’s one thing. You can have the gear but no game, but if you know what your doing with your tools then it makes all the difference in moving forward.

Parents, if you have stayed with me this far, let me say that this might seem so far like something you are more against than for. But let me reassure you that this is for the children’s best interest and it is not integration of guns into society and into unwilling people’s hands but showing select people how to handle firearms for a higher purpose, for our kids defense, that I believe we all can get behind.

Regards,
Josiah Titus
Works Cited

Patel, Sejal H. “Kids and Gun Safety.” Children’s Rights Litigation, vol. 16, no. 3, Spring 2014,
pp.2-5.EBSCOhost,search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=
95727855&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Collier, Charles W. “Gun Control in America: An Autopsy Report.” Dissent
(00123846), vol. 60, no. 3, Summer 2013, pp. 81–86. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1353/dss.2013.0052.
Psychology Today. (2019). School Shootings and Gun Control: A Focus on Suicide. [online]
Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/crimes-violence/201802/school-shootings-and-gun-control-focus-suicide [Accessed 16 Oct. 2019].
Adam Peck. “There Has Been An Average Of One School Shooting Every Other School
Day So Far This Year.” ThinkProgress, 23 Jan. 2014, https://thinkprogress.org/there-has-been-an-average-of-one-school-shooting-every-other-school-day-so-far-this-year-3b594d9c21ad/.
Gibson, Gregory. “A Gun Killed My Son. So Why Do I Want to Own One?” The New York
Times, The New York Times, 1 June 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/
opinion/sunday/shooting-laws-guns.html.

I chose this for my English Major showcase because it reflects on the time and effort I took to come up with an effective beginner resume for when I start to look for jobs upon graduation and upon leaving the Navy.  My English major showcase presents many artifacts of essay type papers I wrote, so since this is a bit different and unique I believed it was critical to include.  It is important to note though that it is rough and has been made in my third year of college so consequently it will not include my Capstone or my Field Work Project so it may appear bare.  What it does show though is a starting list of some of my work, accomplishments, activities, and awards throughout my college years and contains various components that could appeal to many employers dealing with the English major.  This artifact represents learning outcome six of the six learning outcomes for an English Major.  To make this resume I had to do just what the learning outcome states, which is reflect on tons of learning experiences in order to come up with knowledge.  In this case I had to recall and layout many of my learning experiences, which included awards, activities, work, and accomplishments in order to produce a structured and organized body of knowledge in the form of a Resume.  The work put into it will hopefully eventually reflect the opportunities gained from it and this is a starting point.

JOSIAH TITUS

(412) 656-3972 | josiahtitus1998@gmail.com
3339 New England rd. West Mifflin, PA 15122

EDUCATION
B.A., English | Minor or Concentration in Arabic
Virginia Military Institute, Lexington, VA | May 2020
Studied at Community College of Allegheny county for one year

WRITTEN AND VERBAL COMMUNICATION
• Studied the Spanish and Latin language | Foreign Language classes
• Speaks well in Arabic language | Foreign Language department
• Studied Speech Course at Community College of Allegheny County

RESEARCH
• Conducted research on Civic proposal for Gun Control| Civic Discourse class
o Analyzed multiple types of sources to find information on coherent solution
o Evaluated sources for credibility and bias using only the best ones
• Started research work on 2nd Amendment| English Major Capstone Project
o Dissecting the 2nd Amendment itself and what it means for further research
o Examining various secondary sources for different interpretations associated with it

TEAMWORK
• Saved lives on Lifeguard team | Lifeguard, Sandcastle Water Park
o Learned how to work as a unit for pool rescue operations
• Loaded mulch/lumber on Lowe’s loading team | Loader, Lowes Home Improvement
o Worked as a team for loading and securing supplies for customers
• Delivered fridges on Lowe’s delivery team: Ride along, Lowes Home Improvement
o Worked as a part of a team for delivering home appliances to customers

ADDITIONAL SKILLS
Trained in American Red Cross and Ellis & Associate Lifeguard programs
Proficient in Microsoft Word
Proficient in PowerPoint
CPR Certification

AWARDS AND HONORS
Made Dean’s list for academic year 2017-2018, Community College of Allegheny County
Made Dean’s list for academic year 2019-2020, Virginia Military Institute
Eagle Scout award presented 2014

I chose this paper because in it I take the opinions of other authors as well as my own analysis on the book of Kim and use all this information to synthesize deeper meaning behind it’s context and plot.  Both analysists offer criticism on what the book is trying to communicate by finding themes in the story as well as historical influences that illuminate important messages being conveyed.  This paper is good for my English Major showcase because it focuses a lot on looking at a text and criticizing it as well as bringing to light portions that relay specific meanings in terms of what is analyzed.  This paper relates to number three of the six learning outcomes for the English major.  To further explain why this is, this paper clearly criticizes a well known text by taking the judgements and educated analysis of two other authors as well as myself and produces coherent meaning from these evaluations.  Much of the analysis and criticism is done as mentioned slightly through a historical lens, as well as the environment and character development seen.  Specific critical terminology is used by the authors Baucom and Annan in their respective critical papers on the book and this is evidenced within the paper’s multiple citations in support of assertions made.

Josiah Titus
ERH 302
LTC Ticen
October 20, 2019

Reading Kim through literary scholarship

The novel Kim is a story focusing on a young boy’s journey in India and his relationship with a lama, a spiritual holy figure who allows Kim to help him on his journey of enlightenment. In the book many themes are presented surrounding the progression of events that impact and influence Kim the character, transpiring events which allow him to find a place in the evolving world specific to him. Many criticisms have been written on this story though where highly intellectual discussion is had on various aspects and facets dealing with the stories history, accuracy, political engagement, religious ideals, character analysis, symbolism and much more. Two notable criticisms written on the story are Kipling’s Place in the History of Ideas by Noel Annan and The Survey of India by Ian Baucom. Many themes are prevalent in their writing, but one big theme present in both works which can be dissolved down into separate themes is the idea of histories deep involvement in Kipling’s writing seen in the stories setting as well as seen through influences on Kim dealing with through his purpose and the eventual fulfillment of it.
Both criticisms are very different in how they deliver the message intending to be received by readers. The main point in both reflect this overall theme of histories deep correlation to the book’s progression. Noel Annan in her article focuses more closely on the author, and his intentions with historical themes present in the story, while Baucom takes an approach that looks more at the setting of the story but it’s relation to Kim’s influences. Annan’s criticism delves into the political and social history evidenced in the plot of Kim, making up its basis. Annan looks at other authors who give commentary on Kipling’s writing in the novel and draws in other viewpoints, all culminating in seeing the relevance of what happens in the book through cultural traditions in India and historical significance. Overall, what they say is that Kipling’s writing has contributed greatly to the understanding of Englishmen, Indians, and Imperialism (324). The main point in the other article has similar elements within. Baucom’s point is along the same lines, but the focus of his criticism lies in his discussion on how the story is representative of real past events and symbolizes without making it factual, what has gone on in India in the past century with the characters and plot posing as caricatures. Kim’s identity is of high analysis and it can be presented in various ways when we look at his representation of a cartographer.
Annan’s criticism at it’s base revolves around Kipling and what his focus was in developing the themes he did within. As stated by her right at the beginning of her criticism, “Criticism has not yet come to terms with Kipling: the man and his works symbolize a part of British political and social history about which his countrymen have an uneasy conscience” (323). Annan puts her critique all in perspective with her opener. The man and his works as said here represent Britain’s world stage to an extent. Kim as a whole is things taken from what has happened in India and Britain’s lineage of existence and materializing them in the form of a story which incorporates Buddhism, The Great Game, and other components of the war amongst many events from history. Social history is the overarching word here as it entails the two when it’s brought out in the story. Obvious examples are strewn throughout, as Kipling’s story couldn’t be complete without those aspects. The lama is the biggest example of Kipling putting in a common cultural theme dealing with the religion of Buddhism which then stays throughout the whole of the story. In our introduction to the man, Buddhism being concerned is adequately touched on with Kipling writing, “In the entrance-hall stood the larger figures of the Greco-Buddhist sculptures done…statues and slabs crowded with figures that had encrusted the brick walls of the Buddhist…of the North Country” (8). Another example where history is incorporated bringing in a event this time, slightly political in a sense is when Kim meets the old man at a party who was involved in the mutiny of 1857, a real historical event integrated for accuracy and historical relevance. Kipling writes, “It was an old withered man, who had served the Government in the days of the Mutiny as a native officer” (42). Here the historical accuracy and it’s insertion is clear. Kim learns of the old man’s role in the struggle and then the story develops from here with Kim informing him of incoming troops from Pindi and the two share a correlation in the story. Both the lama and this old man themselves show histories social involvement, which is Annan’s core point.
Annan uses Kipling himself and his interests to look at how historical components were brought in beyond the mere characters and setting. Annan says, “Kipling prided himself, however, on describing what Durkheim called social facts” (325). Durkheim, being Kipling’s inspiration for storytelling, is used by Annan to reference how Kipling as mentioned previously modeled his work from a sociological way relevant to past and present proceedings. Taking ideas from Durkheim, a sociologist in this period, his book’s goal was to show how society was developed and how it looked, being visualized for any reader. Probably the most evident part of this is The Great Game in Kim, which the main character takes part in when he joins the secret service. Annan then says to tie together his points, “The impression which his work as a whole gives is that of a man who sees human beings moving in a definable network of social relationships, which impose upon them a code of behavior appropriate to their environment” (325). Probably one of Kipling’s bests sentences to single handedly describe what his writing is intending to accomplish, this gives a clear analyzed consensus on what that is. Kipling’s whole ideology of his thinking on Kim that is communicated through his writing lies in the relationships made by the characters, what they mean in terms of growth and development in the book but at the same time their behavior must follow the strict implementations that an accurate setting dictates all roots tied with history. While Kipling is not going for something nonfictional, his fiction in order to convince and be exact must mightily include this. At the end of the book, Kim has realized his place in the world and how he is tied into the future of India’s history and his role in the Great Game through the secret service agency (234).
Baucom’s criticism does not so much directly revolve on the author or plot, more as it focuses on the setting of the story, while upholding the same points on this historical theme which as mentioned entails influences to Kim’s journey, something Annan touched on but not nearly as much. Sociology is involved in this article of criticism as well but it’s relationship to the story’s environment is way more obvious. As said before setting instead of the author is more keyed in on with this criticism, as well as how moving parts in the story including elements, characters and events influence what his goal and end goal that happens are. One of Baucom’s quotes that ties together the whole criticism together is, “In joining Kim to this band of wanderers mapmakers, Kipling identifies the problem of refashioning Kim’s identity with the dilemma of India’s montgomerie-era cartographers” (351). It’s all about taking the Kim known from the story and fixing multiple views on him to bring out a central state and arc of analysis that personifies who the boy truly is at the core, keeping moving parts and elements from other characters in mind. His development revolves around the pace of the other characters within, but the main one is Creighton, a man who plays a big part in the setting of this story.
Creighton himself provides an outlook of The Great Game and more symbolism of India’s history by what he does. What Creighton also does and what Baucom spearheads in his article is how Creighton demonstrates himself as one of Kim’s biggest influences, subsequently playing a huge lead in Kim’s development from that influence. Baucom puts a lot of emphasis on character. From the start Creighton wanted Kim reared properly, with the example of sending him to school in lucknow telling him, “…thou wilt go under my protection” 98). In his article, Baucom writes “Throughout the greater part of the text, we have been led to believe that Creighton, like Father Victor, Mrs. Bennett, and Kipling himself, remains committed to Kim’s sahibization, that indeed Kim’s sahibization not only is consistent with Creighton’s disciplining of India but will emerge as an offshoot of the colonel’s policing labors” (356). Kim is a work of Creighton in and out. Creighton weighs heavily in on the kid as seen in the novel when he appears in various places. From the start potential in the lad is seen by the man as Kipling writes, “That boy mustn’t be wasted if he is as advertised” (95). Kim’s abilities come into view early and Creighton knows he is talent that can’t be taken for granted India in it’s current time needs people like him. Once Creighton gets him into the service, this is what leads to Kim growing up through the Babu and getting back with the lama who is then able to complete his quest due to Kim’s new abilities.
Annan and Baucom share the theme of history, and influences had on Kim that relate to the history of the time. Annan delivers more in her criticism, but both have justifiable information backed by the book to huge extents. Annan is all about the author and how he puts moments and events in the story which have historical relevance as to portray accuracy, and get the plot moving forward, not just Kim specifically. Baucom focuses on the history of the story but through a lens that looks more at Kim’s character development through the setting and environment as well as being concerned with who’s in it. Creighton is the integral in Baucom’s discussion as his relation to the boy culminates in a litany of transpiring events that follow the ultimate finale of everything to do with Kim’s success and the lama’s journey. Both authors criticisms use history and influence as a driving force to show the reasons behind what happens Kim the book.

Works Cited
Rudyard Kipling. Kim, by Rudyard Kipling. W.W. Norton & Company, 1988.

I chose this paper because of it’s complexity and the vast research that was put into completing it.  It speaks on the rhetorician John Dewey and what his idealogy argues for.  His theology, philosophy, and teachings on education, politics and religon show the rhetoric of the time as well as the major rhetorical theories stood upon.  This paper relates to numbers two and four of the six learning outcomes for an English major.  For number two this paper focuses on cultural context and how it influenced the rhetoric during this time period that John Dewey used and spoke about.  The era lines up with and matches how he viewed the world and it’s functions.  For number four, this paper is a perfect example of using many sources to produce an argument about a rhetorician and show what he taught and showcased.  All sources chosen and used provided evidence to backup statements and assertions made on who he was, what he did and what all of his ideology meant as well as the history that went along with it.

Josiah Titus
ERH 202
Maj. Iten
May 1st, 2019
Word Count: 2005
HR: Works Cited
John Dewey: An Ideal Public made by Communication

In his book The Public and its Problems, chapters four and five offer insight into John Dewey’s rhetorical theory. His focus as evidenced in his writing is concerned with the public, analyzing what it is they need to receive and use rhetoric within a Democratic system. An ideal public is an intelligent one, driven by their human motivation that is appealed to from their leaders to form a relationship and then used for society’s needs, all of which is based on good communication.

There is some historical context that can possibly go along with Dewey’s rhetorical theory. Possibly is used because it is not certain that his rhetoric was completely influenced or used for this time. Christopher Eisele speaks a bit on the time period of which Dewey lived and, on specifically immigration, happening then, and his points can be summarized. A lot of Dewey’s rhetoric as mentioned, centered on aspects dealing with social control, and these will be discussed later. Due to this, his rhetoric may have been influenced from what he saw was happening in America in relationship to the immigrants coming in before and after WWII. It’s difficult to state this as fact though because as Eisele points out, “Dewey’s major statements concerning immigrants, which numbered fewer than a dozen” (68). Basically, there so little Dewey really says on immigrants, that its hard to accurately capture his exact view on them, and how his rhetoric relates. On Dewey’s view of immigrants and his answer, Eisele says, “Dewey, as well as other liberal reformers, was committed to flexible, experimentally managed, orderly social change” (67). Dewey saw the lack of social adeptness from these newcomers to their new land and leaders, and it stemmed from a rhetoric issue. Eisele gives a quote from an unnamed observer of the time saying, “It has consciously become all of a sudden of the very greatest importance to us as a nation that the immigrants whom we have welcomed into our society … should be an integral part of that society and not foreign to it” (71). The immigrants needed to be molded into America and many wanted it as this quote says. Overall Dewey seems to suggest a more communicative approach, like in his rhetoric-although the problem is that in his primary texts, his mention on Immigrants specifically is little. Assimilating these new people into society would prove difficult. Eisele quotes Dewey’s own opinion saying that incorrect assimilation “…contributes to the decline of the person” (68). Patrick Diggins who researches some of the cultural context of Dewey also weighs in on Dewey’s thinking of how this problem could be solved in the long run. It seems to be education. Diggins says, “He had always held up rational intelligence… means by which disputes could be settled” (214). Not much can be ascertained of Dewey on immigrants in society, but what he does emphasize is that education, which by default would bring intelligence, could help to solve the problem. Eisele’s best point is a quote by Dewey on the emphasis of education, “But the problem is not to reduce them to an anonymous and drilled ho- mogeneity, but to see to it that all get from one another the best that each strain has to offer from its own tradition and culture” (72).

Intelligence is one of the leading points in all of Dewey’s rhetoric, that a socially adaptable public with a high degree of intellect is required for problems to be solved in a democratic setting. Contribution by all parties is key though. Dewey quotes, “…participation in activities and sharing in results are additive concern. They demand communication as a prerequisite” (330). Remember though that intelligence only attained through communication, it all links. More on intelligence and it’s problem in the time period most likely, Dewey says “It may be urged that the present confusion and apathy are due to the fact that the real energy of society is now directed in all non-political matters by trained specialists…while politics are carried on with a machinery and ideas formed in the past” (312). Politics is the backbone and leading force of any society Dewey asserts, and if the government is full of unintelligent people that promote artificial work and ideals with nothing holding them up, it crashes and burns. He follows this up with a climax statement, “…a public organized for political purposes, rather than experts guided by specialized inquiry, is the final umpire and arbiter of issues” (313). This only harps on his view of what intelligence can do for a Democratic government and its people. Scott Stroud in relation to Dewey’s theory on intelligence says, “All individuals are assumed to be the implied critic because all individuals can be assumed capable of undertaking some sort of intelligent examination of what is in front of them” (45). The individual, which eventually builds up to the public when all become concerned, must be able to comprehend and decipher. They must know what they are hearing, what they are being called to do, or what they mustn’t do. Ignorance is downfall, but education alleviates this, and when the public can make sense of themselves and what they are receiving through high intellect, only then can success be had. If the public is to grow and be the communicative public Dewey believes is needed for success, intelligence must be gained. Don Burks speaks on Dewey’s thinking saying, “Dewey was much aware of the close relationship of speech and thought, of communication as the essential means by which intelligence develops” (118).

Dewey’s second most important component in his rhetoric dealing with the Public is human motivation, and this mostly deals with the individual’s psyche at the core. This part of his rhetoric can get very complex. Communication is once again integral for this to work and communication in rhetoric, to Dewey at least, goes as deep as the human psyche, making for a complex attribute to be had if effective. Dewey even says, “Communication can alone create a great community” (324). The public must have this effectiveness if they are to be in control of their government as opposed to be controlled by their government. So what of human motivation? Humans must be appealed to, their likes and dislikes exploited if they are to be gained, convinced, or worked with. They are creatures of routine and habit and will be motivated by such, not disruption of it. Dewey says, “Habit is the mainspring of human action, and habits are formed for the most part under the influence of the customs of a group” (334). Mainspring is the key word as it means catalyst and lifeforce almost simultaneously. The public can be moved if what they have in common or what is familiar to them is used on them. Groups only come together under shared customs and ideals. Stroud speaks on how motivation develops in a person from habit saying, “Humans experience life in some environment and with a certain immediacy. Words, events, and so on all have a certain meaning-they evoke certain habitual ways of acting and thinking” (37). Every person is developed differently. They have different experiences in life, different difficulties, and react or initiate in their own certain way based off of their own inner self that is crafted in life. As has been seen though, all of Dewey’s rhetoric flows with the each other. Intelligence cannot be separate from human motivation. Motivation is made through an individual’s intelligence, as Christopher Johnstone says, “Dewey’s “method of intelligence” involves…practical deliberation; and second, a conception of the habits and attitudes to be cultivated in the individual in order to extend the capacity for intelligent judgement” (188). The result Johnstone says is, “Judgements are tested and confirmed, then, only by acting and comparing actual outcomes with those anticipated” (188). What Johnstone is saying here is that intelligence prompts awareness, and keen decision making. If these are possessed by the individual, then they can influence the public. Once appeals are discovered and each individual themselves realizes what drives them to what it is they do, or believe in, or stand up for, then they can intelligently ascribe to society. That certain motivation must be found first though and used.

The depth of what influences a public and how this in turn relates to it’s system of governing and the relationship between the two, is extensive in Dewey’s theories. This is one of his broader pieces of his rhetoric, encompassing intelligence and motivation. The relationship between the government and it’s people rides on both. Dewey says clearly that, “The government exists to serve its community, and that this purpose cannot be achieved unless the community itself shares in selecting it’s governors and determining their policies” (327). Dewey strongly believes that there must exist a strong relationship between the government and the public. The public is a bad one if uninvolved, but both can be critically strong if they share the power and work together through rhetorical communication. Dewey does speak to the problems that occur with this though, and he is most likely referring to the problems in his time but we can only assume. “How can a public be organized; we may ask when literally it does not stay in place…” (322). This is a general statement but what it says is that if the government cannot control its people, then they will not be able to control themselves. Explained better, it is the task of the government to organize, to make order out of chaos and communication is their best weapon. Communication works with intelligence, motivation and this one too. Burks says communication is, “…the establishment or cooperation in an activity in which there are partners, and in which the activity of each is modified and regulated by partnership” (122). Dewey’s theory on motivation plays in to his rhetorical theory on the relationship between the public and government as seen when he says, “Only deep issues or those which can be made to appear such can find a common denominator among all the shifting and unstable relationships” (322). Dewey knows that a public that doesn’t take charge but is taken charge of is one doomed. The motivation and intelligence of the person is tied in with how the public will function, and in turn how the government will function. Dewey writes, “…a good citizen finds his conduct as a member of a political group, enriching and enriched by his participation in family life, industry, scientific and artistic associations…the pulls and responses of different groups reinforce one another, and their values accord” (328). There is the ideal citizen, contributor to society and politics in Dewey’s mind, and what they ascertain out of the life they have is how they end up affecting the groups around them and that their apart of. The individual is always constantly being influenced by their environment, which is why the individual and public cannot work alone if anything is to be achieved.

Dewey is specific in examining what makes an ideal public. He believes that the rhetoric used within the structure shows how intelligent its system is. Communication is the final arbiter of the good and bad of the rhetoric used, but it can be helped by an intelligent public that is appealed to through their motivations, which forms a good relationship between the government and them. The time in which Dewey lived we can strongly guess that his rhetoric might have been fitting for success amidst such struggle His rhetoric seems to be the type that if utilized highly, could give the masses the opportunity to lead the government, so that corruption could not end up destroying the innocent. A naïve, uncommunicative public is privy to this. Hitler’s reign and Stalin’s reign proved this fact. Rhetoric is powerful, but both sides must be adept, because if it’s used to benefit the powerful, then many will end up reaping the consequences. Burks quotes Dewey’s arguably best phrase on this saying “Language makes the difference between brute and man” (119).

Works Cited
Burks, Don M. “John Dewey and Rhetorical Theory.” Western Speech, vol. 32, no. 2, 1968, pp.
118–126.
Dewey, John. The Later Works, 1925-1953. Southern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Diggins, John. “John Dewey in Peace and War.” The American Scholar Vol. 50, No. 2 (Spring
1981), pp. 213-230.
Eisele, J. “John Dewey and the Immigrants.” History of Education Quarterly Vol. 15, No. 1
(Spring, 1975), pp. 67-85.
Johnstone, Christopher. “Dewey, Ethics, and Rhetoric: Toward a Contemporary Conception of
Practical Wisdom.” Philosophy & Rhetoric, Vol. 16, No. 3 (1983), pp. 185-207.
Stroud, Scott. “John Dewey and the Question of Artful Criticism.” Philosophy & Rhetoric, Vol.
44, No. 1 (2011), pp. 27-51.