Dear Future APELC-er,
Congrats for signing up for this course! All lot of your peers probably warned you against taking this class due to its formidable reputation in the past. Fear not. It's really not that bad.
The truth is the most challenging part about this class for me was taking tests. I've always had a love of writing, which definitely helped me in the course along with my grade, however my test-taking skills were not up to par. The class tests both your ability to analyze a text, whether or not you grasped its purpose, how the author achieved that purpose, etc., and your ability to take what you've learned from other writers and apply it to your own work. There is definitely a learning curve required with this course, but it is almost guaranteed that everyone will improve in some aspect.
I think the best way to get the most out of this course would be to keep an open mind. It's pointless to go into expecting the worst; it will be a challenge, there will be grades that you're not used to getting, and you will have to work hard to get an A or a B. But to me this class was so worth the extra effort: it was truly enjoyable, and my writing and analysis definitely improved over the course of the year.
Work hard but don't stress too much. Mr. Yost will say this a lot over the year so get used to it: it's only school. (I rolled my eyes the first time I heard that, but looking back I appreciate the encouragement so much more. It gave me a new perspective that I never fully understand till now.)
Good luck! You'll be fine!
Liz
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
TOW 29 - Was He Justified? (The Armstrong Lie)
As much as the easiest solution is to deem Lance Armstrong in the wrong, the circumstances do not allow for such a black-and-white answer. Whether or not Lance Armstrong was justified in using and lying about using performance enhancing drugs remains a controversy today. Arguments vary from each end of the spectrum as in he was completely justified or unjustified in his actions. The most conceivable argument is that Armstrong was justified in his doping, however his extended lie was inappropriate and short-sighted.
Doping was the norm of Armstrong's era. The various testimonies explicitly stated that just about all of the top cyclists were accused of or found guilty of using performance enhancers. In order to not only compete, but also thrive in this line of work at the time most had to use these drugs. Although it may not have been ethical, the audience of this documentary can be sympathetic to Armstrong's position; almost everyone has been in a situation in which one must decide whether a specific circumstance rationalizes breaking the rules. One testimony stated that we could have accepted Armstrong's doping because everyone else had been doing the same, but it was his constant denial that irked the public and the officials.
Armstrong's nagging rebuttals were the most infuriating part of his doping scandal. Numerous first-hand witnesses with obvious credibility snitched on Armstrong, but neither he nor his devoted fans would recognize anything the opposition said. Armstrong avidly protested the accusations and viciously attacked anyone behind them. Armstrong lied and got caught. He has no excuses and no one to blame but himself. If Armstrong had admitted to his drug use early on it is likely that his name would not live in infamy as it does today.
It is easy to reflect on Armstrong's career criticizing his decisions and denouncing his name; however in that moment Armstrong was genuinely terrified for his future and decided to do what he believed was the best of the worst options. As viewers of this documentary and commentators of the world's issues, it is important to remember that we were not in the shoes of this person at that moment. We did not live their moments, so who are we to judge them? If every bad decision were publicized no one would be remembered for his or her good judgement.
Doping was the norm of Armstrong's era. The various testimonies explicitly stated that just about all of the top cyclists were accused of or found guilty of using performance enhancers. In order to not only compete, but also thrive in this line of work at the time most had to use these drugs. Although it may not have been ethical, the audience of this documentary can be sympathetic to Armstrong's position; almost everyone has been in a situation in which one must decide whether a specific circumstance rationalizes breaking the rules. One testimony stated that we could have accepted Armstrong's doping because everyone else had been doing the same, but it was his constant denial that irked the public and the officials.
Armstrong's nagging rebuttals were the most infuriating part of his doping scandal. Numerous first-hand witnesses with obvious credibility snitched on Armstrong, but neither he nor his devoted fans would recognize anything the opposition said. Armstrong avidly protested the accusations and viciously attacked anyone behind them. Armstrong lied and got caught. He has no excuses and no one to blame but himself. If Armstrong had admitted to his drug use early on it is likely that his name would not live in infamy as it does today.
It is easy to reflect on Armstrong's career criticizing his decisions and denouncing his name; however in that moment Armstrong was genuinely terrified for his future and decided to do what he believed was the best of the worst options. As viewers of this documentary and commentators of the world's issues, it is important to remember that we were not in the shoes of this person at that moment. We did not live their moments, so who are we to judge them? If every bad decision were publicized no one would be remembered for his or her good judgement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)