Response to Sherry Lee’s “Unit 2 Reading Summary”

            I love to keep up with current events including the blog feeds to which I subscribe.  Prior to posting my summary to the reading request I just happened to read Sherry Lee’s “Unit 2 Reading Summary.”  This isn’t typically a post that I would choose to write a response about but I was and still am in need of any insight concerning argument and rhetoric that I can get my hands upon.  I am very glad that I was compelled to read Sherry’s post because it helped me to absorb some aspects of the reading better, realize that I didn’t absorb some aspects at all, and also caused me to adjust my understanding of arguments a bit.

            I take for granted at times that others’ might understand and summarize reading in very different ways.  My summary follows the book and summarizes the pertinent aspects of the “look” of rhetoric.  Sherry’s summary also follows the book but, through a different lens, describes some of the other very pertinent aspects of rhetoric and rhetorical analysis.  The “dialogic strategies” analysis and summary is just a single example of how Sherry and I view the concepts differently with regard to importance.  I didn’t even mention the description of the “dialogic strategies” or “analogy” rhetorical strategy. 

            I do not feel that reading for logic is a natural strength of mine, as the previous paragraph clearly describes, though I do love to read when the subject of the reading takes my interest.  I feel that Sherry’s summary moves me to take another look at the reading and make a few more notes.  Thanks to Sherry, I will apply this mini-lesson throughout my college career and day-based career.  There isn’t a doubt in my mind that I have a lot to learn about rhetoric, reading, and responses.