Gould does not believe Morton’s work was conscious fraud because he published it so openly. If he truly knew how flawed and bias his data was, he would not publish it due to threat of excommunication from the science community. Personal opinion; the science community at that time obviously knew very little and might have even sided with fraudulent data as long as it aligned with their supremacist goals.

The gap that Morgan is trying to fill is he want his readers/voters to be afraid of the potential of black voters and the retribution that might come. He wanted to initiate a “call to arms” to fellow racists that the status quo could be disrupted.

Claim – Morgans claim to me was this; We the white people are superior to all other races and we are under threat of being invaded and our power will be reduced. Our traditions and our way of life will be interfered with. We must stop african americans from voting for fear that we will be screwed.

Reasons – Here are skulls from all over the world. As you can see; white people have the biggest skulls of all races and are therefore smarter. Nevermind the fact that I was biased and treated the data sing and dance like my own personal marionette.

Evidence – I feel this way due to my sarcasm in the above reasons. He used junk science that was flawed. He was racist and allowed that to dominate his scientific profession.

Morton used dubious practices to garner the results he internally desired in regard to average skull/brain size. It appears he used known smaller size skulls of Hindus, Egyptians, and Africans to achieve their averages, while using larger skulls for whites. The concept of larger body/skull = more intelligence has proven false. Morton also invalidated his own tests by changing the frequency of the control. He would lightly shake an african skull with seed to determine the volume, while he would shake a whites skull hard and push in as many seeds as he could to achieve a higher volume. He would also round up whites numbers while rounding down all others. This absolute junk science was the product of a misguided discourse community using what it knew of science and used that to alter tests to justify white supremacy for whatever aims they had at the time.

When “Dr.” Morton died in 1851 he was highly respected as a man of science. However, when later analyzing his data, it was discovered that it was all fudgings on a zealous man desperately attempting to scientifically prove other races were inferior to his own.

PVF Explains how interracial breeding was looked down upon at the time and how women were treated poorly if they had children with a black man. Children of interracial breeding were viewed as “less than” and they would not be beneficial to their parents or society.

TMM is a fine example of a discourse community. The author is disproving the “established” science of evolution and how it related to different races in comparison to whites.

1.) a.)The discourse community of evolutionary science had a clear and common goal. Despite the community being previously misguided by established prejudice. b.)This community certainly also had its own mechanisms of inter-communicating with itself. The scientific language and ways in which evolutionists discourse with each other is and was beyond the outsider. c.) Information and feedback is disseminated in this community by way of scientific journals, letters, etc. This community also had dues to establish membership; becoming educated and specializing in this field was necessary to participate. d.) Finally, This discourse community fits the threshold limitation in my opinion. It requires commitment, time, money, and intellect to join this particular discourse community. With limited apprentices joining and existing members dying, it seems to be a limited pool of individuals that society places a lot of trust into. We trust science to explain what we don’t know or what we strive to know more about. The common person doesn’t have access to such world changing promise. This is why it is crucial in my opinion for discourse communities to not be closed off or subject to rhetorical ideas or general foolishness of the times.

2.) It appears that the evolutionary science community spread their knowledge through publications, journals, and passed along through mentor-ship/teaching.

3.) The prejudices at the time were perpetuated by scientists who as I said above, society puts much credence into. This community was the word of authority and still is to this day. The idea that they could be misguided and spread misinformation helped establish the Jim Crow laws that further divided us by race and the idea that your race defined your merit.

Despite being in a scientific field, men in earlier times were still motivated to document their findings in line with their predjudices at the time. If science could not explain anatomy or evolution, then junk science was allowed to enter the arena and the unexplained was attributed to race or the inferiority of all races to whites.

This is a good example of discourse communities being closed off to new ideas. Despite an established discourse community, scientists at the time were subject to the pitfalls of the time.

– Does science truly guide a developing human race? Scientists seek fact and evidence but even if science can explain what was once unknown, will society accept it? It was only until the church conceded to Galileo that the earth revolved around the sun that the masses accepted it as truth. So it could be argued that science nudges but does not convince the human race as a whole until their culture catches up to the realism of the fact.

Reification – The concept of humans turning unknowns into entities

Ranking – Assigning unknowns to hierarchies

Does our biology truly define who we are and what our intellectual limits are? Or is it limited by our social status?

1.) He explains that food service workers must act as a sort of chameleon with their customers. They must adapt and read each table/person to maximize their dining experience. He adds that service does not equate to servitude.

2.) Not all menu items are common among differing restaurants. Food service workers must be able to distinguish the menu and explain their locations methods to the customer. This practice requires higher learning and problem solving. Certainly not mindless work that food service has been classified.

3.) Fine dining establishments can have fancy and foreign items that customers have no idea about or even how to say. Service workers in these establishments can obtain a word of authority in these circumstances, leading customers to menu decisions and ultimately having a certain degree of control over their dining experience.

4.) People who have not read this essay might discredit or be unaware of the effort and knowledge it takes to be an effective waiter.

5.) The gap is the misunderstanding that customers have the mentality that food service work is mindless. From a rhetorical context, it might be to impress the authors own discourse community.

1.)Speech communities spread as people spread. Information/people drift away from center. You can be either born into or adopted into a speech comm. Speech communities include verbal communication.

Discourse communities formed for specific functions. Information and focus begins to centralize and specialize. Examples could be going to a trade school or joining the military. Reasons for joining these groups could be to feel included, training, career aspirations, etc. These communities include written comm.

2.)Discourse communities has a set agreed upon public goal

Disc. comm has a threshold of membership & expertise

Mechanisms of inter-communication between members

Utilizes those mechanisms to provide info and feedback

Acquired particular language and lingo between members of discourse communities

One or more genres of communication in furtherance of it’s goals

3.) I believe problems with discourse communities is that they are more closed off to speech communities. Even members of discourse communities need to leave their own speech communities at the door.

It takes time and training to get a new initiate up to speed with the speech/lexi usage.

People may feel restricted to new ideas within the discourse community as not to disrupt the agreed setup upon goals or set ways of doing things.

1.) I Believe Swales see’s the gap as being the disconnect between speech communities and discourse communities. Also, there are multiple definitions of these two types of communities that hampers communications fields.

2. This piece fills the gap by informing the uninitiated to discourse communities and how they could join them or even how to excel in them. He provides definitions and attempts to clarify these communities.

3. I believe the intended audience is for the yet to be initiated discourse community members. It could also serve as a refresher for those already in multiple comms to not be closed off to ideas.

4. The danger in an essay like this is that Swales writes as if discourse and speech communities should be exclusive of one another. I think that this is dangerous in practical application because everybody is different and it should not always be black and white like Swales explains.

Bitterwaitress.com is a website that exists to serve as a platform for food service workers to communicate with each other and establish their own discourse community.

An aspect of this website is a forum for individuals who are not in the food service industry to write in and harass workers and belittle them. This is a symptom of a greater need for communication. The dept. of labor classifies waiting on tables a low skilled job. With 1/3 of the nations workforce performing these jobs, it’s quite a large chunk to be in that category by itself.

I have never worked in the food service industry but the idea that economists describe waiting tables as “mindless” and requires little to no problem solving, is debasing and incorrect. I am no economist, but they are wrong.

Lou’s restaurant is good evidence that food service is an intricate art that requires the reading of people and problem solving.

1.) I think the gap refers to the idea that the American public is generally unaware of the lucrative aspect of war. DoD contracts are numerous and the ways in which they are secured would concern the average citizen despite their patriotism or nationalism.

2.) I believe this piece does fill the gap, as long as the reader recognizes the irony. Stein utilizes irony and his cynicism to nail in his point.

3.) I was absent 9/5 but I believe Stein is writing to people who share his view. His irony and cynicism help to portray his possible anger or disgust with the issue and helps galvanize others who share his views.

4.) I believe the danger of this type of essay would be a reader who is not a regular subscriber to Time and thus not a member of the discourse community necessary to understand Steins writing style.

5.) Stein beautifully lays out the ugly truths to wartime profiteering disguised as patriotism.

1.) Speech communities are not at central to our lives then discourse communities?

2.) Clear defined goals, ways of interacting with each other, provides feedback, genres, lexis, threshold.

3.) Closed off to outside ideas. Running out of time, apologies.

Our surrounding’s add context to what we are doing at the time and how we should conduct ourselves. When attempting new activities, careers, or exploring new ideas, we are adding to our discourse experiences. Language and writing can and should also adapt and expand as we meet new people and delve into new arenas.

Swales states that discourse communities have a broad set of goals that are either implied or are written down. Being a student at UC is a discourse community, graduating is the goal. This discourse community has mechanisms for communication between members. Members of this group are expected to adhere to the social norms that apply to it.

Not all discourse communities have to be formal or scholarly. They are all around us in our daily lives and we may be unaware how many we actually belong to.