Meiland Essay Paragraph 1

Kota Funakawa
Professor Owen JAMES
ARW Section AI
29 May 2007

Meiland Essay Paragraph 1

　　The first reason why I disagree with the ides is that the true purpose of college is to learn how to think, intellectual skills and attitudes. This point is suggested by Meiland “the content is not the main point. Much of the content that you are taught in college will be outmoded or discarded anyway in ten or twenty years. Learning intellectual skills and attitudes is far more important.” (Meiland 5).This Meiland’s argument is complete answer for this essay’s topic “a college education seems to be fairly useless” because the main affirmative claim for the topic is the information which we are studying now will be out-of-date but Meiland says the content of study is less important. And there is an example. In ICU, the professors always say “Think critical. Don’t believe the information without considering by yourself. Have your own opinion.” so ICU students must learn how to think critical. When you are learning it, you use particular topic. But after acquired, the way of thinking are employed not only when think about particular topic but also anytime. The importance of intellectual skills and attitudes will not change. And here is another example, think about legal science. The number of laws is increasing day by day. The reason why they are increasing is that new problems are happening in our society so new law is being made. But appearing of laws is not automatically means the old laws became useless. At first it looks like that the old laws became out-of-date, but it isn’t because the new law is made to cover just new extent and existing laws keep their effect for their own fields, they didn’t become useless. The example tells us if the new information appeared, it is not always means the old one is out-of-date.

Fluency journal "The purpose of ELP"

Kota Funakawa
Professor Owen JAMES
ARW Section AI
22 May 2007

Fluency journal "The purpose of ELP"

　

　　I would like to explain the purpose of ELP. The reason why I chose this topic is because I thought that now is the time we recognize the meaning of ELP anew. I hope that rediscovery will make our studying English more efficient. Now let’s begin. The purpose of ELP is to make students fluent at English enough to take lecture. But the ELP alone won’t make you a fluent English speaker because ELP is just an opportunity to use English. So you have to have the desire, motivation and effort to learn in order to be a fluent speaker. The ELP has six kinds of classes in spring term: ARW, RCA, ALS, ALN, ASP and NP. Let’s see the purpose of each class. First, ARW has two purposes, writing part and reading part. On the one hand, reading part helps you understand and talk about the ideas presented in the readings and NP lectures. On the other hand, writing part develops your writing abilities in English for university level work. Second, RCA also has two parts. The purpose of reading part is to develop skills in reading the content for accuracy. That of writing part is to develop your understanding of the structure of English sentence, paragraphs and academic texts. Third, the objectives of ALS are to introduce you to various learning strategies, and to help you develop effective ways to promote classroom interaction and self-study techniques. Forth, the aim of ALN class is developing your listening and notetaking skills. Fifth, the object of ASP is to become more fluent in spoken English. Last, NP’s purpose is to develop your academic listening and notetaking skills. These are the purposes of ELP. We should study while being conscious of these purposes to improve your own skill of English.(298 words)

Work cited

ELP STUDENT HANDBOOK 2007-2008

Fluency journal "Menus of ICU restaurant"

Kota Funakawa

Professor Owen JAMES

ARW Section AI

15 May 2007

Fluency journal "Menus of ICU restaurant"

　

　　Next to Diffendorfer Memorial Hall, there is the dining hall. It is called by students “Gakki”. There are about 10 menus usually and the taste is not bad. The most popular menu is chicken TATSUTA. But the price is high in general. In the ranking of WASEDA GAKUSYOKU KENKYUUKAI, ICU’s dining hall is the best. But is it sure? What do you think? So we went Aoyama-gakuin university to investigate the dining hall. Aogaku’s dining hall is really large because there are a lot of students. There are about 30 menus always. We ate lunch set A titled “Omotesandou” and “Millefeuille KATSUDON.” They are really nice especially Millefeuille KATSUDON is fantastic. Then, we find an interesting paper there. It says Aogaku’s dining hall is the best in the ranking which investigated by Asahi newspaper. In that ranking, ICU’s dining hall is out of the 10th. But we are convinced “Aogaku’s dining hall is better than ICU’s one.” because the price is lower overall and there are really many varieties. Therefore we felt Aogaku’s dining is better.

ARP:Reaction to Meiland's "Why Reasons Matter"

Kota Funakawa
Professor Owen JAMES
ARW Section AI
8 May 2007

Reaction to Meiland’s “Why Reasons Matter”

Summary
　　　　In “Why Reasons Matter” Meiland argue that beliefs are supported by good reasons. First, if the beliefs are supported by good reasons, the beliefs are credible. It doesn’t mean, however, we don’t need to confirm those beliefs. Next, basing beliefs on good reasons are really important for us because they liberate us from avoiding frustration and encourage us to achieve our goals. This function is called “pragmatic” justification. So we can get along better in the world. Third justification is called “social” justification because basing beliefs on good reason fits together well with our democratic way of life and help to achieve the aim, to be ideal person, to make the environment which we want to live. Forth, if we have the belief which supported by good reasons, we don’t have to bother whether it is true or not because good reasons let us avoiding when we are challenged. Last function of good reasons is deeper understanding. If you pursue the good reason, you will gather more specific information. So you get better, deeper, understanding. We are using the functions of good reasons while we are unconscious. Therefore the good reasons are supporting the beliefs.

Discussion
　　　　According to the Meiland, beliefs are supported by five functions of good reasons. So you don’t need to bother whether they are true. But the five justifications are originally the same. It is because the five functions appear at the same time. When you do the first justification, searching for good reason to make your own belief credible, you have to gather a lot of information. So you automatically do the second, “pragmatic”, justification: to let you to get along better in the world, and fifth one, to understand about the belief deeper. When you search, you have the purpose finding the good reason and understand about the belief better. These are the second and fifth. While it is happening, the third and forth justifications are also appearing. In the one hand, the third, “social”, justification to make you or the environment around you pleasant is found in discussion. You frequently use the way gathering information through discussion. Thus the third justification is discovered there. On the other hand, the fourth justification is also in the discussion. But it is difficult to find because the　definition is abstract. Meiland’s definition is “If you know the grounds-the good reasons or justification-for your beliefs, then when your belief is challenged, you can defend your belief, not only to other people but to yourself too.” In short, in my interpretation, if the belief has the forth justification, you can hold the self-confidence. Wait a minute, do you remember the first justification? It is similar to the forth justification, isn’t it? The forth justification is just an aspect of the first justification. So the forth justification is inevitably happened together. Thus it is obvious the five justifications are happened simultaneously. Therefore the five justifications are originally the same.

Work Cited
Meiland, Jack W. Why Reasons Matter:College Thinking:

How to Get the Best Out of College, 1981. (The ELP Reader, 2007)

ARP:Reaction to Meiland's "New Tyapes of Interrectual Work"

Kota Funakawa

Professor Owen JAMES
ARW Section AI
29 April 2007

Reaction to Meiland’s “New Types of Intellectual Work”

Summary
　　　　According to the Meiland, there are three explicit differences between high school and college. First is the difference of how to treat the fact. In high school, the fact is absolutely and eternally true, but in college it is just a theory. Next is the difference of the method of understanding. Both High school and college need students to understand the materials. It is same. The students in college require the critical examination and evaluation for understanding the materials because the materials treated as beliefs or conclusions that have been reached on the basis of investigation rather than treated as unchanging facts, but high school students understand through just memorizing. The last is the difference between a descriptive statement and a normative statement. A descriptive statement tells how things in fact are, while a normative statement tells how things should be, regardless of how they in facts are. A normative statement is mainly used, because the fact is treated as the theory in the college. Therefore high school and college are almost the same, but it is distinctly different and college work is higher level. So college freshmen must change their mind to the “New Type of Intellectual Work”.

Discussion

　　　　Meilamd says that high school and college are almost the same, but it is distinctly different and college work is higher level. It is because college requires new types of intellectual work at the college level. But, is this little difference? Is this not so important? I don’t think so, because I think the way of understanding in High School and that in college is absolutely different. The study in high school is about the facts absolutely and eternally true, very, very sure, because the facts are proved by somebody who studies the fact as his major. So students don’t need to check the things whether it is really true or not, but students in college require gathering the information, evidence and result of exam because the fact is just a theory in college. Meiland himself also mentioned this point “What is treated in high school as eternal and unchangeable fact that human beings have discovered in their continual and relentless progress toward total knowledge will be treated in college as belief that may perhaps be well supported at the present but that could turn out to be wrong.” I think that one of the main purposes of the college study is pursuing the truth because study in college is the latest study in each divisions or majors. So the scholar must prove his or her own argument because the answer, the fact, has not discovered yet. Therefore I think that mere, passive memorizing the things which proved by expert is by far different from the work to understand in college, to estimate the result, to search the information, to prove the estimation. They are absolutely different work. So I can’t agree with Meiland clearly.

Work Cited
Meiland, Jack W. New Types of Intellectual Work: College Thinking:

How to Get the Best Out of College, 1981. (The ELP Reader, 2007)

Paraglaph:My Most Meaningful Experience

Kota Funakawa

Professor Owen JAMES

ARW Section AI

29 April 2007

My Wonderful Experience

　　　I learned three meaningful things from my experience of volunteer at retirement home. The purpose of this volunteer was to commune with the old. First, I learned the importance of kindness. When I did really small thing, to hand a cup to an old man, to move his wheelchair, to listen his old story, he always said “thank you” at last. Next, when I listened his old story about World WarⅡ, I strongly felt the misery of war because he said ”I went to China as a soldier. I killed some Chinese, but, to tell the truth, I don’t want to do so”. He looks like sad. Last, when I felt the misery of war, I felt the richness of our age at the same time. We seldom feel the problems about war and poverty in daily life. He said “Japan has gotten really rich.” And I felt “How blessed age we are living!” Therefore I learned three important things in life from the old man.