Writing 122- Cora
Agatucci
English Composition [Argumentation
& Critical Reading-Response]
Example Formal
Academic Summaries
Online Handout, WR 122, Winter 2002
Cora
Agatucci
Writing
122, Dr. Agatucci
Formal
Academic Summary
22
January 2001
Rogers, Carl R.
"Communication: Its Blocking and its Facilitation."
In On Becoming a Person. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1961. 329-337.
Rpt. in Current Issues and Enduring
Questions. 3rd
ed. Eds. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo
Bedau. Boston: Bedford Books-St.
Martin's Press, 1993. 794-801.
In "Communication: Its Blocking and Its Facilitation,"
psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers proposes that his client-centered approach to
dealing with failures of communication, can be applied to improving human
communication in general. In
Rogers’ view, the main barrier to effective interpersonal communication is
an individual’s too-quick tendency to evaluate, from her own point of view,
another’s statement. This
obstacle can be removed if individuals delay judgment, and genuinely listen to
and try to understand the statement from the other’s point of view.
While this solution sounds simple, Rogers acknowledges that it is
difficult to achieve empathetic understanding of another's frame of reference,
especially when participants are emotionally invested in defending their own
positions. Courage is required to
listen empathetically when it means opening oneself up to the risk of change.
In such cases, Rogers explains, a disinterested but sympathetic third
party can help the antagonists achieve mutual understanding by inducing them
to approach the task as partners trying to solve a problem together, rather
than as opponents attacking each other. Rogers
believes that his “test tube” solution could be successfully applied to
global communication failures among large groups if Western leaders had enough
faith in the social sciences to invest in
peace-making projects like his. Indeed,
Rogers warns, the continued survival of humankind may depend upon such an
investment.
[Example Formal Academic Summary by
student Carrie Emrich]
Carrie
Emrich
Writing
122, Dr. Agatucci
Formal
Academic Summary
22
January 2001
Gomes, Peter J.
"Homophobic? Reread Your Bible." New York Times 17
Aug. 1992. Rpt. The Aims of Argument: A Rhetoric and
Reader. Eds. Timothy W. Crucius and Carolyn E. Channell. 3rd
ed. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 2000. 516-518.
In
"Homophobic? Reread Your Bible," Christian professor and minister
Peter J. Gomes examines the use of the Bible by Christian Fundamentalists as a
weapon against homosexuals. He states that Fundamentalist religious
groups attack gays out of the need for villains and scapegoats. These
attacks are often supported by religious leaders and teachings.
Attackers frequently use slanted interpretations of the Bible to justify
hatred for gays, accusing them of being immoral or evil. Gomes argues,
however, that the Bible passages being used include trespasses that the
accusers themselves are guilty of violating. The author goes on to urge
that Christians use the Bible to "confront our prejudices rather than
merely confirm them." He amends that not all Christians use the
Bible to lash out at gays, and offers examples of how the Bible has been used
for positive results in humanity in recent times. Gomes concludes with a
plea for freedom from the dangerous prejudice of homophobia.
© Carrie Emrich, 2001
[Example Formal Academic Summary by
student Crista Harrison]
Crista
Harrison
Writing
122, Dr. Agatucci
Formal
Academic Summary
22
January 2001
Gomes, Peter J.
"Homophobic? Reread Your Bible." New York Times 17
Aug. 1992. Rpt. The Aims of Argument: A Rhetoric and
Reader. Eds. Timothy W. Crucius and Carolyn E. Channell. 3rd
ed. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 2000. 516-518.
In
"Homophobic? Reread Your Bible," Peter Gomes, a minister and
professor of Christian morals at Harvard University, claims that the Bible,
which is often used as a weapon against homosexuality, is not a valid source
of evidence against homosexuality as an immoral practice. He proposes
that, while many fundamentalists use the Bible as backup to their homophobic
prejudices, the Bible is being wrongly interpreted as a source against
homosexuality. Gomes cites nine biblical references most commonly used
in arguments against homosexual practice and states why they are wrongly
interpreted. He also claims that "fundamentalists and
literalists" do not actually derive their values from Scripture and so
fear wrong interpretation. Gomes argues that fundamentalism is
"dangerous because it cannot accept ambiguity and diversity and is
therefore inherently intolerant," and gives reasons for this argument.
Gomes ends his argument with this statement: ". . . one of the most
precious freedoms for which we must all fight is freedom from this last
prejudice [against homosexuality]."
© Crista Harrison, 2001
Top of this page
WR 122 Home Page | Syllabus
| Course Plan | Assignments
& Online Handouts Table of Contents
| Student Writing |
You are here:
Example Formal Academic
Summaries
URL of this webpage: http://www.cocc.edu/cagatucci/classes/wr122/handouts/summaries.htm
Last updated: 18 September 2005
This webpage is maintained by Cora
Agatucci, Professor of English,
Humanities Department, Central
Oregon Community College
I welcome comments: cagatucci@cocc.edu
© Cora Agatucci, 1997-2002
Cora's Home Page | Current
Schedule | Cora's Classes | Copyright
| Site Map
For problems with this
web, contact webmaster@cocc.edu