1. What salient points does he make to develop his position?
Mike Rose asserts that people in blue-collar jobs, deemed to be repetitive, routinary, and do not require high-level of literacy, actually require as much application of diverse skills including cognitive, verbal, mathematical, visual representations and illustrations, and analytical skills as people in white-collar jobs apply.
2. Discuss how convincing his argument is and whether you agree or disagree with it and why?
Rose’s arguments and the manner by which these are presented make them convincing through the use of rhetorical appeals which include logical and emotional appeals. Therefore, I agree with his contentions that blue-collar workers apply different levels and expansiveness of skills in their respective work settings depending on their experiences and how they perceive tasks could be improved in the undertaking of their expected roles and responsibilities.
3. Where does Rose mention differently views and what is his reason for bring them up?
One portion where Rose compared different views was when he stated that: “The big difference between the psychologist’s laboratory and the workplace is that in the former the problems are isolated and in the latter they are embedded in the real-time flow of work with all its messiness and social complexity” . His reason for comparing these two is to assert the disparities between white-collar workers with blue-collar workers.
4. Summarize your argumentation discussion and include your salient position points (including your counterarguments)
One is convinced that blue-collar workers actually apply as much high-level skills as those being applied by white-collar workers, depending on the nature of their tasks and how they perceive that their manner of performance could be improved in the process. Any discrimination or prejudice should therefore be avoided as society tends to pose stereotyped beliefs on categorizing blue-collar workers as significantly lower in the employment hierarchy. The arguments proposed by Rose evidently provided enough support to validate the fact that “to acknowledge a broader range of intellectual capacity is to take seriously the concept of cognitive variability, to appreciate in all the Rosies and Joes the thought that drives their accomplishments and defines who they are” .
5. How do you think readers will respond to your argumentation essay and why? Who is your audience and how did you write for this audience? (diction, syntax, exempts, facts, etc.?)
One is convinced that readers would agree with one’s argumentation since the basic premise was clearly contended and any counterargument was appropriately addressed. Thus, the audience could be anyone who had previously regarded blue-collar workers as assuming a lower stature in the labor market. The argument was therefore written with observance and adherence to grammatical rules and using the support from Rose’s affirmations.
Work Cited
Rose, Mike. "Blue-Collar Brilliance." 2009. The American Scholar. http://theamericanscholar.org/blue-collar-brilliance/#.UmtRkXAvPdA. 26 October 2013.
