I.      Layers of persuasion

A.   Logos

B.    Pathos

C.    Ethos

II.    Infowrite criteria

A.   Distinguishing Fact from Opinion and Bias from Reason

B.    Distinguishing Between Primary and Secondary Sources

C.    Evaluating Information Sources

1.     Perspective

2.     Timeliness

3.     Relevance

4.     Logical vs. deceptive reasoning

III.  Toulmin model of analysis[lawn care example]

A.   Claim

1.     Qualifier

2.     Exception

B.    Reasons

C.    Evidence

D.   Objections and rebuttals

E.    Evaluation or interpretation

1.     Emotional response

2.     Reasoned response

3.     Writing a claim of your own

IV.  Claims from readings

A.   Baker’s speech

1.     Cal Poly finds it fitting and appropriate to associate itself with the Talloires declaration.

B.    Talloires

1.     Thus, university leaders must initiate and support mobilization of internal and external resources so that their institutions respond to this urgent challenge.

C.    Lovins

1.     In the next century.. a remarkable transformation of industry and commerce can occur. Through [which] society will be able to create a vital economy that uses radically less material and energy[and]…free up resources, reduce taxes on personal income, increase per-capita spending on social ills (while simultaneously reducing those ills), and begin to restore the damaged environment of the earth… promot[ing] economic efficiency, ecological conservation, and social equity.

V.    Measure Q

A.   Ordinance text

1.     Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to propagate,  cultivate, raise, or grow genetically engineered organisms in San Luis Obispo  County. 

2.     Finding. The people of San Luis Obispo County wish to protect the  county’s agriculture, environment, economy, and private property from genetic  pollution by genetically engineered organisms until all the risks associated with  these organisms are fully understood.

3.     Exemptions. Nothing in this Ordinance shall make it unlawful for (1) a  fully accredited college or university to engage in scientific research or  education using genetically engineered organisms under secure, enclosed  laboratory conditions, taking precautions to prevent contamination of the outside  environment, or (2) any licensed health care practitioner to provide any  diagnosis, care or treatment to any patient.

B.    Arguments in favor

1.     GE never occurs in nature. 

a)     Different from traditional plant breeding;  forcing genes from one species into another

2.     GE bad for Farms and Farmers

a)     Maintains our strong agricultural economy

(1)  Trading partners demand GE free crops
(a)   US exporters have lost $300M year because of GE corn

(i)    American farm bureau

(2)   Provide economic advantage

b)    GE crops contaminate conventional food crops at seed production and transport, cross-pollination, harvest, milling, storing and processing

(1)  Examples
(a)   2001:  50% of Iowa corn harvest contaminated
(b)  2002: 500,000 bushels of soybeans destroyed

c)     contamination raises liability questions

d)    2001-3: 73M more pounds of pesticides applied on GE acres than on non-GE acres

e)     Some GE crops classified as pesticides by EPA

3.     Supporters

a)     Fetzer and a small winery

b)    Carlson M.D.

c)     Farm owners

C.    Rebuttals to Arguments in favor

1.     Q isnt just about crops—other products are GMO

a)     Q bans all GMO’s in county

b)    Technology jobs go

c)     Medicine development prohibited and cleaner industrial products and cleaner industrial processes

2.     Q cant be enforced

a)     Ag commissioner

b)    Enforcement is expensive

3.     Harms Farm Economy

a)     IB in trade with China for GMO soybeans

b)    Hawaii papaya industry saved by GMO

c)     Grape growers will be able to protect industry from Pierce’s disease

4.     International acceptance for GMO is growning

5.     GMO crops are safe

a)     All evidence shows this

6.     GMO reduces use of other more dangerous treatments

7.     Cornell Public Information project: 

a)     http://www.geo-pie.cornell.edu/gmo.html

(1)  extensive agbized information website claiming to be objective

8.     Authorities

a)     2 calpoly phd’s president Greenhouse growers, cattlemen association, Talley Vineyards

D.   Arguments Against

1.     GM improves environment

a)     Less pesticides and herbicides and reduce cultivation

b)    Improves air quality and worker safety

2.     UN, WHO, AMA, NAS have examined.  UN reports GM “pose no more risk than conventionally grown crops” “no  reports of health or environmental harm.”

3.     GM enriches food and provides drug cures

4.     Enforcement would cost too much money

5.     Authorities: president of farm bureau, Jan Haynes director of medical device company, director local biotech company, president Wine Growers Association

E.    Rebuttal of Arguments against

1.     Q prohibits growing not sale of GMO

2.     Q allows

a)     University research

b)    All present grape growing practises

c)     Farm workers to be safer from increased use of pesticides

d)    Use of animal feed with GE byproducts

e)     Growing GMO crops elsewhere

3.     Testing is inadequate

a)     FDA, EPA, USDA leave testing of GE crops to companies that make them

b)    Center for food safety says there cant be confidence in safety of GE food

c)     NAS asks for more research to detect harmful effects  2004

4.     Alternate methods can address crop disease

5.     Enforcement is not expensive, compared to billions lost to ag. Because of GE crops

6.     Authorities: five individual farmers

F.    Trib Editorial

1.      Without going into the philosophical questions surrounding bioengineering, we find that Measure Q is bad legislation for the following reasons:

2.      • Cal Poly, as a state-owned property, would be exempt from the ban. This means the university can, and does, grow GE food, which makes the measure discriminatory against farmers in the private sector. It also means that research capital probably won't be spent at a university located in a county hostile to bioengineering. This is at a time when head-of-household biotech jobs are expected to increase 32 percent over the next 10 years, and business and community leaders have suggested that the area should look to the biotech field as a source of good-paying jobs that could stimulate the local economy.

3.      • The enforcing agent would be the county Ag Commissioner who, with no offense to Commissioner Bob Lilley, has neither the expertise nor budget to oversee compliance of medical bioengineering.

4.      • Besides the term "organism" having far-reaching unintended consequences, the safety factor of keeping the ban in place "until all the risks associated with these organisms are fully understood" is simply unattainable in its subjectivity.

G.   ASPB

1.     This prohibition on field testing by university researchers, will discourage further university-based research in the County.

2.     National Academy of Sciences

a)     http://www.nap.edu/books/0309092094/html/

3.     using modern technologies, such as genetic engineering has lead to the reduction of pesticide usage and to less disease.

4.     genetically engineered wheat, which will be much safer for people with wheat allergies to consume.

5.     lower levels of mycotoxins, known potential cancer-causing agents, have been found in lines of genetically engineered corn, compared to conventional corn.

6.     The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations in a report issued in May of this year found that biotechnology and genetic engineering of crops hold great promise for agriculture in developing countries.

7.     Founded in 1924, ASPB is a non-profit society of nearly 6,000 plant scientists, including 450 scientists in California, based primarily at universities.

VI.  Evaluate and rank arguments; look for the strongest ones to critique; get further research

A.   track down Center of Food Safety

B.    go to Cornell website and get to hazards and dangers

A sample of an critique of an argument on Measure Q written by a supporter of the measure