In Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s person narrative “Cosmic Perspective,” he illustrates to a diverse audience that humans are not insignificant to the universe, but a link in a never-ending chain; that chain being the cosmos. This in mind, one is called to question how essays like “In the Minimum Wage Debate, Both Sides Make Valid Points” and “Speaking While Female” should, or could, be interpreted and perceived through the cosmic perspective. To do so, one must have and understanding, no matter how small, of what Tyson was explaining. Tyson’s “Cosmic Perspective” was written to recondition how a phycologist perceived Tyson’s space show, “Passport to the Universe”. The phycologist said that he was experiencing “dramatic feelings of smallness,” making
…show more content…
For instance, when the essays “Speaking While Female,” which deals with workplace sexism, and “In the Minimum Wage Debate, Both Sides Make Valid Points” are initially discussed, people become close minded and choose a side of each argument to be on. However, Tyson calls readers to consider the whole picture instead of only caring about their opinionated stance and acting as if the whole world revolves around their individual reception of the issue at hand. Both essays are arguing controversial topics to an audience of people, that are either blind to sexism or are a part of the working middle class, on corresponding topics like workplace sexism and whether minimum wage should be raised or not. Tyson is trying to get people to realize that it is more enlightening to look at the whole picture instead of just the side the reader agrees …show more content…
When Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant wrote “Speaking While Female” they insist that “organizations can increase women’s contribution by adopting practices that focus less on the speaker and more on the idea,” providing the reader with a way to unconsciously view the issue of sexism in the workplace through the cosmic perspective. Sandberg and Grant request that sexist biased is removed in order to be able to openly view everyone’s opinions and ideas. On the other hand, when Rex Huppke wrote “In the Minimum Wage Debate, Both Sides Make Valid Points” he does not give the reader a means to use cosmic perspective, but instead he relays all of his findings through the cosmic perspective so that the reader has the full picture and is not blinded by foreshadowed biased. He removes his opinion on the issue of minimum wage entirely so that the reader can understand the topic before they are pressured to choose a
For instance, when the essays “Speaking While Female,” which deals with workplace sexism, and “In the Minimum Wage Debate, Both Sides Make Valid Points” are initially discussed, people become close minded and choose a side of each argument to be on. However, Tyson calls readers to consider the whole picture instead of only caring about their opinionated stance and acting as if the whole world revolves around their individual reception of the issue at hand. Both essays are arguing controversial topics to an audience of people, that are either blind to sexism or are a part of the working middle class, on corresponding topics like workplace sexism and whether minimum wage should be raised or not. Tyson is trying to get people to realize that it is more enlightening to look at the whole picture instead of just the side the reader agrees …show more content…
When Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant wrote “Speaking While Female” they insist that “organizations can increase women’s contribution by adopting practices that focus less on the speaker and more on the idea,” providing the reader with a way to unconsciously view the issue of sexism in the workplace through the cosmic perspective. Sandberg and Grant request that sexist biased is removed in order to be able to openly view everyone’s opinions and ideas. On the other hand, when Rex Huppke wrote “In the Minimum Wage Debate, Both Sides Make Valid Points” he does not give the reader a means to use cosmic perspective, but instead he relays all of his findings through the cosmic perspective so that the reader has the full picture and is not blinded by foreshadowed biased. He removes his opinion on the issue of minimum wage entirely so that the reader can understand the topic before they are pressured to choose a