Categories

Assignment #2

Part One: Reading and Response: Read pages 12–18 in Dynamic Argument and answer the following questions.

1) In your own words, define each of the three persuasive appeals.
Authority – Knowing what you are talking about or being prepared.
Emotion – Compassion or sentiment you share with your audience.
Logic – Having evidence and supporting materials.

2) When writing a research paper, what are good strategies you can use for appealing to the reader’s trust in authority? How is it advantageous for you to get your reader to trust you as an authority?
Some strategies you can use include doing research, mentioning counterpoints and views, and “borrowing” authority from other experts. It is important that readers trust you as an authority so that you are more believable and credible.

3) What are some good strategies for appealing to emotion when you’re formulating a reasonable argument? Support your claim with a hypothetical situation in which appealing to a particular emotion would be advantageous.
A good strategy to use for appealing to emotion is creating a mental image that reminds the reader of something emotional. For instance, describing the destruction caused by the falling of the World Trade Center in an argument about war on terror.

4) Are there any potential disadvantages with using a heavy appeal to emotion? Support your claim by describing a hypothetical example.
One disadvantage would be if you touch the emotions too much. The audience may lose sight of the topic. Using a joke, for example. If the joke is too funny, then the reader might forget about what is being presented.

5) What are ways you can use logos to build a strong argument? How important is using logos when formulating a reasonable argument? Support your claim.
I think logos is a very important part of a strong argument. Logos is the evidence and supporting material that gives you credibility and believability.

6) Are ethos, logos, and pathos totally separate from each other? Give an example or two that support your claim.
No, I think the need one another to work to your advantage. How I see it, you need pathos (emotion) and logos (logic) to give you that authority (ethos) needed for a strong argument. Without emotional support from your audience and logical reasoning to support your claims you cannot achieve authority.

Part Two: Applying the Concepts: Write a 250 words analyzing an essay (any essay–please remember to include title and author in your post) from Dynamic Argument for how the writer uses each of the three persuasive appeals (ethos, pathos, logos). Based on this analysis, evaluate the argument (in other words, does the way the writer uses the three appeals effective in building a persuasive argument?).

Janet Barnett
Childhood Obesity: Introducing the Fat Card

In this essay, Janet Barnett argues that teens today are fat due to the fact that their parents let them watch too much television and guide them to eating the wrong foods. She thinks that promoting better health education and giving teens fat report cards will resolve the problem at hand. I think Barnett has a strong argument because she has good use of logos, pathos and ethos. The mentioning of obese kids not being able to get jobs and die sooner than fit kids is a good touch of pathos. When reading that part I felt an emotional connection with the fat kids and it made me sad to think they will not live long if they watch too much T.V. and eat poorly. The statistics that were included were also a beneficial. I put them in the category of logos. The statistics, for example, Type II diabetes is up 800% in the last 10 years and 60% of adults are overweight, are good for supporting the claim made. Both the use of emotions and logic gives the author credibility and in turn authority. I think the argument proposed is well supported and persuasive. Janet Barnett’s uses of the three persuasive appeals (Logos, Pathos, and Ethos) were, in the end, effective.

Assignment #1

Part One: Reading and Quick Summary: Read pages 4–6 in Dynamic Argument. In your own words, define the following terms: claim, support, evidence, and explanation. Also, describe how each of these functions as an element of argument.
Claim – A statement that one uses as supporting evidence in an argument.
Support – Statements or claims used as evidence. Support is needed in arguments to make the speaker/writer more believable.
Evidence – Evidence and support are one in the same. They make the speaker more believable.
Explanation – Detailed support and evidence. This is needed in argument for clarifying ideas.

Part Two: Applying the Concepts: Read Michael Crichton’s article on page 593 in Dynamic Argument. Applying the concepts discussed above, answer the questions below in detail.

1) What is your immediate response to Crichton’s argument? How does it make you think and feel? Why? As you read the article, did anything stick out to you?
At first thought, I am intrigued by Crichton’s argument. I have never thought about Environmentalism as a religion but I understand where he is coming from. Nothing specific stuck out to me.

2) What is Crichton’s tone? How does he feel about the topic, and how is he trying to make the reader feel? What is his purpose in trying to make the reader feel that way?
The tone used is very self-assured and confident. Crichton speaks strongly about his view of Environmentalism and he is trying to make me, the reader feel like being an Environmentalist is a bad thing. I think that he is trying to make me feel this way because he feels this way. But that is what should happen, since this is an argumentative reading.

3) What is Crichton’s main claim? Be precise. Does he make any supporting claims?
The main claim is that Environmentalism has become more of a religion and needs to be put back in the right position as a scientific study. Yes, he has supporting claims.

4) How does Crichton support his claim? What evidence (facts, statistics, and reasoning) does he use, and what explanations does he provide? Evaluate the evidence: how well does his evidence support his claim?
He supports his claim by expounding upon the comparison of religion and Environmentalism. As far as evidence and explanations, Crichton mentions how politics are influential to the idea proposed and how Environmentalist think they are superior but in fact are clueless.

5) What reason does Crichton give for not citing his sources? Do you accept this? Does not citing sources help or hurt his argument?
I do not like the fact that this story is not cited. I questioned it when I read about the secondhand smoke and DDT mentioned. I thin not citing the sources hurt his believability.

6) Is Crichton’s argument strong? Why or why not?
Yes his argument is strong. He was very persuasive and convincing.