Whitby English 1010, Spring Semester 2013 (11:30): March 2013

Hope you're all having a fantastic spring break! For those of you who are thinking ahead to class next Monday, here is the assignment for Essay #2, the handout on rhetorical appeals, and the handout on logical fallacies that I will give you in class on the 11th. I will also post some suggestions on persuasive articles soon.

Essay #2 Assignment
ENG. 1010/Emily Whitby
Due: ___________________
In this assignment, your task is to compose an essay in which you describe how one text attempts to persuade the reader. You need to draw on examples from the text and evaluate the persuasive language in these examples using rhetorical appeals, advertising appeals, and logical fallacies.
Remember, this is not an essay about your opinion of the text, or whether the text is “good” or “bad.” This is an essay in which you make an argument about how the text persuades readers, and then support your claims with examples from the text. In order to accomplish this, you will need to discuss 1) what the author is trying to achieve, 2) how the author uses persuasive language to do it, and 3) whether the author is successful in persuading the reader and why. You must focus on these three things in your essay in order to get credit for the essay.
Formatting:

3-4 pages
Double spaced
12 pt. Times New Roman
1” margins
Include a Works Cited page at the end of your essay (this does not count as a page of your essay)

Essay #2 Drafting Questions

What is the author trying to make us think, feel, or believe?
Why does the author want us to think, feel, or believe this?
What rhetorical appeals does he or she use?
What logical fallacies can you find in the text?
Give specific examples of how the text tries to persuade us.
Give specific quotations from the text that are particularly persuasive or manipulative.
What specific words or images does the author use to persuade us?
Does the author succeed in his or her purpose? What makes him or her successful?
What makes the author’s argument important or significant?
Overall, what can be gained by considering the persuasive/manipulative language in the text?

_______________________________________________________________________________

Rhetorical Appeals

Rhetoric (n) – the art of speaking or writing effectively. According to Aristotle, rhetoric is “the ability, in each

particular case, to see the available means of persuasion.” He described three main forms of rhetoric: ethos, logos, and

pathos.

Logos_______________________________________(Greek for “word”)

Logos is an appeal based on logic or reason. Documents distributed by companies or corporations are logos-driven.

Scholarly documents are also often logos-driven. A logos appeal relies upon definitions, factual data and statistics,

quotations, citations from experts and authorities, and informed opinions to persuade readers. It evokes a cognitive,

rational response.

Examples:

“In Canada between 1985 and 2001, the prevalence of obesity more than doubled from 7 percent to 14

percent among women and to 16 percent from 6 percent among men.”

"Since 2000, America's billionaire club has gained 76 more members while the typical household has lost

income and the poverty count has grown by more than 5 million people."

"What remains unclear is the sustainability of the flat tax. Structurally, the flat taxes that have been adopted

do not provide a coherent framework for dealing with the difficulties that almost all countries now perceive

in taxing internationally mobile capital income."

Ethos____________________________________(Greek for “character”)

Ethos is an appeal based on the character or authority of the speaker; it also refers to the reputation and trustworthiness

of the speaker or writer. An ethos appeal gives a sincere, fair-minded presentation of the issue. It can also be affected

by the writer's reputation as it exists independently from the message--his or her expertise in the field, his or her

previous record or integrity, and so forth. Ethos is an effective persuasive strategy because when we believe that the

speaker has the knowledge or authority to speak on an issue, we are more willing to listen to what he or she has to say.

Examples:

“John H. Banzhaf III, a practitioner of public interest law and a professor at the law school at George

Washington University, believes that the most powerful weapon against obesity is legal action against fast

food corporations.”

“'As an African American child growing up in America, I had to learn about my heritage by myself. Today

I can help children grow up aware of the contributions African Americans have made to the development of

our great country,' said Robert Kersey, creator of the Black Heritage Trivia game."

“David Hofmann of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), which published the

figures, said: 'Over this last decade the growth rates in carbon dioxide have been higher. I don't think we can

plausibly say what's causing it. It's something we're going to look at.”

Pathos_____________________(Greek for “suffering” or “experience”)

Pathos is an appeal which evokes an emotional response. Advertisements, political rhetoric, and arguments in the

popular press are often dependent upon pathos appeals. A pathos appeal uses emotionally loaded language, connotative

meanings, emotional examples, vivid descriptions, narratives of emotional events, emotional tone, and figurative

language.

Examples:

“Women suffering from the problem of compulsive eating endure double anguish: feeling out of step with the

rest of society, and believing that it is all their own fault.”

“I have ceased thinking of myself as obsolete and begun to see myself as I really am--an endangered species.

Like the whooping crane and the snow leopard, I deserve attentive nurturing and perhaps a distinctive metal

tag on my foot. Because I'm one of the last of the dying breed of human females designated, 'Occupation:

Housewife.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Logical Fallacies_________________________________

Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim. Avoid these common fallacies in your own arguments and watch for them in the arguments of others.

Slippery slope: This is a conclusion based on the premise that if A happens, then eventually through a series of small steps, through B, C,..., X, Y, Z will happen, too, basically equating A and Z. So, if we don't want Z to occur, A must not be allowed to occur either. Example:

If we ban Hummers because they are bad for the environment eventually the government will ban all cars, so we should not ban Hummers.

In this example the author is equating banning Hummers with banning all cars, which is not the same thing.

Hasty Generalization: This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence. In other words, you are rushing to a conclusion before you have all the relevant facts. Example:

Even though it's only the first day, I can tell this is going to be a boring course.

In this example the author is basing their evaluation of the entire course on only one class, and on the first day which is notoriously boring and full of housekeeping tasks for most courses. To make a fair and reasonable evaluation the author must attend several classes, and possibly even examine the textbook, talk to the professor, or talk to others who have previously finished the course in order to have sufficient evidence to base a conclusion on.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc: This is a conclusion that assumes that if 'A' occurred after 'B' then 'B' must have caused 'A.' Example:

I drank bottled water and now I am sick, so the water must have made me sick.

In this example the author assumes that if one event chronologically follows another the first event must have caused the second. But the illness could have been caused by the burrito the night before, a flu bug that had been working on the body for days, or a chemical spill across campus. There is no reason, without more evidence, to assume the water caused the person to be sick.

Genetic Fallacy: A conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth. Example:

The Volkswagen Beetle is an evil car because it was originally designed by Hitler's army.

In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character of the people who built the car. However, the two are not inherently related.

Begging the Claim: The conclusion that the writer should prove is validated within the claim. Example:

Filthy and polluting coal should be banned.

Arguing that coal pollutes the earth and thus should be banned would be logical. But the very conclusion that should be proved, that coal causes enough pollution to warrant banning its use, is already assumed in the claim by referring to it as "filthy and polluting."

Circular Argument: This restates the argument rather than actually proving it. Example:

George Bush is a good communicator because he speaks effectively.

In this example the conclusion that Bush is a "good communicator" and the evidence used to prove it "he speaks effectively" are basically the same idea. Specific evidence such as using everyday language, breaking down complex problems, or illustrating his points with humorous stories would be needed to prove either half of the sentence.

Either/or: This is a conclusion that oversimplifies the argument by reducing it to only two sides or choices. Example:

We can either stop using cars or destroy the earth.

In this example where two choices are presented as the only options, yet the author ignores a range of choices in between such as developing cleaner technology, car sharing systems for necessities and emergencies, or better community planning to discourage daily driving.

Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather than her/his opinions or arguments. Example:

Green Peace's strategies aren't effective because they are all dirty, lazy hippies.

In this example the author doesn't even name particular strategies Green Peace has suggested, much less evaluate those strategies on their merits. Instead, the author attacks the characters of the individuals in the group.

Ad populum: This is an emotional appeal that speaks to positive (such as patriotism, religion, democracy) or negative (such as terrorism or fascism) concepts rather than the real issue at hand. Example:

If you were a true American you would support the rights of people to choose whatever vehicle they want.

In this example the author equates being a "true American," a concept that people want to be associated with, particularly in a time of war, with allowing people to buy any vehicle they want even though there is no inherent connection between the two.

Red Herring: This is a diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues, often by avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them. Example:

The level of mercury in seafood may be unsafe, but what will fishers do to support their families?

In this example the author switches the discussion away from the safety of the food and talks instead about an economic issue, the livelihood of those catching fish. While one issue may affect the other it does not mean we should ignore possible safety issues because of possible economic consequences to a few individuals.

Straw Man: This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument.

People who don't support the proposed state minimum wage increase hate the poor.

In this example the author attributes the worst possible motive to an opponent's position. In reality, however, the opposition probably has more complex and sympathetic arguments to support their point. By not addressing those arguments, the author is not treating the opposition with respect or refuting their position.

Moral Equivalence: This fallacy compares minor misdeeds with major atrocities.

That parking attendant who gave me a ticket is as bad as Hitler.

In this example the author is comparing the relatively harmless actions of a person doing their job with the horrific actions of Hitler. This comparison is unfair and inaccurate.

______________________________________________________________________________

Copyright ©1995-2010 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use. Please report any technical problems you encounter.

Whitby English 1010, Spring Semester 2013 (11:30)

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Possible Articles for Essay #2

Essay #2 Assignment, Rhetorical Appeals, Logical Fallacies