More handpicked essays just for you.
List of Persuasive Writing Techniques
Persuasive techniques used in english writing
Persuasive techniques english writing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“Paper or plastic?” This is often a question customers are asked at the weekly trip to the supermarket to purchase groceries to keep families fed. Adam B. Summers has created a highly plausible argument that may change customer’s answer next time. In Summers’ “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” editorial for the San Diego Union-Tribune, he argues against the possible laws hindering Californians from using plastic bags at grocery stores. He believes they would do more harm than good, and that “a little reason and perspective is in order.” By the end of this piece the reader will likely find themselves nodding in agreement with what Summers has to say, and this isn’t just because he’s right. Summers, like any good writer, employs tactical …show more content…
reasoning and persuasive devices to plead with the audience to take his side. The reality of facts gets the audience to listen to his message. “Plastic bags . . . make up only about 1.6 percent of all municipal solid waste materials,” Summers ventures, his first utilization of a cold, hard fact. The truth in the numbers is undeniable, and he cites his sources promptly, making the statement that much more authentic. Knowledge is often viewed as power, and with information as direct as a statistic, Summers is handing that power to the reader – the power to agree with him. Not only does Summers spread the facts with numbers, he also does so with trends. He talks about the price increase in Ireland, and the documented health hazards of reusable bags. He uses the truth, backed by reliable sources, to infiltrate the readers’ independent mind. His thoroughness in this regard carefully builds his argument against this piece of legislation, and this is just one of the many ways he spreads his opposition. Additionally, Summers appeals to the ethical and emotional side of individuals.
With key phrases like “taxpayers will have to pony up” and “borne by consumers,” Summers activates the nature of a human to act in their own self-interest. While one might view this as selfish, Summers reassures the reader that they are not alone in feeling this way, further contributing to his argument. With his statement that he “love[s] sea turtles as much as the next guy,” Summers adds acceptance to those who don’t care to act with regard for the environment. By putting himself beside the reader as a typical consumer, he equals them, and makes himself more likeable in the process. Appealing to environmentalists, too, Summers qualifies that they “have every right to try to convince people to adopt certain beliefs or lifestyles, but they do not have the right to use government force . . .” A statement such as this is an attempt to get readers of either persuasion on his side, and his ingenious qualification only adds to the strength of his argument. An article focusing on the choice between “paper or plastic,” and how that choice might be taken away certainly seems fairly standard, but by adjusting his diction (i.e. using well known phrases, selecting words with strong connotations), Summers creates something out of the ordinary. It is with word choice such as “recycled rather than trashed” that the author reveals the legislation's intent to stir up a repeat bill. Because the issue at hand is one of waste and environmental protection, his humorous diction provides a link between he and the audience, revealing not only an opportunity to laugh, but also reinforcement of the concept that Summers is trustworthy and just like everyone else. Negative words with specifically poor connotations also aid Summers in his persuasive struggle. “Reprieve,” “dubious,” “bureaucracy,” and “evil incarnate” all depict a disparaging tone of annoyance and anger, surely helping Summers to spread his
message. It is through many rhetorical devices that Summers sells his argument. Powerful diction, qualification, ethos, pathos, logos, and informative facts all contribute to an exceptionally well-written argument. It is his utilization of these practices and more that make this article worthy of recognition. Once one reads the piece, they’ll be nodding along in accordance with Summers, and it isn’t for no reason.
The beginning paragraph is what draws many readers to Quammen’s article. He begins with statements implying that environmentalism is a bad thing altogether. For those who are truly against environmental protection, this is an eye-catching statement. They will want to
The article Plastic bags are Good for you, by Katherine Mangu-Ward was written to explore the pro’s and con’s of three different types of bags. Which is better between plastic, paper, or reusable bags has always been a debatable question with an opinionated answer. In the article Mangu-Ward characterizes the cause and effect relationships which have lead to the unpopularity of plastic bags in terms of guilt.
Although Maniates labels the “A” in IWAC as “meaningful consumption Alternatives,” his thoughts on the matter refer more to the institutional influences on product development. In Woodhouse’s words, “The public’s failure to embrace sustainable technologies has more to do with institutional structures that restrict the aggressive development and wide dissemination of sustainable technologies than with errant consumer choice” (48). Instead of attributing the lack of environmentally friendly products to happenstance, Maniates claims that there are production-side structural aspects which hinder the development of green products. Woodhouse mirrors Maniates in this aspect by recognizing the influences on engineers to overlook environmental concerns. “Neither law nor professional norms make [sustainable] design tasks a required aspect of most engineers’ responsibilities, and most employers place substantial obstacles in the way of engineers taking those design elements farther than law and market competition require” (27). By and large, companies are driven by the desire to maximize profit above all else, and from the perspective of employers, adding in environmental concerns is merely an additional constraint on potential profit margins. If engineering ethics and government regulations are sufficiently detailed on sustainability, then employers
The government wants to put a price on plastic bags 5-10 cents.While some agree with this movement other don’t. & the people who don’t wanna agree with it wanna get rid of plastic bags for good as a plastic bag ban. They have many reasons for why they don’t want plastic bags anymore but so do the people who want plastic bags & to add a fee for having them. We’re just giving our pure opinion of what we think about the movement, we are supporting why our opinions & telling how either the movements will affect us as a community negatively or positively.We both disagree therefore we will have to support what we say & why we say it with evidence from a source that will help us explain and persuade the government that this movement is either a good
The author provided three arguments to support the ban of backpacks in classrooms. The authosr's use of language is organized, however, the author did not effectively provide strong evidences to support his arguments, many of his arguments are have little logical connection with the topic. There are also many redundant points which decreases the effectiveness of the argument. Therefore the strength of his argument is not solid.
In conclusion I believe that Melanie Scruggs uses many different approaches such as logos, and ethos to effectively persuade her audience to believe that she is in fact correct about recycling, and landfills. Although Scruggs fails to apply pathos, and address her opposing argument I believe her argument is still
Waste Not, Want Not: if you use a resource carefully and without extravagance, you will never be in need. In a 2009 essay, “Waste Not, Want Not”, writer Bill McKibben argues on the excess of unnecessary waste. To halt climate change, he proposes to convince the reader to shift priorities in waste management and go back to the frugality of simpler times. Bill approaches his argument with a vast amount of informative charged words to convince the reader into taking his side of the argument. The writer’s intended purpose in writing this piece is to make a statement and develop his argument against the unnecessary waste. To make this argument effective, the writer utilizes logic to persuade the audience with overwhelming data and reason. His primary instrument of choice in this essay is using logically charged words followed by factual evidence to back up his claims. Although his use of emotion and pathos are less obvious, but where used, is effective.
Using plastic bags are second nature to people in this day and age. Warner acknowledges, “Much to the dismay of the environmentally conscious citizens worldwide, the ubiquity of the free plastic carryout bag has bred nonchalant consumers who take this modern convenience for granted” (646). Although some people are conscious about the environment, people strive more for convenience and do not think about the impacts using bags have not only on the environment, but on themselves as well. If something is bad for the environment, it will alternatively be bad for humans as well. When plastic bags are exposed to the sun from being littered all around, the ultraviolet rays cause the substances of plastic bags to weaken. After the substances weaken, the substances become invisible to the naked eye. The substances that are no longer able to be seen are toxic to humans (Warner 649). As a result of plastic bags being littered around, animals consume plastic bags. This is negatively affects humans because animals are often consumed. When humans consume animals like, fish, there can be plastic in the fish’s belly, which then transfers to the humans and this poses a concern for human’s health. Humans are negatively affected by plastic bags because of the toxic chemicals in plastic bags, as well as, consuming animals with plastic in their
Leonard shows us how passionate she is about the topic and how she ventured across the world to see how consumerism is affecting not only us, but countries all over the world. She worked hard in her research to show us that the plastic bottle is a concept that can destroy our ecosystems and in return hurt us as individuals.
The single most important environmental issue today is over-consumerism, which leads to excess waste. We buy too much. We think we always need new and better stuff. Will we ever be satisfied? There will always be something better or cooler on the market. Because we live in a capitalistic consumer culture, we have absorbed things like: “Get it while the getting’s good,” “Offer ends soon, buy while it lasts,” “For great deals, come on down…Sunday Sunday Sunday!” We, kids from 1 to 92, have become saturated with commercials like: Obey your thirst. How much of our consumption is compulsive buying, merely obeying our momentary thirst? Do we actually need all that we buy? Could we survive efficiently, even happily, without making so many shopping center runs? Once after I made a Target run with mom, I noticed that most of the bulkiness within my plastic bags with red targets symbols on them was made up of the products’ packaging. I then thought about all the bags that were piled on the floor near us…all of the bags piled on the floors of many homes throughout America daily.
This essay will discuss the various harmful effects of plastic bags, and demonstrate the risks that these bags impose on humans, animals, and the environment. It will also discuss a series of suggested solutions that could help reduce plastic bag usage. Although plastic bags appear to be fragile and light, their negative environmental effect is devastating. Plastic bags may cause large amounts of pollution at every step of their limited life cycle, from the extraction of raw materials, production, transportation, and recycling or disposal. Plastic bags can be defined as the most damaging form of environmental pollution.
Everyone has heard a cashier one time or another mumble, “Paper or plastic?” as he put their groceries in a bag, but do shoppers know the effects of each vessel in which they carry their comestibles? There are many issues and benefits to both paper and plastic. The making and recycling of both paper and plastic bags can harm the environment. One must also look at the costs of making each bag. The convenience of each is also something to look at. Many people jump to conclusion that paper bags are better for the environment without knowing the facts. Since plastic bags are preferred by customers and plastic bags actually do not hurt the environment as much as paper ones do, consumers should feel at ease when choosing plastic.
The article is about “Plastic Bag charged introduced in England”. “Plastic bags used for just a few minutes but take 1000 years to degrade”. Therefore when resources are not used efficiently, market failure arises, which is a situation in which the market does not allocate resources efficiently. Therefore plastic bags are negative externality of consumption, which is when a third party is affected by the consumption of goods and services for which no appropriate compensation is paid.
While walking through the park last Sunday, I observed a shocking scene. There were two cans: one for recycling and one for trash. The recycling receptacle had only an empty Dr. Pepper can and a few used Ozarka water bottles. On the other hand, the trash can had a plethora of half eaten meals, wrappers, banana peels and disgustingly even bottles, cans, newspapers and plastics that could have been recycled. Because people do not understand or do not care to understand about conserving our resources, many reusable items are being put in landfills when recycling these items could help save the environment. People should know the negative impact of throwing away a water bottle or newspaper, purchasing meat from the grocery store or consuming gasoline has on the environment, and many do not. By informing society about how their decisions affect the environment, we can help save our planet and change our attitude toward the land we live on, the water we drink and the air we breathe” and truly show respect for the stuff that we depend on.
Saillant, Catherine. "L.A. Starts 2014 with Its New Plastic-bag Ban." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 31 Dec. 2013. Web. 14 Mar. 2014.