Analysis of Analytical Discrimination

Analysis of Analytical Discrimination

If one was required to put a definition on analytical discrimination, what would it mean? In the article “Discrimination is a virtue,” author Robert Keith Miller discusses the word “discrimination” and its true meanings, stating it as just knowing a difference. So if the question were asked once again, would it be possible to discriminate the appeals used in analytical analysis? Miller presents us stories and examples to point out a “lost” definition of a word often overheard, but never studied. His use of appeals sides with logos, discriminates against ethos, and makes anti-pathos a reality. His writing appeals to the mind, leaving much to ponder, though these thoughts may be lost in the whirlwind of ink ideas thrown into a paperback debate.

This article focuses on different situations to discuss the problems within. This topical discussion is effective being as there are no two clear sides for argument, and no steps to concluding a definite answer. This articles presentation leaves it open for logos, the writer seemingly shuns or does not have the use of ethos and pathos.

Miller has written for Newsweek, where this article comes from. He has also written writing handbooks, such as Motives for Writing (McGraw-Hill) and Hodges’ HarBrace Handbook (Harcourt College Publishers). He is an educator in argument techniques, writing Informed Argument: A Multidisciplinary Reader and Guide.

The audience for his article is people of open mind and education. His appeals to logic show a need to take apart his examples and examine them to find their meanings. When he presents his ideas, there is a need to understand each situation, and...

... middle of paper ...

...f logos is a main theme in the argument. Miller needs people to think about what he is presenting to have an effect on them. To a concentrated audience, his appeals make a good impression and even some realizations. An argument that offers a change in a language may come as hard for the reader to understand, but Miller presents examples in which he change makes sense to arouse the readers mind. This use of examples may be rampant and unconnected in some aspects, but all do serve the main purpose and relate to the main argument. Miller’s techniques form an informative and interesting essay. I believe that he has found his purpose and offered his point in the best possible way considering the subject matter. In interpreting his essay, Miller’s own words seem to sum it up best: “Let us be open-minded by all means, but not so open-minded that our brains fall out.”