Rhetorical Analysis To Dr. William Ross

In the 1950’s the Second Red Scare also referred to as McCarthyism was in full swing. Fearful of communist overtaking the United States almost everyone, including educators were scrutinized and affected. In the letter “To Dr. William Ross”, Katherine Porter is responding directly to Dr. Ross and his request for an Oath of Allegiance as a condition of her employment at Colorado State University. She is writing during a time when refusal to sign such an oath, often resulted in denial or loss of employment, and destruction of careers. In “To Dr. William Ross”, Katherine Porter effectively uses logos, ethos and pathos to support her claims, and persuade her audience that an oath of allegiance is not necessary for one to be loyal and allegiant

Porter establishes herself as a credible source on the subject of signing an oath of this kind. “My memory goes back easily thirty years to the time this law was passed in Colorado, in a time of war, fright and public hysteria being whipped up by the same kind of people who are doing this work now. (Porter 617)” The author uses ethos in this statement to show that she has personal memories of the Original Red Scare which happened around 1920. She supports her claim with pathos in her statement “I believed then, and still do believe, that this requirement of an oath of allegiance was more of a device for embarrassing and humiliating honest person than an effective trap for traitors and subversive people. (Porter 617)” The author is appealing to our sense of pride, and the embarrassment felt when people attack our

There is nothing in it that I do not naturally and instinctively observe as I have and will. (Porter 617) In this statement the author is using logos show that it’s not the oath that she is against but rather the claim that if she does not sign the oath she is not loyal to her country. She supports her claim using logos “My people are the Old Stock. The helped found colonies, to break new trails, and to survey wildernesses … They have fought in all the wars, they have been governors of states, and military attach’es, an at least one ambassador.” The author is appealing to our logic that someone with this family background would naturally have loyalty and patriotism instilled in them. She goes on to explain why she resents the request of an oath of allegiance “My feelings about my country and its history is as tender and intimate as about my own parents, and I really suffer to have them violated. (Porter 617).” Using this pathos statement she is appealing to the sense of love and loyalty toward his parents, giving him something to compare to her suffering over the oath. She attacks the oath and the political movement behind it “We’re going to be made sorry very soon for our refusal to reject unconditionally the kind of evil that disguises itself as patriotism, as love of virtue, as religious faith, as the crusader against the internal enemy. These people are themselves the enemy. (Porter 618)” The author is appealing to logos,