Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In 2012, Professor John Duffy published an essay titled “Virtuous Arguments” discussing the importance of first-year writing courses. In his essay, Duffy explains that toxic rhetoric is overwhelmingly being used by the media, politicians, and other officials. For instance, Duffy exemplifies this by stating that politicians have called their opponents “Nazi propagandists” and “demons.” He argues that the only way this can be stopped is with first-year writing courses. These courses are more than just a “speed bump” students have to pass through (Duffy 1). He states that these courses teach students how to engage in an ethical public discourse without the use of toxic rhetoric. This will help them be successful in their college careers and beyond
In Downs and Wardle’s article, they argue and identify the flaws in teaching writing in college. Demonstrating the misconceptions that academic writing is universal, but rather specialized in each case. Citing studies and opinions from esteemed professionals, Downs & Wardle state their points and illuminate the problem in today’s many colleges.
In an article originally published in May 2003 in USA Today called “College Isn’t For Everyone,” by W.J. Reeves combined these rhetorical devices to make a compelling argument that although colleges are easily accessible, higher education lacks students with the capabilities of academic success. To validate this claim, Reeves uses persuasive appeals to convey an effective argument by influencing the audience, however, he limits his reach because of the excessive pathos and condescending tone used to present his argument.
The author begins his argument by retelling the story of his youth to build his ethos but the results are poor as it presents more questions on how he is a credible source on this argument as his only evidence is his own story. However, through the same means his pathos is built as his anecdote conveys feelings in the audience, making them more willing to listen. Graff finally, gives a call to action to schools to use students’ interests to develop their skills in rhetoric and analysis, which reveals the logic behind his argument. The topic about how students are taught rhetoric and analysis brings interest but with an average argument only built on pathos, a low amount of logos, and questionable ethos it can fall on deaf
...o engage in destructive rhetoric are held to task, rhetoric cannot simply be attributed to some state of affairs, while the rhetorician from whose lips the rhetoric emerges is held to no ethical standard. Certainly it is conceivable that rhetoric can have destructive consequences. Rhetoric seems to have played a central role in the deterioration of people’s faith in their systems of government, or the electoral process by which they choose their representatives. A view of rhetoric in which the rhetorician is accountable for the effects of the change they inflict upon the world could lead to less destructive rhetoric and a society which operates on the solid ground of personal responsibility.
In Patricia Limerick’s article “Dancing with Professors”, she argues the problems that college students must face in the present regarding writing. Essays are daunting to most college students, and given the typical lengths of college papers, students are not motivated to write the assigned essays. One of the major arguments in Limerick’s article is how “It is, in truth, difficult to persuade students to write well when they find so few good examples in their assigned reading.” To college students, this argument is true with most of their ...
Americans have embraced debate since before we were a country. The idea that we would provide reasoned support for any position that we took is what made us different from the English king. Our love of debate came from the old country, and embedded itself in our culture as a defining value. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that the affinity for debate is still strong, and finds itself as a regular feature of the mainstream media. However, if Deborah Tannen of the New York Times is correct, our understanding of what it means to argue may be very different from what it once was; a “culture of critique” has developed within our media, and it relies on the exclusive opposition of two conflicting positions (Tannen). In her 1994 editorial, titled “The Triumph of the Yell”, Tannen claims that journalists, politicians and academics treat public discourse as an argument. Furthermore, she attempts to persuade her readers that this posturing of argument as a conflict leads to a battle, not a debate, and that we would be able to communicate the truth if this culture were not interfering. This paper will discuss the rhetorical strategies that Tannen utilizes, outline the support given in her editorial, and why her argument is less convincing than it should be.
David Foster Wallace, author of the essay “Authority and American Usage*,” praises and advocates for “good” writers who have a strong rhetorical ability, which he defines as “the persuasive use of language to influence the thoughts and actions of an audience” (Wallace 628). To have a strong rhetorical ability, an author needs to be aware of whom their audience is, in order to present their information in a way that will be influential on their audience. Wallace recognizes that an author who applies a strong rhetorical ability will be able to connect with the audience so that they respond “not just to [their] utterance but also to [them]” (Wallace 641). An author needs to take into consideration not just content, syntax and grammatical structure (their “utterance”) but also how their character will be perceived by their audience. A positive tone will make the author seem more pleasant and relatable, whereas a negative tone connotes arrogance and pretentiousness. That is why it is crucial for an author to recognize that an audience will respond to “them” and not just their “utterance,” as an author’s appearance to their readers can also shape how impactful their writing is.
From this course I have learned that being a writer is much more than writing grammatically correct. A writer is one who studies deeply and takes into mind the audience and the context and then begins to form their paper. Writers are rhetor’s, encoders, and members of discourse communities. As a writer, I hold the power to influence anyone that reads my writing, whether I intend to influence that person or not. Being a writer from my understanding this semester should actually be called a rhetor or encoder, because just about every piece of writing contains rhetoric and intertextuality of some sort, whether you consciously recognize it or not. I find that the knowledge, skills, and new ideas I have acquired this semester will significantly influence not only my college career but also benefit my life in general.
Clark (2016) suggests that rhetoric isn’t limited to oral communication, but currently has a permanent foothold in written works: magazine or newspaper excerpts, novels, and scientific reports. Not only written
Obama, Michelle. "Remarks to the NAACP National Convention." "They Say/I Say": The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing: With Readings. By Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, and Russel K. Durst. Vol. 2e. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2012. 417-33. Print.
“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”( Douglass). This famous quote epitomizes the philosophies of Frederick Douglass, in which he wanted everyone to be treated with dignity; if everyone was not treated with equality, no one person or property would be safe harm. His experience as a house slave, field slave and ship builder gave him the knowledge to develop into a persuasive speaker and abolitionist. In his narrative, he makes key arguments to white abolitionist and Christians on why slavery should be abolished. The key arguments that Frederick Douglass tries to vindicate are that slavery denies slaves of their identity, slavery is also detrimental for the slave owner, and slavery is ungodly.
"most students are already rhetorically savvy but unaware of their critical processes..." Author Jane Fife puts the three rhetorical analysis pieces to work, ethos pathos and logos, in an attempt to teach rhetorical analysis in a classroom. Fife uses a collaboration of all three types of rhetorical analysis. While the author does make good use of the first two pieces of rhetorical analysis, Pathos, and Logos, Fife strays away from the use of Ethos in her article. Fife applies the rhetorical appeals of Pathos and Logos to teach rhetoric to her class and the reader. However, her use of examples in a classroom backed up with little evidence to prove her authority surrounding the subject causes her readers to doubt her claim that Facebook and
In After Virtue, author Alasdair MacIntyre critiques the state of modern morality and proposes an argument in favor of Aristotelian virtue ethics. For MacIntyre, he believes that a lack of community driven morality is the cause of moral decline in society, and that this decline began during the age of Enlightenment. He explains that the Enlightenment brought society into a state of disruption because the intense focus on individualism drove people to philosophical emotivism. Emotivism is defined by MacIntyre as being “the doctrine that all evaluative judgements and more specifically all moral judgements are nothing but expressions of preference, expressions of attitude or feeling, insofar as they are moral or evaluative in character” (11). Emotivism (like relativism) leads to a subjective form or morality, which MacIntyre’s thesis explains to be deeply flawed. MacIntyre favors virtue ethics because he believes it to bring about a more objective moral value system.
Co-author of “They Say/I Say” handbook, Gerald Graff, analyzes in his essay “Hidden Intellectualism” that “street smarts” can be used for more efficient learning and can be a valuable tool to train students to “get hooked on reading and writing” (Graff 204). Graff’s purpose is to portray to his audience that knowing more about cars, TV, fashion, and etc. than “academic work” is not the detriment to the learning process that colleges and schools can see it to be (198). This knowledge can be an important teaching assistant and can facilitate the grasping of new concepts and help to prepare students to expand their interests and write with better quality in the future. Graff clarifies his reasoning by indicating, “Give me the student anytime who writes a sharply argued, sociologically acute analysis of an issue in Source over the student who writes a life-less explication of Hamlet or Socrates’ Apology” (205). Graff adopts a jovial tone to lure in his readers and describe how this overlooked intelligence can spark a passion in students to become interested in formal and academic topics. He uses ethos, pathos, and logos to establish his credibility, appeal emotionally to his readers, and appeal to logic by makes claims, providing evidence, and backing his statements up with reasoning.
Virtue is such an abstract concept that it is impossible for individuals or even societies as a whole to clearly and unequivocally define it, so there must be some form of a higher authority capable of defining human virtues tout court in order for such a thing to even exist. Because of the impact one's environment can have on his or her belief system there is a wide range of conflicting ideas regarding human virtue around the globe, which indicates that no intrinsic definition of human virtues exists for humans. Therefore, human beings alone are only able to speculate as to the nature of human virtue that cannot serve as concrete standards people must live up to as opinions generally do not have enough certainty to function as definitions. Thus, there must be a non-human higher power that outlines what is and is not thought to be excellent for all human beings, regardless of age, race, gender, or belief system.