|
|
For this assignment, I analyzed the YouTube videos between the Democrats Hiliary Clinton and Barack Obama and the Republicans: Ruday Giuliani, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.
Both parties discuss meaningless subjects! They are not looking at the big picture. Their entire debates surface small topics or subtopics in their campaigns. Why do people always bring up the past? “You said….when you were riding a horse around your barn!” This is just childish behavior.
However, as the video goes on from the Republican debate, they do start talking about the immigration problem. Yes, I realize that it is a huge and complicated problem, but someone needs to address it without putting anyone else down. People feel differently about this subject and the politicians are aware of it. They use their feelings about that topic to persuade their audience. For example, Mayor Ruday Giuliani talked about how he allowed illegal immigrants who were in school the right to stay in school because it would be inhumane to leave them on the side of the street. He also stated that in New York, where he is the mayor, he allowed illegals hospital care because forbiding it would also be inhumane. “…illegals are people, too” (Giuliani) (These show two uses of pathos).
The ethos and logos perspective can be interpreted differently. In my opinion, the candidates do not focus on the ethos as much as the other two rhetorical parts. The logos; it must be heavily used in such debates. Logic has an enormous part in debating. If the candidates do not speak logically, they will (1) get torn-up by the others, and (2) will decrease their chance of getting elected.
For years, the world has been talking about a “Greener Earth”. But what does that really mean? Does it mean we should plant more trees or recycle more? Automakers think differently. As for them, they also have been talking about making the planet a better place to live… starting with the ozone. As the topic appears in papers repeatedly, automakers have found small ways to use up newer, longer-lasting resources. Moving away from using the now-one-hundred dollars a barrel oil, they have found ways of using battery-powered cars and other modes of transportation.
Starting in California, automaker General Motors introduced a pure-electric vehicle in 1996, cleverly named the EV1. The cars were cheap and they definitely were environmentally friendly. Citizens of California bought them. GM built over 400 power stations throughout the state for owners of the EV1 to use and recharge their cars. Sadly, there are downsides to this great piece of ecofriendly solution: The cars could not travel more than 29-30 miles on a single charge.
Batteries used in the EV1 were of the Nickel-Metal Hydride family, (Ni-MH). Newer batteries, developed by Stanford R. Ovshinsky, were introduced to the EV1, making the cars able to run longer on a charge. This change in batteries used in the EV1 allowed for 100-120 miles to be driven before the vehicle would need to be replenished of electricity. Last, but not least, another battery family came into play: The Lithium Ion batteries. Used in combination with Ovshinsky’s newfound development, the EV1′s had the ability to run just a bit longer. As GM was putting the final touches on its environmentally-friendly car, another company was getting jealous.
Daimler-Chrysler wanted a piece of the action. They fought with the state on mandates to allow more research to be done on these types of cars. The EV1s were ruining business for other automakers. The routine maintainance on the cars were virtually nonexistant. A regular routine maintanance would include rotating the tires and filling up the washer fluid. All the oil changes, replacement parts, and others such as those were huge business to automakers. The bringing of this car would decrease business for the other makers of cars. Through a series of events in a short amount of time, the EV1s were ordered to be destroyed. People had their cars repossessed; it left people crying.
In conclusion, automakers talk a lot of hype about making a car that will change the Earth… but no one company seems to do anything about it.
Title: “Shop ’til We Drop?”
By: Robert J. Samuelson
This essay talks about how Americans spend so much money every year buying everything they “need” and want in their American lives. The evidence of the usage of ethos, pathos, and logos are very clear. Samuelson uses [logos] statistics of which its numbers have amazed me and of the ethos persuasive appeal, he uses the disgusted tone to express how sickening it is for people to spend so much money is such a relative short amount of time.
Spending in the U.S., relative to other countries, has the biggest difference. The essays suggests that countries such as France and Japan have only 55-60 per cent of its population’s GDP (gross domestic product) are consumed in shopping, whereas the United State’s population’s GDP spending is the highest, towering in at a whopping 70 per cent.
The ethos part of the essay is also very evident. The author uses sources as to make himself a very creditable source. He has cited major sources which make myself feel as if I would be able to trust his facts. The charts and graphs included in his paper also come from a reliable source. (The Federal Reserve Board,) which displays data of every fourth quarter of each year, starting in 1946 and terminating in 2002.
Pgs. 14-18
1) Ethos- (Gr. ‘authority’) In writing, to establish creditability, you must research and cite your sources. Ethos is the word used to connect creditability and your writing.
Pathos- (Gr. for ‘emotion’) The use of emotion in writing will help set the proper tone to express how you feel to your reader.
Logos- (Gr. for ‘logic’) Logical writing makes sense and can present your argument precisely.
2) The use of well-known, creditable resources in your writing will establish trust in your reader(s).
3) Emotion that is used well in a piece will allow the reader to know how you feel about the argument you are presenting. Be sure to also present alternative viewpoints or the reader will likely lose interest and will stop reading.
4) Yes. There are many disadvantages to applying heavy use of emotion. “Pathos” can be overplayed to the point that its emotional element can be so entertaining that you miss the point of the argument. (A commercial advertising a car can have the car driving in the sky or up a wall, interpreting that the car can be driven anywhere.)
5) Logos is very important to a writer. The use of a properly ordered argument can be very effective in persuading someone.
6) Ethos, Pathos, and Logos are not separated at all. They actually work together and can produce an amazing paper. Having the knowledge, either from your experiences or from research, will help bring together these three concepts and will construct a phenomenal paper.
Environmentalism as Religion Run Amok
1) After reading the article, I immediately think Crichton is correct. He has a point with the whole ‘leave Religion out of it’ statement. People do not need faith to make the Earth a better place to live; they need to actually do something.
2) Crichton’s tone clearly is on the offensive, trying to persuade the reader to take some action and not just believe in ‘Someone’ to magically do it for them.
3) I believe that his main claim was “…our straggle to determine what is valid is the need to decide which of our perceptions are genuine and which are false.” He goes on explaining that we as people of this Earth should become smarter and recognize the correct way to think.
4) He uses factual information from reliable sources, which he does not cite, to support his claim throughout the paper.
5) He refers to his sources as “…the most prestigious science journals currently in print”. He should have included the sources so they could be verified.
6) I believe it to be strong. My reason for thinking in that way: he has certainly convinced me.
The following terms can quickly be define if researched in a dictionary, online. But, of course, the assignment asks that we read a few pages and define the following words ourselves:
Claim- I hypothesize that “claim” is defined as a statement that someone views as true.
Support- the reasons which are used to hold up a claim.
Evidence- Items or ideas which are concrete and abstract, respectively, that are used to support the truthfulness of a claim.
Explanation- the action of explaining; the use of verbal words to express feeling of your claim.
Well, Welcome to my Blog.
This is nothing special. Just a place to read what a Greek “Boi” posts.
Come back when something is on my mind!
|
|
