|
|
Analyzed Commercial
In this presidential campaign advertisement it is designed and the people are clothed in reference to the Spartan movie. The people are dressed like soldiers back in time. In this advertisement the three argumentative appeals are used which are ethos, pathos, and logos. In this commercial there is the Spartan leader in between the Spartans and the opposing group which one of them is an Arcadian. Ethos which is appealing to audience’s truth and authority is used when the head Spartan, the leader, starts off the commercial. The Spartan leader is at the middle of the two groups of soldiers and asking the opposing group “what is your profession?” and then the Spartan group. The Spartan group is Obama’s people and the opposing group is not for Obama. As the three of the opposing group soldiers each are asked “what is your profession”. One answers a Farter, and then farts. One answers a Foot-sniffer and then sniffs. The last one answers a bartologist. This part of the commercial displays pathos, which is the comical sense of the commercial. After the Spartan leader asks the opposing soldiers that question he asks the Spartans the same question and they reply “Obama!, Obama!, Obama!”. After the Spartans are finished cheering “Obama!” The Spartan leader turns to the opposing group of soldiers and says “See old friend, I brought more soldiers then you did”. And then the commercial finishes with a bang noise and end with thanking Snoop Dogg Productions and then goes to another slide and shows a banner across of the middle of the screen saying vote for Obama and end the war, with a picture of Obama on the banner.
Opinion
T he view I have on the argumentative topic of abortion is that I am not for it. One of the reasons I have this view is because the word of God is against it. Also one of the reasons I have this view is that the thought if killing someone, a baby in this case the thought se, is not positive to me. The thought of a baby being killed in any circumstance especially for reasons that could have been avoided is not acceptable t me. Also now that woman have a way out of having children they will not as safe as they could be, just because there is an easy way out of it. I have heard of teens getting abortions just because of having unprotected sex, because their boyfriends did not like using condoms. My point is if you did not want to get pregnant avoiding it as much as you can, do not just do whatever you like and then get an abortion. To me that is in other words saying that you would rather end up having to kill a child, your child, in order to not use condoms and please your companion and to not have to worry about being safe and protected by using condoms and more. My last main reason why I am against the act of having an abortion is that it too is also murder, just as killing someone, which is against the law, so why is murder against the law but abortion is not, and abortion is an act of murder.
1) Ethos is authority by how much information you know and you voice.
Pathos is emotion by persuading.
Logos is logic, using evidence and factual explanations support.
2) When writing a research paper good strategies you can use for appealing to the readers trust in authority are to research your topic thoroughly and create an authoritative sound. It is advantageous for you to get your reader to trust you as an authority because it makes you confident and makes you have a sense of authority and it also lets your reader have a open mind like you do.
3) Some good strategies for appealing to emotion when you are formulating a reasonable argument are using images and demonstrating sympathy. For example, images of the World Trade Center collapse affected the “war on terror”.
4) There are potential disadvantages with using a heaving appeal to emotion. For example if told a emotional story about a child dying when talking about poor children.
5) Ways you can use logos to build a strong argument are using important people as references and facts. It is very important to use logos when formulating a reasonable argument because if there is no logic you will lose the reader. For example if there are no facts and explanations you would lose the reader, the reader would not care.
6) Ethos, logos, and pathos are not totally separate from each other. Logos is connected to pathos and ethos because to have logic you need some kind of authority and emotion behind your evidence and support.
In this essay “Measuring Up” talks about how toys contribute to a child’s self image. The article is written by Amy Dickinson. This essay speaks about how when we were young tried to measure up to the Barbie’s and G.I. Joe’s, and still are trying to measure up to the perfect body and the perfect face. In this essay the author uses the three persuasive appeals throughout the essay but some more than others. Ethos is used when the authority cuts in talks about looking at our sons, relating to hers and the readers, so she is relating to the readers letting them now she knows what it is like having a son. Pathos is used in the essay when talks about a recent study and how they affected young boys, the increasing rate of anorexia and bulimia, and the syndrome of obsession with size and shape. So pathos is used more than ethos is the essay. But logos is used more than pathos in this essay. Logos is used in the essay by using many facts by Dr. Harrison Pope, co-author of The Adonis Complex, a helpful book on male body obsession. The way the writer uses the three appeals is effective in building a persuasive argument. To me it is most effective because the author used a lot of facts from a legitimate source, which was Dr. Harrison Pope, and also the facts of the effects of different the different eating disorders from trying to become “perfect”.
A claim is an argumentative topic or view. A claim is what your view is against the other arguments.
A support is a reason behind your claim. They are reasons backing up your argument.
Evidence is actual facts on your claim. Evidence is facts n the topic and surrounding topics of your argument.
An explanation is a breakdown of your claim and its support and evidence. An explanation fills any misunderstandings in an argument and wraps your argument up.
1) My immediate response to Crichton’s argument is that this man is crazy. I t makes me think what is the world coming to and feel that people really need to realize who God is because I believe in God and believe anything can happen through environmentalism through him. Something that stuck out to me was him saying that we want to be in a nature but not fully, just for a week or so to get away but in a house by the beach with screens.
2) Crichton’s tone is mad and disgusted. He feels that we are ridiculous by going off of religion and environmentalism instead of science/facts and environmentalism. The purpose of making the
reader feel this way is so that we can think really think about what he is saying and to second guess if what we are already doing is correct.
3) Crichton’s main claim is that we need to abandon environmental religion and to get politics out of the thinking of environmentalism. He makes supporting claims stating what politics did negatively towards the environment and also just stating the fact that we do not know it all and the earth’s function is to complex for us to know it all.
4) He supports his claim by stating facts and telling a story, and history. He uses facts about different parts of the world, Bible information, and how nature truly is without our fantasy view. His evidence supports his claim but to me is exaggerated and some are opinionated.
5) Crichton’s reasons for not citing his sources is that it would probably only impact a few because the convictions of a religion are not dependent on facts, but rather are matters of unshakable faith. I do accept his reasoning g because it is true. Not citing hurts his argument because some
of them sound like opinions and if they were cited we would know for a fact that they were facts and not opinions.
6) His argument is still strong because he has a lot of information on different topics that could come up from his main claim. It is also a strong argument because he has passion for what he is talking about.
|
|
