Read the quotations and identify the rhetorical strategy or strategies. Preview the document (of ethos, pathos, and logos) used by the author in the passage; in particular I’d like you to discuss how the diction or word choice used by the author affects the reader/audience (i.e. what is interesting about the author’s word choices in terms of their connotations).
READ: Ethos, Pathos, & Logos
Rhetorical Appeals: Ethos, Pathos, Logos
In rhetoric, Artistotle referred to three different appeals that we have at our disposal to be effective in our communication. When we write (especially for persuasive purposes), we can use strategies that appeal to our authority and credibility as authors (ETHOS), our audience’s emotions and values (PATHOS), and imbue our message/essay with good reasoning and evidence to support our ideas and thus appeal to our audience’s intellect (LOGOS).
These rhetorical appeals align themselves with the rhetorical triangle as follows:
Ethos = Author
Pathos = Audience
Logos = Text
Over the next few weeks, as we apply our new understanding of rhetoric to the study and analysis of a documentary film, you should refer to my handout.Preview the document on the appeals and different strategies used by authors to create ethos, pathos, and logos.
âWith bulldozer, earth mover, chainsaw, and dynamite the international timber, mining, and beef industries are invading our public landsâproperty of all Americansâbashing their way into our forests, mountains, and rangelands all looting them for everything they can get away with. This for the sake of short-term profits in the corporate sector and multimillion-dollar annual salaries for the three-piece-suited gangstersâ¦who control and manage these bandit industriesâ¦actively encouraged, inevitably, by those jelly-fish government agencies that are supposed to protect the public lands, and as always aided and abetted in every way possible by the compliant politicians of our Western statesâ¦who would sell the graves of their mothers if thereâs a quick buck in the deal, over or under the table, what do they care.â (Edward Abbey, âEco-Defenseâ)
Sample Solution
The major weakness of this study â as noted by the authors â is the lack of student voices (Wright et al., 2010). The researchers intentionally choose this method because it protected the refugees from feeling taken advantage of, which was a developing pattern with researchers in the camps (Wright et al., 2010). As a consequence, we do not hear directly from the students, yet they are protected from any exploitation. Wright et al. (2010) also noted the possible biased nature of the feedback from organizers rather than students. Perhaps the most thorough studies conducted on online programs are performed by Thomas Crea. His first work appears to be a follow-up to the program that Wright et al. (2010) attended to in the Kenyan camp called Kakuma â although there were additional locations added to the 2010 â 2014 program. The focus of this study was to look at the effectiveness of the pilot project objectives (Crea et al., 2015). The objectives were to provide adequate Internet service, provide online tertiary and community service programs â for which the students were expected to be graduated by the end of the pilot. The results indicated that the objectives were all successful to some degree (Crea et al., 2015). This is the first piece of research that focuses exclusively on a specific online program rather than including higher education in refugee camps in a more general way. And the first step in looking closely at this program would be to address the effectiveness of the program objectives, which is precisely what Crea et al. do (2015). Their methodologies are meticulous. This is also the first study that uses quantitative data. Crea et al. explain the procedure of coding data, âto produce a grounded theory of the [studentsâ] perceptions and understandingsâ (p. 240). It included both administrators and students for a total of 122 participants over the three locations and two programs (Crea et al., 2015). Data was taken from 22 focus group discussions and gender demographics were also included (Crea et al., 2015). Creaâs (2016) follow-up study looked more closely at the urgently needed studentsâ perspective of their experience with tertiary education in the camps. Crea also, âexamine[d] survey data collected from these students related to their quality of life, and compare[d] these data with their assessments of higher education as a means of exploring the context of their educationâ (p. 12). It appears that the same group of participants was used in the 2016 study as in the previous 2015 study. Again, there was quantitative data that was used as well as additional qualitative data (Crea, 2016). Participants were given a quality of life survey as well as participated in focus groups. The combination of both qualitative and quantitative research provides evidence of a well-structured study. The results indicate that the participants valued education because o>
The major weakness of this study â as noted by the authors â is the lack of student voices (Wright et al., 2010). The researchers intentionally choose this method because it protected the refugees from feeling taken advantage of, which was a developing pattern with researchers in the camps (Wright et al., 2010). As a consequence, we do not hear directly from the students, yet they are protected from any exploitation. Wright et al. (2010) also noted the possible biased nature of the feedback from organizers rather than students. Perhaps the most thorough studies conducted on online programs are performed by Thomas Crea. His first work appears to be a follow-up to the program that Wright et al. (2010) attended to in the Kenyan camp called Kakuma â although there were additional locations added to the 2010 â 2014 program. The focus of this study was to look at the effectiveness of the pilot project objectives (Crea et al., 2015). The objectives were to provide adequate Internet service, provide online tertiary and community service programs â for which the students were expected to be graduated by the end of the pilot. The results indicated that the objectives were all successful to some degree (Crea et al., 2015). This is the first piece of research that focuses exclusively on a specific online program rather than including higher education in refugee camps in a more general way. And the first step in looking closely at this program would be to address the effectiveness of the program objectives, which is precisely what Crea et al. do (2015). Their methodologies are meticulous. This is also the first study that uses quantitative data. Crea et al. explain the procedure of coding data, âto produce a grounded theory of the [studentsâ] perceptions and understandingsâ (p. 240). It included both administrators and students for a total of 122 participants over the three locations and two programs (Crea et al., 2015). Data was taken from 22 focus group discussions and gender demographics were also included (Crea et al., 2015). Creaâs (2016) follow-up study looked more closely at the urgently needed studentsâ perspective of their experience with tertiary education in the camps. Crea also, âexamine[d] survey data collected from these students related to their quality of life, and compare[d] these data with their assessments of higher education as a means of exploring the context of their educationâ (p. 12). It appears that the same group of participants was used in the 2016 study as in the previous 2015 study. Again, there was quantitative data that was used as well as additional qualitative data (Crea, 2016). Participants were given a quality of life survey as well as participated in focus groups. The combination of both qualitative and quantitative research provides evidence of a well-structured study. The results indicate that the participants valued education because o>
