Upload
bernice-garrett
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
THE FOUNDATION
• Introduction• Writing process• Two attendance topics • Semester topic • Key terms exercise • Writing Center visit • Office visit • Discourse community map • Discourse community response • Agency discourse memo --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11 Projects in 2 Weeks!
RHETORIC 101
• Ethos: credibility • Expertise, experience, no conflicts of interests (not corrupt) • Can you trust what this person says? Why or why not?
• Pathos: emotional appeals • Ability to move the crowd, induce sense of grief, sympathy,
empathy, injustice, or any other kind of powerful feeling
• Logos: evidence/reasoning • facts, statistics, laws, proof, logical arguments
The HOW of words, NOT necessarily the what • Analysis, NOT summary • Do NOT insert your personal opinion (save that for later)
RHETORIC 101
• Not all rhetoric features ALL three forms of appeal • Not all three forms of appeal need to be effective
for the argument to work, for example: • Strong ethos, weak logos (or any other combo) could be
effective in ONE kind of issue but ineffective in ANOTHER. So…
• CONTEXT MATTERS• Audience consideration comes into play • If you are addressing the National Academy of Sciences you
would want strong logos • If you are a politician addressing the National Rifle Association,
you would want some pathos about the “right to bear” • If you are addressing Congress about the dangers of nuclear
proliferation, you would want some ethos
ANALYSIS OF BIG BOSS SPEECH
• Context: founding military force • What is he saying? • Effective?• Audience: • His own army.
• Tone: resolved, decisive • Is it mostly… • Pathos? • Ethos? • Logos?
ANALYSIS OF BIG BOSS SPEECH
• “We are soldiers without borders, our purpose defined by the era we live in” • This is the main idea/thesis/crux of his speech. • Logos, pathos, or ethos?
Purpose: “We will be the deterrent for those with no other recourse” -LOGOS, Some PATHOS
“We will sometimes have to sell ourselves and services” • Logos. Is this admirable?
• “We need no reason to fight. We fight because we are needed” • This is a fallacy (an error in logic). [Wikipedia lists fallacies]
ANALYSIS OF BIG BOSS SPEECH
• “We will forsake our countries…we have no philosophy” • But is this speech a philosophy in and of itself?
• “If the times demand…we’ll be revolutionaries, criminals, terrorists…headed straight to hell” • Ethos: he is blunt. • Ethical limit? • All for a greater good?
• Logos: logic. “If…then” statement. His closing response to this? Pathos: “What better place for us than this? It is our only
home. Our heaven and our hell”
CAMPAIGN AD
• Context: Campaigning for Congress• Ethos: • NRA Rating of 100% • Female = Need more ethos than men in politics?
• What are the values the campaign appeals to? • God (Christian, conservative) = PATHOS• Guns = PATHOS• Lower taxes = LOGOS• Change in Congress = LOGOS, PATHOS
Do these values make a good politician?
CAMPAIGN AD
• Use of visuals: • Fires at “TAXES” = PATHOS • Fires a Thompson, assault rifle, revolver =
PATHOS, ETHOS • Gun rights
• Smiling = PATHOS • Use of language: • Puns = PATHOS • “Caliber,” “right on target,” “a pretty fair
shot” • Voice? Calm male.
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SPEECH
• Audience = Senate floor (immediate audience), and, everyone online (recorded) • Key Background/CONTEXT = “Hours before
New York lawmakers rejected a key marriage equality bill (38-24), State Senator Diane J. Savino made the passionate case for a government that recognizes and administers same-sex marriages.” • ETHOS = State Senator, NY • Interesting introduction: • Nervous, but because not sure of position, but because
not sure what is going to happen (to the bill)
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SPEECH
• Key claim: NOT about politics • What does this “politics” mean in this CONTEXT? • “An issue of fairness” = equality
• Ethos: personal experience, modest about the quality of her relationship, acknowledges has been LOBBIED, uses personal anecdote (storytelling) • More ethos: Thomas Jefferson, founding father,
secular values • Sen. Diaz: shows she considers and acknowledges
OTHER SIDE • Tone: Respectful but passionate
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SPEECH
• Role of government = LOGOS • Changing “definition” of marriage? Role of
government not to determine “quality” of marriage. • LOGOS
• Sanctity of marriage? Divorce rate = LOGOS, cultural critique (television = superficial, sanctity not there in the first place, people who CAN marry abuse it)
• CALL to ACTION: Bill passes (through vote)• Use of language: • “Nothing to fear” repeated = anaphora, a rhetorical device
MAD MEN PITCH
• CONTEXT: Consumer advertising, 1960s • Tone: Assertive, cool, eloquent • ETHOS: Creative director (experience) • Logos/pathos: not about “new,” but “nostalgia”• PURPOSE: The Kodak “Carousel” = slide projector • Pitch: So Kodak will buy their advertising services
• Language: “Nostalgia” theme• not a wheel, but a carousel • not a spaceship, but a time-machine
• Audience: Coworkers, and himself? • PATHOS: Family photos, voice • Visual rhetoric: eye contact, photos, professional
POLITICAL RHETORIC
• Issue/Context: Existence of “terror babies” • Anderson Cooper = journalist • Defense: Lack of evidence, FBI denies existence
• Is Cooper “attacking the messenger”? • Even if he is, is that a bad thing?
• “Evidence” = logos • “Absolutely no evidence” of terror baby conspiracy –
Anderson Cooper • Conspiracy • Cooper’s ethos/logos: FBI, which finds no evidence • Key terms/jargon: demagogue, conspiracy (look up
terms)
POLITICAL RHETORIC
• Cooper claims the politician’s agenda is just “politics” • Spreading “scare stories” = pathos, induce fear
• Cooper addresses the politician’s voice, “yelling”• Pathos from politician = Protecting America • Cooper’s rebuttal: Both Democrats and Republicans agree they
want to protect America
• Do the politicians offer any “evidence”? • Closing statement from Anderson: Summarizes interview• Does Cooper concede any of the points? • Yes, for example, that there is “birth tourism”, but that is different,
Cooper claims. • Conceding points from other side = ethos = honest • Logos as well = logical, rational to acknowledge other side