A Rhetorical Analysis Of Apple's Counter Arguments
The argument being presented in the given piece is the FBI asking permission from Apple to have the ability to access people’s private messages in their apple products. This argument came into conversation after the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. The author’s claim towards the argument is that the FBI should not be able to have the ability to tap into people’s individual cell phones. Although the FBI’s idea of decoding Apple’s encryption code in order to gain access to tapping into all iPhones under service, it seems that the cons outweigh the pros of this certain situation. However, there has to be a completely different way the FBI can develop a better way to combat terrorism without interfering with all of Apple’s customers.
…show more content…
Instead, he briefly introduces the counter argument, but closes it in the same sentence by saying, “As some might say something about the FBI having control of the cellphones will help the US catch terrorists and other problems, others disagree.” The authors inability to acknowledge a counter argument hurts his argument because it makes his claim seem more biased. If the author doesn’t depict to the audience that he understands both perspectives, that will make his argument less credible. Not only will introducing a counter argument help eliminate all thoughts that your claim is biased, it will help strengthen your claim. Presenting a counter argument will allow you to point out all of the flaws in the opposing perspective. Developing a counter argument will appeal to the audience’s emotions as well. The ability for the author to relate to both sides of the story will appease both opposing party’s of the audience. If the audience realizes that the author only sympathizes or relates to only on viewpoint, then they will more than likely begin to tune out the argument in its entirety. For example, since the author didn’t touch base on why the FBI should have access to Apple’s encryption code, the part of the audience who is for the FBI gaining access to the code will most likely discredit the rest of the writer’s
Instead, he briefly introduces the counter argument, but closes it in the same sentence by saying, “As some might say something about the FBI having control of the cellphones will help the US catch terrorists and other problems, others disagree.” The authors inability to acknowledge a counter argument hurts his argument because it makes his claim seem more biased. If the author doesn’t depict to the audience that he understands both perspectives, that will make his argument less credible. Not only will introducing a counter argument help eliminate all thoughts that your claim is biased, it will help strengthen your claim. Presenting a counter argument will allow you to point out all of the flaws in the opposing perspective. Developing a counter argument will appeal to the audience’s emotions as well. The ability for the author to relate to both sides of the story will appease both opposing party’s of the audience. If the audience realizes that the author only sympathizes or relates to only on viewpoint, then they will more than likely begin to tune out the argument in its entirety. For example, since the author didn’t touch base on why the FBI should have access to Apple’s encryption code, the part of the audience who is for the FBI gaining access to the code will most likely discredit the rest of the writer’s