ANALYSIS: "In Defense of Prejudice" by Jonathan Rauch
Jonathan Rauch's essay is a deviation from the traditional point of view. This well written essay discusses the fact that society is rather trying to eliminate hate and prejudice when in fact society should be trying to educate people against prejudice. Rauch makes an excellent point when he says "..stamping out prejudice really means forcing everyone to share the same prejudice, namely that of whoever is in authority."� He believes that society needs to not focus on eliminating prejudices and doctrines but instead focus on redirecting them so that they are beneficial to society. That would require everyone to place prejudice against prejudice and dogma against dogma, therefore allowing everything to appear for public criticism. Rauch lets the reader know that he is a gay Jewish man, while using quotes from several people that are well know in society. In his essay, "In Defense of Prejudice," Jonathan Rauch successfully uses the three definitions of pathos, logos and ethos .
Rauch makes some very valid points that have no basis except for emotional appeal. This use of the "power of a situation, piece of writing, work of art or person to cause feelings of sadness, esp. because of sympathy" is essentially pathos. He suggests the reader to realize how much of a mistake and harm it would be to our country to totally eliminate prejudice and offensive material. He also points out how ridiculous it is to try to erase all traces of hate and prejudice. Rauch brings to the reader's attention that one cannot have both the first amendment and a prejudice/racist free world. He says, "Where there is genuine freedom of expression there will be racist expression," also stating that " If you want to believe in intellectual freedom and the progress of knowledge and the advancement of science and all of those other good things, then you must swallow hard and accept this: for as thickheaded and wayward an animal as us the realistic question is how to make the best of prejudice, not
Rauch makes some very valid points that have no basis except for emotional appeal. This use of the "power of a situation, piece of writing, work of art or person to cause feelings of sadness, esp. because of sympathy" is essentially pathos. He suggests the reader to realize how much of a mistake and harm it would be to our country to totally eliminate prejudice and offensive material. He also points out how ridiculous it is to try to erase all traces of hate and prejudice. Rauch brings to the reader's attention that one cannot have both the first amendment and a prejudice/racist free world. He says, "Where there is genuine freedom of expression there will be racist expression," also stating that " If you want to believe in intellectual freedom and the progress of knowledge and the advancement of science and all of those other good things, then you must swallow hard and accept this: for as thickheaded and wayward an animal as us the realistic question is how to make the best of prejudice, not