Comparing Logic And Ethical Rhetoric
1. From what I have observed from a day of all the arguments, I have found that logical rhetoric seems to be the most effective argumentation because it appeals to our reasons. We can persuade another person by providing provable facts, data, and numbers, which make it reasonable for them to agree with us. Therefore, the person on the other hand can decide based on the facts I have provided.
2. Most of the time, I have found myself utilizing all of those three argumentation .For professional purposes; I mostly utilize logical and ethical rhetoric. For personal purpose, I use logical and emotional rhetoric.
3. I chose what kind of argumentation I should use depend on what kind of situations and who I am dealing with. I like to use Ethos and logical rhetoric when it comes to professional argumentation because Ethos proves credibility and trustworthiness, …show more content…
and logical rhetoric proves with data, facts, and it is based on statistical information. For personal purpose, I use both logical and emotional rhetoric. However, I have found out that using logical rhetoric can persuade another person better because it is reasonable and provable. However, emotional rhetoric doesn’t seem to be effective because it mainly appeals just to my feelings. It seems to be effective only if I put the other person in a very uncomfortable situation such as they do not have any other choice.
4. Part One: Effective rhetoric is when the argument appeals to my reason with data, facts, survey based, numbers, verification, credibility and trustworthiness.
In my opinion, logical and ethical argument must be made to approve their request. The reason is I have to decide something important, therefore, they must prove me with the statistical number, the facts that why it would work, and the data to support their point. It must be direct and straight to the point .It also needs to have credibility.
Part Two: I have seen a post on the Internet about why people should become vegetarian.
In the post, it has stated a various facts and it has proven with survey they have collected. They also have credibility as well, for instance, they stated according to World health organizations, and they also addressed Drs. Dean Ornish and Caldwell Esselstyn -- two doctors with 100 percent success in preventing and reversing heart disease -- have used a vegan diet to accomplish it, when talking about becoming vegetarian can also good for your health. Reasons they have stated in there is helping animals also help the global poor, eating meat supports cruelty to animals, eating meat is bad for the environment, and etc. Not only they have those factors, they also have proven numbers and facts, for instance, they stated that there is ample and justified moral indignation about the diversion of 100 million tons of grain for biofuels, more than seven times as much (760 million tons) is fed to farmed animals so that people can eat meat. Those specific criteria suit with my definition of effective rhetoric, and somehow persuaded
me.
2. Most of the time, I have found myself utilizing all of those three argumentation .For professional purposes; I mostly utilize logical and ethical rhetoric. For personal purpose, I use logical and emotional rhetoric.
3. I chose what kind of argumentation I should use depend on what kind of situations and who I am dealing with. I like to use Ethos and logical rhetoric when it comes to professional argumentation because Ethos proves credibility and trustworthiness, …show more content…
and logical rhetoric proves with data, facts, and it is based on statistical information. For personal purpose, I use both logical and emotional rhetoric. However, I have found out that using logical rhetoric can persuade another person better because it is reasonable and provable. However, emotional rhetoric doesn’t seem to be effective because it mainly appeals just to my feelings. It seems to be effective only if I put the other person in a very uncomfortable situation such as they do not have any other choice.
4. Part One: Effective rhetoric is when the argument appeals to my reason with data, facts, survey based, numbers, verification, credibility and trustworthiness.
In my opinion, logical and ethical argument must be made to approve their request. The reason is I have to decide something important, therefore, they must prove me with the statistical number, the facts that why it would work, and the data to support their point. It must be direct and straight to the point .It also needs to have credibility.
Part Two: I have seen a post on the Internet about why people should become vegetarian.
In the post, it has stated a various facts and it has proven with survey they have collected. They also have credibility as well, for instance, they stated according to World health organizations, and they also addressed Drs. Dean Ornish and Caldwell Esselstyn -- two doctors with 100 percent success in preventing and reversing heart disease -- have used a vegan diet to accomplish it, when talking about becoming vegetarian can also good for your health. Reasons they have stated in there is helping animals also help the global poor, eating meat supports cruelty to animals, eating meat is bad for the environment, and etc. Not only they have those factors, they also have proven numbers and facts, for instance, they stated that there is ample and justified moral indignation about the diversion of 100 million tons of grain for biofuels, more than seven times as much (760 million tons) is fed to farmed animals so that people can eat meat. Those specific criteria suit with my definition of effective rhetoric, and somehow persuaded
me.