Example Of A Rhetorical Analysis Paper
The two editorials presented speak about universal healthcare in the United States but, the editorial speaking against universal healthcare is the more affective of the two because it uses two forms of rhetorical appeals and three forms of the argumentations. The first editorial mainly uses emotion to appeal to the reader while the second appeals more to statistics and logic. Also, the second editorial is more objective rather than subjective because of how the writer speaks and what he or she chooses to say.
Editorial number one, while very well written, is not a strong argument to use. The editorial uses only and appeal to emotions rather than ethics or logic. Pathos is not a strong rhetorical appeal because the reader does not believe the writer as much because there are no facts or statistics presented. Another flaw with the editorial is that I begins with a story. While this can be effective, it is not appropriate for the topic presented because of how …show more content…
subjective it may come off. The editorial over all is very subjective because of how much emotion it tries to bring into it and it is not a strong form of argumentation.
The second editorial is against universal healthcare and is a very strong argument because it hits three different points on why universal healthcare is a bad idea.
Also, it uses two appeals and three argumentations which make a very strong argument. The editorial hits a point about how if universal healthcare were to happen then government regulations would influence the quality of the healthcare that is provided. Another point that it makes is job loss because if universal healthcare is provided then many private insurance companies would be out of business. The strongest point that the editorial hits is how to pay for the universal healthcare. It gives a statistic about how much coverage each person would need which would add up to about $6,000 per person. The editorial also does not only use one appeal but two, logos and pathos, which are very effective when writing an argumentative essay. The editorial is very strong because of the logic and statistics the author uses to justify his or her
argument.
Both editorials use effective language just in different formats. The first editorial uses only pathos, the second editorial also uses pathos but less prominently. The second editorial uses logos more prominently than the first which makes it a stronger argument. The first editorial tries to appeal mainly to emotions and only uses one statistic but the second uses multiple statistics to support their argument. A big difference between the two is that the second uses three strong points in the beginning to outline the editorial which helps the reader to distinguish and think about the points throughout the other paragraphs.
While both essays are strong in their own ways the second editorial is more effective and strong because of the logic and statistics it uses to support. Also, the first editorial is not effective in the situation because it is subjective and appeals to emotion rather than facts.
Editorial number one, while very well written, is not a strong argument to use. The editorial uses only and appeal to emotions rather than ethics or logic. Pathos is not a strong rhetorical appeal because the reader does not believe the writer as much because there are no facts or statistics presented. Another flaw with the editorial is that I begins with a story. While this can be effective, it is not appropriate for the topic presented because of how …show more content…
subjective it may come off. The editorial over all is very subjective because of how much emotion it tries to bring into it and it is not a strong form of argumentation.
The second editorial is against universal healthcare and is a very strong argument because it hits three different points on why universal healthcare is a bad idea.
Also, it uses two appeals and three argumentations which make a very strong argument. The editorial hits a point about how if universal healthcare were to happen then government regulations would influence the quality of the healthcare that is provided. Another point that it makes is job loss because if universal healthcare is provided then many private insurance companies would be out of business. The strongest point that the editorial hits is how to pay for the universal healthcare. It gives a statistic about how much coverage each person would need which would add up to about $6,000 per person. The editorial also does not only use one appeal but two, logos and pathos, which are very effective when writing an argumentative essay. The editorial is very strong because of the logic and statistics the author uses to justify his or her
argument.
Both editorials use effective language just in different formats. The first editorial uses only pathos, the second editorial also uses pathos but less prominently. The second editorial uses logos more prominently than the first which makes it a stronger argument. The first editorial tries to appeal mainly to emotions and only uses one statistic but the second uses multiple statistics to support their argument. A big difference between the two is that the second uses three strong points in the beginning to outline the editorial which helps the reader to distinguish and think about the points throughout the other paragraphs.
While both essays are strong in their own ways the second editorial is more effective and strong because of the logic and statistics it uses to support. Also, the first editorial is not effective in the situation because it is subjective and appeals to emotion rather than facts.