Ind Bias
Individual Bias, Rhetorical Devices, and Argumentation
COM/220
12/04/2011
Individual Bias, Rhetorical Devices, and Argumentation I saw several examples of bias, fallacies, and rhetorical devices employed in this speech. The Perils of Indifference was a speech that was both written and given by Eli Weisel, to former president Bill Clinton and his wife on April 12,1999 in Washington, D.C In his speech, Elie Wiesel addresses Mr. and Mrs. Clinton and the members of Congress, in an attempt to persuade the audience into action, using forms of argumentation. He mentions scare tactics by simply stating the harsh and brutal suffering of what happened to him and everyone there. He doesn’t mention any particular action; he simply doesn’t want the audience to stand by while others suffer. To me that is a metaphor. His use of questions and word choice apparently angers the audience into anything but indifference which I intend to believe is a paradox. There are two paragraphs that are mainly questions. The fourth paragraph in the speech, he asks of indifference, “Is it necessary at times to practice it to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine, as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?” This question suggests a form of a rhetorical device because he states that while indifference is certainly easier than action, it is not necessarily right. This form of contradiction makes the audience begin to realize that indifference is wrong. Mr. Wiesel's choices of words in his speech was meant to anger, horrify, and otherwise arouse the audience into action. The words used in the speech caused feelings of empathy and anger which was a good use rhetorical devices. This played a major role in making the graphic illustrations so horrifying and the intensifying illusions made the speech more thrilling and therefore evoked several emotions from the audience which leaned in as being fallacy. To me this falls under political
COM/220
12/04/2011
Individual Bias, Rhetorical Devices, and Argumentation I saw several examples of bias, fallacies, and rhetorical devices employed in this speech. The Perils of Indifference was a speech that was both written and given by Eli Weisel, to former president Bill Clinton and his wife on April 12,1999 in Washington, D.C In his speech, Elie Wiesel addresses Mr. and Mrs. Clinton and the members of Congress, in an attempt to persuade the audience into action, using forms of argumentation. He mentions scare tactics by simply stating the harsh and brutal suffering of what happened to him and everyone there. He doesn’t mention any particular action; he simply doesn’t want the audience to stand by while others suffer. To me that is a metaphor. His use of questions and word choice apparently angers the audience into anything but indifference which I intend to believe is a paradox. There are two paragraphs that are mainly questions. The fourth paragraph in the speech, he asks of indifference, “Is it necessary at times to practice it to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine, as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?” This question suggests a form of a rhetorical device because he states that while indifference is certainly easier than action, it is not necessarily right. This form of contradiction makes the audience begin to realize that indifference is wrong. Mr. Wiesel's choices of words in his speech was meant to anger, horrify, and otherwise arouse the audience into action. The words used in the speech caused feelings of empathy and anger which was a good use rhetorical devices. This played a major role in making the graphic illustrations so horrifying and the intensifying illusions made the speech more thrilling and therefore evoked several emotions from the audience which leaned in as being fallacy. To me this falls under political