Rhetorical Analysis: Watson and Rifkin
Jeremy Rifkin, an American economist, writer and public speaker, is founder and president of the Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET). In his article, “A Change of Heart about Animals,” published in the Los Angeles Times (2003), suggests that animals are more like humans in the sense that they are capable of feeling emotions as well as comprehending concepts much like we’ve never expected. He supports his claim by providing a series of statistics, facts and rhetorical questions, all of which have a strong appeal directly to logos and indirectly to pathos. Also, Paul Watson, in his essay “Loving Nature with a Gun,” (2006) addresses the topic of animal treatment. The Canadian animal rights and environmental activist and former Sierra Club National Director aggressively argue that the Sierra Club, an animal and environmentalist organization, is portraying an inappropriate and hypocritical image of the corporation. Watson relies on a strong appeal to pathos in the form of personal opinion as well as logos presented as statistics to support his main claim.
Both Rifkin and Watson address the topic of animal treatment. Rifkin and Watson both use pathos and logos to support their claims however, they do so in contrasting ways. In my rhetorical analysis of the essay’s I will examine these strategies in both texts, make connections between the two works, and I will show how Rifkin’s essay clarifies Watson’s and was ultimately more effective. First I will talk about a very important term in Rhetoric, the logos appeal.
Logos, which is the appeal to logics, provides hard to debate and solid evidence. Although it is present in both the authors’ essays, it is more frequently addressed in Rifkin’s piece. For example, the author states, “Studies on pigs’ social behavior funded by McDonald’s at Purdue University have found that they crave attention and are easily depressed if isolated or denied playtime with each other. The lack of mental and physical stimuli can
Both Rifkin and Watson address the topic of animal treatment. Rifkin and Watson both use pathos and logos to support their claims however, they do so in contrasting ways. In my rhetorical analysis of the essay’s I will examine these strategies in both texts, make connections between the two works, and I will show how Rifkin’s essay clarifies Watson’s and was ultimately more effective. First I will talk about a very important term in Rhetoric, the logos appeal.
Logos, which is the appeal to logics, provides hard to debate and solid evidence. Although it is present in both the authors’ essays, it is more frequently addressed in Rifkin’s piece. For example, the author states, “Studies on pigs’ social behavior funded by McDonald’s at Purdue University have found that they crave attention and are easily depressed if isolated or denied playtime with each other. The lack of mental and physical stimuli can
Cited: Rifkin, Jeremy. A Change of Heart about Animals. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Times, 2003. Watson, Paul. Loving Nature with a Gun. http://www.seashepherd.org/, 2006