Space Exploration

If you looked at a satellite image of the United States from space you can see that we are tiny. Extremely tiny. So why do humans make it essential that we should explore the space even though our impact would barely make a dent in the unfathomable universe. In the article Why Bother to Explore the Universe, David Helfand argues and persuades his readers that through astronomy and space exploration we, as humans, have continued to be as curious and imaginative as ever. This growing interest for what is outside our planet has taught humans to be innovative and creative when it comes to problem solving. He utilizes the effect of rhetorical questions, modes of persuasion, and repetition to convince his readers that space exploration is needed
“One urgent need we have today is something astronomy provides in spades: perspective. We all have problems; our communities, our nation, and the planet face some serious challenges.” He continuously keeps using words such as “we” and “our” to make the readers all feel connected to each other and to him, even though these people could be on opposite ends of the planet. This connection to people allows him to be a person and relatable and the common ground that is provided creates a persona that the author is just like them. This is also apparent in the second paragraph when Helfand uses humor to make him more interesting. “Helium was first discovered on the sun – no birthday party would be the same without that.” The significance of discovering helium is no small feat and yet something as simple as a birthday party would be dramatically influenced by it is almost an understatement. Similarly, towards the end of the article, the writer paints a scene for his readers by telling them a story. “I found myself in a car with a senior astronomer driving to a nighttime observing session in Arizona. He abruptly asked, ‘What if you were called before Congress and asked to justify public expenditure on astronomy.’” The purpose in telling this story is to put himself in the article and say that he too is affected by the ringing question of space exploration. Those who read the article will
Helfand’s arguments lack the basic necessities to get someone’s point across and this is through facts. Without this proper support, the readers aren’t 100% sure that the information they are reading is true and accurate. His lack of this evidence in ends damages the ethos that he had originally built up throughout the article and the credibility is