 |
| Indolences "Green equilateral triangle point up" 4/4/2007 via Commons.Wikipedia. Public Domain License. |
- Some of the strategies that appeared in the text that were mentioned in the Student's Guide to First Year Writing includes personal stories, references to credible sources, acknowledgment of the counterarguments, and appeals to values and beliefs shared with the audience.
- The author used these strategies to make his side more believable. For example, the author included lots of information about his interviewee to help solidify the information he provided. The scientist that was interviewed used to work for oil and gas companies, giving him a deeper understanding of the fracking process.
- I think these strategies successfully increases the credibility of the author. Chris Mooney is a published author that writes about politics in science. I think because his argument is supported by an external source that has experience in the fracking world, his opinion is more believable than if Mooney just stated his opinion.
- Similar to how Mooney's credibility was increased, I think the effectiveness of the article increased with the strategies implemented. Mooney is very upfront of his public appearance, he does not try to hide that he is typically a political writer. However, he uses this to the advantage of his argument when he disagrees with his party.
- And now the reason I bring it up in the context of politics is that the right, the political right uses this as a central case study for liberals getting science wrong. They say fracking isn't that risky. The left over exaggerates the risk because they hate corporations yada-yada. And I've been kinda sympathetic to the argument and took that stance in Scientific American in 2011 and also in my book...But since that time the science has evolved and developed in particular the research has gotten clearer on two subjects that you've got to call pretty concerning..
- Because this piece is an opinion piece I think its nearly impossible to eliminate all bias. However, like in the previous bullet, I think Mooney address his bias, namely his political affiliation, but uses his bias to aid his argument.
- The piece seems to value more logic and scientific fact than emotional appeal, but some of the emotional strategies that are present in the text are the repetition of key words, and the level of formality.
- I think they emotional response that Mooney is trying to elicit is an informed annoyance. I do not think he is trying to get people very angry as he gives no attainable goal. It seems like the response he is looking for would include people getting informed and going to their Congressmen to seek change.
- I think the text does a good job of informing people and creating enough anger to drive people to want to do something, but not angry enough to vandalize fracking sites.
- Because Mooney is not striving to create an angry audience he is more credible because he focuses the information towards informing the audience of the facts.
Appeals to Logic.
- I think this article focused mainly on its logos appeals and the strategies that are present in the text include: an interview and expert opinions, clear transitions, arrangement of text for emphasis, and effective organization of information and how it was presented.
- Because the article focuses on the scientific argument against hydraulic fracking in shale, Mooney is trying to keep the article as logical as possible so the concrete facts do not get lost and overshadowed by emotional or excessive jargon.
- In my opinion Mooney achieved keeping his article logical. The text presents an argument that I found easy to follow and I didn't find excessive bias present.
- I think because this piece was targeted towards an audience that valued the scientific evidence the strategies to keeps the text unbiased and logical are incredibly effective.
Reflection
After reading Nick and Jessica's post I realized that the types of strategies the author uses really depends on what kind of argument the author is trying to make.
Nick, like me, had an article that relied heavily on scientific fact and evidence. In fact, his author also used an interview with an expert scientist as evidence for his argument. Because of the scientific focus the articles relied more on a logical approach than an emotional one.
Nick, like me, had an article that relied heavily on scientific fact and evidence. In fact, his author also used an interview with an expert scientist as evidence for his argument. Because of the scientific focus the articles relied more on a logical approach than an emotional one.
In Jessica's post her author used more of the emotional strategies to add validity to her argument. Her text used more visual aids that were implemented to draw an emotional response from the reader, whereas the images in my text were used more to explain the scientific ideas.
Our articles similarly favored logic over emotion. I find that in scientific articles, such as ours, utilize logic more frequently. Logos was definitely the strongest rhetorical strategy present in my article. Also interesting was the inherent bias present in your article. My article was relatively free from bias.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the article seems to have an emphasis on logos appeals. It also has strong pathos to complement that. Your use of textual evidence in the pathos section gave me a better understanding of how the author attempted to dismiss his bias for the reader. An article with appeals to logic and credibility makes sense in the science and engineering fields. It seems like the author did a good job tailoring his rhetorical strategies to fit the topic.
ReplyDelete