A Rhetorical Analysis Of Don T Blame The Eater

In the article, “Let Them Eat Dog,” Jonathan Foer sheds light on a controversial topic, the consumption and breeding of dogs for food. Throughout Foer’s article he uses many different argumentative tactics in order to capture the reader’s attention on whether or not eating dogs should be considered morally. He uses three emotional tactics to establish his credibility and prove he knows the topic. The three tactics are ethos, pathos and logos Foer uses these three argumentative tools to convey his message across not only to prove eating dogs is wrong, but to take a stance on a bigger issue, the slaughtering of animals.

In the article “Turkeys in the Kitchen” Dave Barry provides plentiful amounts of ethos and pathos by implying that feminism aids men more than women. The author only indulges his own experiences, the readers only see through his point of view which is that feminism contributes to men more than women. However, these examples he provides are from his personal life, and he doesn’t ponder feminism outside of his household and his own opinion. Even though he has an abundance quantity of ethos and pathos examples, there is a deficiency of logos. Lack of logical assertions in his writing generates weak debating

A man should never go through an animal for its nutrients, when that animal receive all of its nutrients from plants. One man such, author Wendell Berry, wrote " The Pleasures of Eating," published in 2017, and he argues that every individual should be educated in what happens to their food before it becomes food. Many people are oblivious to what harmful things animals are put through in order to one day become our meal. Berry's intended audience is every single human being who eats meat, and even those who do not. I know this because Berry mentions the importance of individuals understanding where their meat comes from and why they should not let animals be treated this way. Berry assumes that individuals would not like to be treated that way, so why should animals be treated this way. Berry's purpose in this piece is to inform all humans of what inhumane things are done to animals in order to provide as one of our temporary fills. Berry's writing is somewhat credible and valuable because he is currently a farmer and currently a writer, he gives personal viewpoints and few examples, and he provides emotional statements about animal cruelty.

In 2009 a movie by the name of Food Inc. was released that challenged the production of food we eat. The movie examines everything from the science of seeds all the way through the consumption of the food, the food’s often negative effects on the body. The movie ends with the line “You can change the world with every bite”. This quote embodies the heart behind movie that change starts with the individual, and how they make food choices. This sort of change that Food Inc. invokes implies that top down change that the consumer can bring about change to the seed level. Food Inc. challenges the processes that allow companies like Monsanto to feed the world. We must understand how media like Food Inc. effects this mission to feed the world by examining the movie, the history of Monsanto as a company, and looking at the response from both sides to these challenges made in the public square to better combat and address issues brought forth.

The second focus of Forks Over Knives is ‘a whole-foods, plant-based diet is the solution.’ The documentary has already effectively proven that something about Americans’ eating habits needs to change. Half of Fulkerson’s burden is complete. Viewers are scared by the unhealthiness of America and the possibility of surgery for themselves. They have seen the cost of their diet and even scientific studies showing that the diet promotes cancer growth.

Marion Nestle, an author with a couple of published books and a teacher at New York University, dives into the how supermarkets encourage shoppers to buy more than they need in an essay taken from her 2006 book “What to Eat: An Aisle-by-Aisle Guide to Savvy Food Choices and Good Eating.” Nestle informs her audience of general shoppers on the topic of how supermarkets are prime real estate so that she can convince the audience that supermarkets do things to make more money by getting people to buy more. Nestle uses rhetorical strategies of having pathos, examples, and facts. Nestle begins her essay by utilizing pathos. She attends to the audience’s emotions by describing the mass amounts of choices shoppers must make when they shop and the stress that comes with shopping.

The amount of foreign students come to study in Canadian University has increased dramatically in the last few years, and in the process for them to integrate into the host country, they will experience a culture shock. In her article “Picture this: A Photovoice study of international students’ food experience in Canada”, Stephanie Amos delivers a research she made on food experiences of international students in Canada, and based on the experimentation, she demonstrates that “international students acculturating to Canada have emotional and physical needs, which can be met through food.”(pg59). Stephanie Amos herself is a registered dietitian who works in the Department of Applied Human Nutrition at Mount Saint Vincent University, and through this article, she tries to convince Canadian Universities to “incorporate food acculturation strategies into campus events and menus,” (pg59) and then she persuades the nutrition professionals on campus study on create a better food environment for international students. Stephanie utilizes logos, which is the dominant rhetorical appeal of the article, by separating the article into different parts, though in some respects her appeal to logic is kind of weak. In spite of the fact that Stephanie effectively appeals to her audience by using ethos and pathos to connect them to the participants in the

Eating food produced within a hundred-mile radius has never been a prominent concern historically, though there has been a recent increase in this trend. Those that are rigorously set on this new ideology are being labeled “locavores”. Christophe Pelletier, being a proficient individual on the topic of food production had an educated opinion on the locavore’s predicted way of life. Pelletier’s, “The Locavore’s Dilemma”, provides multiple examples to support his belief that informing every resident of the carbon footprint their food contains would realistically carryout the locavore’s ideology to a more viable agriculture. His blog post on this ideology goes into depth about the physical and economical destruction they would provoke. This would include: the possibility of famine, lack of needed nutritional supplements,

David Crystal’s essay is persuasive and effective. His use of ethos, pathos and logos helped him persuade the reader. He used ethos by showing he had credibility to support the statements that he made. He also used pathos in his essay to connect with the reader on an emotional level. Crystal also uses logos by providing strong reasons and sufficient evidence to reinforce his argument. In doing so he was able to effectively show the benefits of text messaging.

In this rhetorical rationale on English 1010, my purpose is to professionally present a rhetorical analysis of this review. Since day one of my English 1010 class, I have learned a lot about rhetoric, it has been long time since I was in school, I didn’t know what ethos, logos or pathos meant. And that when you read an essay, an article, a book, newspaper, etc, they all have a purpose and an audience. For me it is really hard to understand when I read and write something because the minute I finish reading it, I forget what was all about. With all I have learned in this class now I can concentrate and focus more, I’m able to identify the parts of a rhetorical triangle, I know how to write a summary and rhetorical analysis.

Is Greed actually not of a financial use rather than a emotional use. If so would employees who work at fast-food establishments or even major corporate heads of these billion dollar fast-food chains allow their own children to indulge themselves in them, knowingly aware of the vast risks they could embark on later in life due to their unhealthy choices? In his essay “Don’t Blame the Eater,” David Zinczenko brings up valid points on how fast-food is harmful to one’s body. Zinczenko is able to effectively argue against the manipulation of the food industry. by showing the reader that the consumer is the victim while the food industry is the one to blame.

Did you know, that the United States consumes about 24 billion pounds of meat every year? Meat and poultry is one of the fastest growing industries in the world today. For many, all that goes through their mind is how good it is and they chow it down without a second thought. It has become a habit, an act of second-nature. However, many are not aware of the way it was produced or where it comes from. In his 2009 New York Times essay, award winning novelist and New York University professor, Jonathan Foer considers the effects of consuming meat and argues that the contemporary ways in which the animals we eat are produced, is highly unethical. Specifically the conditions they are raised in, the genetic tweaks, and the inhumane killing process. He spent three years researching his book, Eating Animals, which was published on November 2, 2009.  It is clear he is not forcing his views on his readers, rather he is speaking to them on a more logical and emotional platform. Bringing to light the controversial ways of modern day meat production, he insists on more conscientious food choices. Foer is critically acclaimed for his persuasive writing techniques, staggering research, clever language, and graphically creative instances. His main claim is that meat is bad when it comes at the expense of animal suffering, danger to your health, and negative effects to our environment. To advance his claim he does the following: first,  he uses narration as a way to attract his audience attention and keep them engaged with the text, next, he employs the strategy of cause and effect, to help his audience to fully comprehend the results in his research, and lastly, uses convincing descriptions to appall his readers and to leave them in dismay. His audience is mostly mainstream, however, it specifically entices rhetoricians. It seems his main purpose is to inform his audience and educate them on the matter at hand.

How can a person hold someone else responsible for his or her health when that person is not living a healthy life style? Some people tend to blame others for their health issues and demand that the government or health insurance companies pay for their medicals. Meanwhile, it is believed that we are responsible for our health. According to David Zinczenko ’s “Don’t Blame the Eater”, he believes that the government should be responsible for our health. On the other hand, Radley Balko’s “What You Eat Is Your Problem” does not support Zinczenko’s idea. Balko believes that each person should be responsible for their own health and what they eat.

Brassuer delivers a number of useful lessons for presenting information effectively. Firstly, an argument needs to address a problem and needs to explore all possible solutions; it needs to ask questions and to provide answers. Secondly, an argument needs to persuade its readers through a balanced use of the three rhetorical tools: ethos, logos, and pathos. Thirdly, an argument has a specific audience in mind. Lastly, the author of an argument should pay attention to the social environment, culture, and values of his/her audience.

Zinczenko uses ethical appeal by using a personal experience from his own life as a backing to support his argument which shows that he has personal stake in and first-hand experience with the problem. He starts his essay by telling the readers that he was living on a fast food diet during his teenage years, like most American teens. He grew up with divorced parents and a mother who worked long hours. His mother did not have enough time to cook healthy food due to her job to make money for both of them; thus, he did not have an alternate choice but to turn to fast food restaurant like McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken, for his daily meals. Day by day he started to gain weight and, by the age of 15, his weight was 212 pounds, which is not proper for a kid of his age. Zinczenko mentions that he, eventually, turned his life around and began to make healthier choices when he went to college and joined the Navy Reserves and got involved with a health magazine which helped him in making better choices regarding his diet and losing weight. Although he points out that he was able to manage his diet, he admits that “Most of the teenagers who live, as [he] once did, on a fast-food diet won’t turn their lives around” (463). His concern is that many teenagers that are experiencing what he went through will not be able to improve their eating habits the way he did and will remain obese for the rest of their lives. By Zinczenko involving himself in his essay and speaking