Rhetorical Analysis Of Our Gas Guzzlers, Their Lives Essay

According to Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), 36.5 million Americans currently smoke, that is about fifteen percent of the population which is equal to the combined population of America’s twenty-five largest cities. Although anti-smoking advertisements are shown throughout the United States, people do not take them seriously half the time. The advertisement in this analysis showcases a grayish background, with the colors focusing mainly on a cigarette box that has the cigarettes put into crayon labels and the box also opens like a crayon box. There is also a child’s writing with crayons saying, “Just like mommy.” From this, the image showcases the dangers of smoking and the causes it has on loved ones. This advertisement uses strong ethos, pathos, and logos to get ASH’s point across very clear.

With the automobile, came one of the most widely used technologies in the world, the invention of the internal combustion engine which has left a noticeable impact on many parts of today’s world. One of the most widely debated and controversial topics having to do with the automobile is its effect on the environment. Al Gore, former United States Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize award winner, has spent many years trying to argue the negative effects that the internal combustion engine leaves on our planet. In his presidential campaign in 2000, he preached the ideas of a cleaner environment and better ways of living. He said, “When we seek to artificially enhance our capacity to acquire what we need from the earth, we do so at the direct expense of the earth’s ability to provide naturally what we are seeking. We frequently ignore the impact of our technological alchemy on natural processes. When we manufacture millions of internal combustion engines and automate the conversion of oxygen to CO2, we interfere with the earth’s ability to cleanse itself of the impurities that are normally removed from the atmosphere.” He has led many people to believe that the automobile of today is leaving a terrible and lasting effect on the earth’s atmosphere, and that it is one of the primary causes of the term “Global Warming.” Although Gore has had a giant following and

He says, “So perhaps we need some symbols to get us started, some places to sharpen the debate and rally ourselves to action.” He claims that sports utility vehicles are one of the main blamable symbols for global warming. He goes as far as to say “SUVs are more than mere symbols. They are a major part of the problem…” McKibben opposes SUVs because he claims they are simply unnecessary, not fuel efficient, and do not provide any additional safety compared to average cars. He claims, “SUVs essentially are machines for burning fossil fuel that just happen to also move you and your stuff around. But what makes them such a perfect symbol is the brute fact that they are simply unnecessary.” He fails to back this claim with evidence which weakens his argument because it appears to be biased. Furthermore, he extends the symbol of the SUV to American consumerism. McKibben claims that SUVs are “…the perfect metaphor for a heedless, supersized society.” He strays from his thesis at this point because consumerism is unrelated to the morality involved in global warming. In “The Obligation to Endure,” Carson does not use symbols like McKibben does; instead, she directly assigns the blame to humans for the environmental issues associated with nature’s balancing cycle. She claims that through pesticides and insecticides, importation of new species, and failure to follow the advice of

Texting and driving are activities that separately are indispensable in everyday life, but together represent one of the greatest dangers society faces on a daily basis, from the moment the car starts and transits to the desired destination. It is so easy to look at the phone while driving! Everyone justifies themselves, “it’s just a second”, but everyone also knows, that only takes a second to have a fatal accident. This is why there is the need to raise public awareness and campaigning as in the Public Service Announcement, “Don’t text and drive”, produced and air on TV by News Channel 6 ABC, where the Pathos appeal in the most powerful rhetorical device used in the PSA and Logos and Ethos are also visible, but they are inferred rather than directly enlisted.

Approximately twenty percent of adults in the United States smoke cigarettes, it is this habit which is the number one cause of death that is easily preventable. Anti-smoking advertisements are seen throughout our society, usually showing the harmful effects of tobacco through graphic pictures or other shocking images. The advertisement I chose is a black and white image, showing a young man smoking a cigarette, with the smoke from it forming a gun pointed at his head. Off to the side appear the words, “Kill a cigarette, save a life. Yours.” The advertisement makes use of the three rhetorical appeals of logos, ethos, and pathos through its image and implied meanings. Through this, the image is able to convey a strong sense of danger and bring awareness to the deadliness of smoking.

This anti-smoking video begins by showing adult smokers on the street who become very confused when small children come up to them asking for a lighter. Through the use of ethos, pathos and logos, the story display’s a very powerful message to it’s audience. By using these three rhetorical situations, the writer illustrates an important story to persuade the audience not to smoke cigarettes.

Jobs and protecting the environment, important or not? George Will wrote his essay, “What Price Clean Air?” to convey the message that most of the Navajo Nation run and work at the power plants in Arizona, but as the growing change in protecting the environment, those Native Americans are forced to alter their livelihoods. George Will directs his essay to the American people, to persuade them to help find a change. Using the best equipment and spending billions of dollars on new technology may be affected by the uncertain environmental movement. With ethos, logos, and pathos, George Will effectively uses the rhetorical devices to convey his argument about the social and economic damage brought on by the federal government.

Fox’s argument is effective, because he uses all forms of pathos, ethos, and logos, to

Nicholas Kristof wrote a compelling article titled “Our Gas Guzzlers, Their Lives”. In the article he is arguing that wealthier country’s greenhouse gas emissions are severely damaging life in many African countries. In fact Charles Ehrhart, a Care staff member in Kenya, states, “The negative impact of the West’s carbon emissions will overwhelm the positive effects of aid” (Kristof 580). So although we are trying to aid, it is our lifestyles that are damaging these peoples’ environment. Nicholas does a spectacular job presenting his case and giving evidence for his claims. Kristof produces an effective argument because of his stellar development of ethos, logos and pathos.

James Hansen’s appeal relies heavily upon Pathos. In his opening statement, as well as his closing remarks, calling for civil resistance, stating this is the most urgent fight of our lives, and finally, it is our last chance, is a persistent engagement of your emotional response. Seven points regarding fossil fuel use and environmental onslaught to obtain them appear factual. Consequently, the use of possible factual information amongst the plethora of Pathos loses any impact to the appeal it might have had, casting doubt on the validity of the information presented. Soliciting our mistrust of government is a useful, if not somewhat powerful, approach to capturing the audience’s intensely negative feelings towards perceived government corruption

The Western existence of modernization, especially technological and industrial development, economic growth, material prosperity, urbanization, and democracy, has been built upon a long line of industrial capitalism, an economic system predicated on the accelerating extraction and consumption of fossil fuels for energy (Clark & York, 2005). A major unintended consequence of the use of fossil fuels is an increase in the average temperature of the earth; known as global warming or climate change. Recognizing and responding to climate change, arguably the most challenging social problem of the modern era (Giddens, 2009), thus poses a fundamental critique of continued modernization processes around the world (Freudenburg, 2003). Climate change is a major issue that affects all life across the

Modernism represents an optimistic view of human impact on the environment that has been the dominant viewpoint for the last 200 years. The knowledge that mankind holds the ability to control the environment heavily stresses why climate change is not such a problem to worry about. One of the core beliefs of the modernistic perspective is that people have no need to fear future environmental disaster because the next technological advancement that will prevent it is right around the corner. Furthermore, those who share this view do not include themselves in their image of the ecosystem, believing they are detached from it. Lastly, a laissez-faire approach is taken to environmental problems, focusing on progression through technology, stressing that as long as progress is made in this area all problems will be fixed. For a modernist, climate change is nothing to worry about. This may be a real situation, but it will be solved with advancements in technology before one’s way of life is changed. What people should be worrying about is ensuring a laissez faire approach to the market with sponsorship to new technologies. As a result of reusable energy technology already existing, modernists believe that the problem of climate change has been solved and without disrupting free market system these technologies will be further implemented. As long as there are people given the opportunity to innovate, some will focus on and ultimately solve the concern of climate change. The issue of

Throughout his presentation, Hans Rosling shows that the rich and wealthy release the most carbon emissions, but they are often the ones telling Africa or another developing country they shouldn't begin using fossil fuels and other technology because it's hurting the environment. Rosling claims that the rich end look down at the "poor" people and say, "You cannot live like us, you will destroy the planet." Technology, however, is key to progressing out of poverty and developing. As shown in his graphs, the wealthy release the most emissions, but shake their finger at developing countries that are starting to use technology and/or burn fossil fuels. An example used in the video is Africa and the coal available to them to provide warmth and light.

Many people today do not realise how driving a vehicle can affect people’s daily living. Currently in China, people are fighting for their lives because of the amount of emission that vehicles put out into the atmosphere. Whether individuals have efficient vehicles that do not harm or pollute the atmosphere or lack efficient vehicles, the quality of air is an issue that affects, not just China, but the entire world. The following articles will discuss what is better for China’s environment through different areas such as ethos, logos, and pathos. In the article “The Health Effects of Beijing’s Smog,” by Devon Haynie will discuss ways to help China through logos and pathos, but lacks ethos. While Jennifer Duggan, (2014), in the article “China to Scrap Millions of Cars to Ease Pollution,” will discuss different ways to prevent vehicle pollution using ethos, logos, and pathos.

Greenhouse gases come from such mainstays of modern life as electrical power plants, automobiles, and heavy industry. Growing consumption of fuel by less efficient cars and light trucks suggests that motor vehicles may soon overtake industry as the largest source of gases suspected of causing global warming by effectively creating a greenhouse around the Earth. Many people do not want to decrease their standard of living by reducing their consumption of fossil fuels. These people do not realize that if they reduce their consumption, there will be a reduction in the amount of greenhouse gases. If this does not happen and global warming continues, the long-term effects may be catastrophic.