Rhetorical Discourse

The social problem is that some police overstep their boundaries as law enforcement and commit acts of unnecessary brutality towards citizens. The name of the article is “Sheriff: Lawyer Says Deputies Didn’t Need to Kill Texas Man” and was posted on abcnews.go.com on September 2, 2015. The scope of coverage and audience is at the national level.

In “Bring Back Flogging”, Jeff Jacoby addresses the problems within America 's criminal justice system. He gives many reasons why imprisonment simply does not work, and suggests that corporal punishment should be used as an alternative. Published in the Boston Globe, a newspaper well known for being liberal, Jacoby provides a conservative view and directs his argument towards those who strongly support imprisonment and view corporal punishment to be highly barbaric and inhumane. However, in order to shed light on our current situation, Jacoby discusses the dangers that we face though our criminal justice system a nd shows concern that imprisonment is doing more harm than good. In effect, Jacoby looks to the past for solutions, and

“Just as the success of a corporate body in making money need not set the human condition ahead, neither does every scientific advance automatically make our lives more meaningful'; (Wald 45). These words were spoken by a Nobel Prize winning biologist and Harvard professor, George Wald, in a lecture given in 1976 on the Dangers of Genetic Engineering. This quotation states that incredible inventions, such as genetic engineering, are not always beneficial to society. Genetic engineering is “altering the genetic material of cells and/or organisms in order to make them capable of making new substances or performing new functions'; (Wald 45). It is also one of the top controversial issues of the 20th century (Epstein 1). Many believe that

When you see a solider in his or her uniform, you are proud that they are serving this country to protect our freedom, securing our country, and defending democracy worldwide. The solider can come from different branches of the Military. The one you might be familiar with is the U.S. Army. These soldiers are well respected and prepared to serve our country whenever and wherever needed, combat-ready at all times, and trained to counter any threat, anywhere. In 2007, the United States Army department published a recruitment ad for U.S.

Persuasion is a skill that can be acquired and utilized with a mastery of writing. Arguing against the popular belief is one of the most difficult things that one can do. The following essay rhetorically analyzes an article that is written about why the legal drinking age should stay at 21 years old in the United States. The author of the article attempts to argue against the popular opinion that the drinking age should be lowered and is successful by using appeals to one’s logos. The author is an experienced writer and knows how to convey their ideas to convince people of his argument. Understanding why someone is writing a piece, what their motivation is, and how they try to convince the reader of their argument helps gain a more comprehensive grasp of what the subject matter itself is. Personally, I look to argue against popular opinions because it enables me to critically think of a sound argument that can not easily be disputed. This essay helped me

Do traffic signals make a difference when drivers are conducting their vehicles? In U.K. the roads have less signs and are smaller roads than in the United States. The United States has great amounts of traffic signals and symbols all over the road to make the driver more aware. In the U.K. accidents do occur but not that often has in the United States. In the Unites States every second there is huge amounts of accidents going on over the nation. John Staddon in his magazine article “Distracting Miss Daisy” tries to persuade that traffic control is making traffic more dangerous because we do not pay attention to the road, but to the signals.

The primary election for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians is to be held Thursday, September 3, 2015. This momentous occasion happens every four years. The elected chief and officials, such as council members, can run for office for as long as they see fit, for there is no term limit. Our past chief, Michell Hicks, was in office three consecutive terms for a total of twelve years. This year Hicks has decided to step down and the new candidates for chief are Patrick Lambert and Gene “Tunney” Crowe. These new candidates must be able to fill the role of a generous and successful leader to those of the Cherokee nation. The platforms of both Lambert and Crowe are used to persuade the public to vote in their favor and are extremely versed in the

Nat Turner: Mr. Garrison I do wish I could agree, but few of these men (looking down at Fitzhugh and calhoun) have shown no respect for god.

From two perspectives, we see a world plagued by the ignoble aspects of human nature. Through one set of eyes we are shown the global ecosystem imitating the opening motions of a mass extinction, through another we see the inevitable and hellish effects of culturalized greed. In both cases we are treated to the observations of an aggrieved observer, but the means by which these observers show us their perspective on the world are by no means identical. Here we will explore the strategies, expressions, argumentations, and appeals of two authors with intertwining stories to tell.

Texting and driving is one of the most debated topics in society. Whether it affects all people or whether or not you’re just good at multi tasking. Yet, all people would come to the agreement that it is one the most dangerous activities to participate in and ends millions of lives yearly. "Drivers and Legislators Dismiss Cellphone Risks” published in New York Times by Matt Richtel and "LOL? Texting While Driving Is No Laughing Matter: Proposing a Coordinated Response to Curb this Dangerous Activity" by Alexis M. Farris are two articles that present variations of ethos, pathos, and logos and make identical arguments claiming that texting and driving is not only dangerous but is shaping the way Americans live. Both articles illustrate

A rhetorical analysis assignment is to see how an author tries to present his work to a certain group of people. There is present certain meaning in all the texts and it is up to the author to communicate it in the required way. The purpose of this assignment was to review the article and see how the author made use of different strategies. It appears that a major aim that the author had was trying to convince the readers about revenue based financing. The author made use of several strategies as they will be discussed further down. There are many examples of rhetorical writing strategies that an author can use to make the writing all the more powerful. There is a very crucial reason why writers actually go for this sort of writing. The simplest answer would be to have their writing be more powerful and effective on the reader. The document that will be analyzed today is an n article written by Verne Kopytoff. The title of writing basically talks about how revenue-based financing is a good solution for business. The title itself sheds positive light on the article and states that the better the business does, the faster you will pay. The author of the article is Verne Kopytoff who is a technology journalist. He is alum of the San Francisco Chronicle and the New York Times. The article was written on February 05 2013.

It is incredible to see how far genetic engineering has come. Humans, plants, and any living organism can now be manipulated. Scientists have found ways to change humans before they are even born. They can remove, add, or alter genes in the human genome. Making things possible that humans (even thirty years ago) would have never imagined. Richard Hayes claims in SuperSize Your Child? that genetic engineering needs to have limitations. That genetic engineering should be used for medical purposes, but not for “genetic modification that could open the door to high-tech eugenic engineering” (188). There is no doubt that genetic engineering can amount to great things, but without limits it could lead the human race into a future that no one

The art of rhetoric has been present since the beginning of time. The birth of rhetoric is usually attributed to the Greeks as they presented us with ideas and theories about discourse. Famous philosophers such as Plato, the Sophists, and Aristotle presented us with theories that continue to be studied throughout. Most importantly the reason why we still study rhetoric is because rhetoric is everywhere. Our everyday lives are filled with the intensity of rhetoric and what it can do. Thus, rhetoric is the art of words that has the ability to influence, persuade, and create communication and intimacy in societal connections.

"The characteristics of genetic engineering have substantial behavior towards the good and the bad” (Powell 13). Although we do not recognize the true meaning of this quote at first glance, these words actually posses the key to mankind. Even though genetic engineering supports an exciting opportunity for the humanity, many red flags have been raised related to problems with safety, the availability, and most of all the epidemic itself. It has been portrayed throughout the years that genetic engineering not only induces a strong risks to children, Ladies, and gentleman, but also produces a new threat to the environment. Yes, genetic engineering has the chance to have a number of medical advancements, but in reality it is a devastating experiment for the development between technology and mankind.

For thousands of years, humanity has selectively bred plants and animals to produce the most favourable results from the fruitful species around us. It has only been a very recent event in our history, however, that we have invented a systematic procedure to ensure the best results in these species. This procedure is called genetic engineering, and has sparked multiple debates among both academics and the public about the ethics behind controlling the outcome of a species. Among all the altercation regarding this relatively new technology, no other topic has brought about more controversy than the use of genetic engineering in humans. Proponents of genetic engineering envision a future where disease, crime, suffering, and infertility have been eliminated - replaced by an enhanced human race better suited to our environment. Opponents fear a nightmarish world where biodiversity and the human genome have been corrupted through