Goldberg's Syllabus: A Logos Analysis

Wal-Martians- Logical Fallacies

Although I think Barbara Ehrenreich did a good job of using pathos and logos in her Wal-Martians writing, I feel there are quite a few fallacies in her logic. Granted, she uses a lot of hyperbole, her logical fallacies should not escape scrutiny. The truth is that Walmart isn't responsible for any city having turns in its economic stability. The fault simply cannot be put upon them. Surely there may have been some small businesses who have closed their doors as a result of Walmart's presence, but where were the loyal customers to the Mom-and-Pop's? Did Wal-Martians zap their brains and their abilities to function independently? Were they robbed of their choices to shop at other stores? Of course not. No business can be expected to curtail their own growth to save those businesses affected by their success. The fault lies with the community and those businesses who could not adapt and improvise to address the competition.

Ms. Ehrenreich accuses Walmart of "abysmally low wages". There is no real evidence in her article detailing what these wages are, although I'm not sure it matters. Walmart pays its employees above minimum wage, to my knowledge, with some benefits offered to the majority. How much should stacking shopping carts and greeting people pay? Are these jobs really underpaid? Perhaps the fact that they even pay people to do these jobs instead of just eliminating "Greeter" from the payroll is a gesture of kindness by Walmart. Additionally, Ms. Ehrenreich's argument that Walmart's wages are horrible removes all responsibility from the employees being "victimized". These people have the agency to seek employment elsewhere, go to school, start their own business, etc. To paint them as helpless in their Walmart predicament is inane.

I think Ms. Ehrenreich steps a little over the line when she finally accuses Walmart of being criminal. She says Walmart is being faced with charges of sex-discrimination and non-payment of wages, as well as accusations of locking employees in at night without help in medical emergencies. These are charges and accusations. The validity of them is not apparent. She just skips right to "Confronted with its crimes", and assumes that Walmart is 100% guilty. In the USA it is intended that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Even if some of the charges and accusations are justified, Walmart cannot be held absolutely accountable for the individual actions of its employees, only for its company policies. Individuals need to be held accountable for their actions. If an employee is asked to do something unethical, that employee is liable for his/her choice, as is the person who asked him/her to act unethically.

Alma's Preaching: An Ethos Analysis

In Alma 7, Alma addresses the inhabitants of Gideon. In the first six verses, he effectively portrays himself as one who is worth listening to because of his many accomplishments and as someone who has stayed humble even in the position of chief judge over the land. In verse two, he establishes his credibility in a way that is particularly effective for his audience of a more righteous group of people.

"And even I could not have come now at this time were it not that the judgment-seat hath been given to another, to reign in my stead; and the Lord in much mercy hath granted that I should come unto you. "

There was probably renown and authority associated with being the chief judge, and Alma could have noted that aspect about himself, but instead he says he was "wholly confined to the judgment-seat." By saying 'wholly confined,' he implies that he would have rather been doing something else, like speaking to the people, and that judgment-seat is not a particularly desirable position. Alma knew that preaching the gospel was more important than being chief judge, and guessed that the people of Gideon agreed with him, so he presented himself as one who knew the gospel rather than as the former chief judge.

In addition, Alma says several times how much he trusts that the people of Gideon are doing what is right. He identifies with the people by mentioning several things that they all would consider important if they are following Christ, especially in verses three and six. For example, “I trust...that ye do worship the true and the living God, and that ye look forward for the remission of your sins.”

Alma also mentions “the awful dilemma that our brethren were in at Zarahemla,” referring to how the people of Zarahemla had strayed from the right paths. He addresses this audience and establishes his credibility somewhat differently. In Alma 5:3, he says, “I, Alma, having been consecrated by my father, Alma, to be a high priest over the church of God, he having power and authority from God to do these things...” He stresses his responsibility as high priest without even mentioning his previous authority as chief judge, which is similar to the way he later addressed the people of Gideon. Even if the people of Zarahemla would have responded positively to being addressed by a former chief judge, perhaps Alma chose not to mention it because he planned to speak of things relating to the church and not the judgment-seat.

Alma is much less gentle than with the Gideonites, spending less time introducing himself and jumping right into exhorting the people to remember the many ways the Lord has delivered both them and their ancestors, temporally and spiritually. He asks them to ponder upon what they might think at the day of judgment.

“I say unto you, can you imagine to yourselves that ye hear the voice of the Lord, saying unto you, in that day: Come unto me ye blessed, for behold, your works have been the works of righteousness upon the face of the earth?

"Or do ye imagine to yourselves that ye can lie unto the Lord in that day, and say—Lord, our works have been righteous works upon the face of the earth—and that he will save you?

"Or otherwise, can ye imagine yourselves brought before the tribunal of God with your souls filled with guilt and remorse, having a remembrance of all your guilt, yea, a perfect remembrance of all your wickedness, yea, a remembrance that ye have set at defiance the commandments of God?”

(Alma 5:16-18)

I was interested to observe that even with the people of Zarahemla whom Alma spoke more harshly to, he still didn't try to use the worldly fame of the judgment-seat to get people to trust him.

Ra #3 federalist #2 final

The Federalist #2 by John Jay is a very persuasive essay, promoting a strong central government as opposed to a confederacy. Its point is very clear and the argument is a good example of Logos, although pathos, and kairos play a large role as well. The core of Jay's argument is that the United States are strong while united, but weak when divided. He continues that the way to stay united is to have a strong central government, not divided state governments. Jay harkens to the Revolutionary War in which the U.S. won under the leadership of the Continental Congress, a strong central government, thus central government is equated with victory. This part of Jay's core argument apeals especially to those who remember the Revolutionary War, which was almost everyone that could vote, because they all remember how the states won by working together (this is an example of Jay's Kairos). Jay states that if the U.S. does not have a strong central government it will not be able to protect itself from foreign meddling (not necessarily in an open war), as it did in the Revolutionary War, which was undesired by many because it was associated closely with the war. Jay also states, in closing, that if the United States don't unite they can say, "Farewell! A Long Farewell to All my Greatness," implying that they are great while united, but not while divided, this appeals to the readers pathos.

Not only does Jay have a sound core argument he also counters the argument of his opponents, who said that a strong central government will make decisions only to benefit its members, and will ignore the rights of its citizens. Jay does this by providing an example from the past which all voters will remember. He uses the example of the continental congress, which led the U.S. during the revolutionary war, he states that it did nothing that did not benifit all of the patriots, and did not act only for he good of its members. While this is probably slightly stretching the truth, it doesn't matter because the U.S. won the Revolutionary War under the leadership of the Continental Congress, and thus the Continental Congress is associated with victory, which those voting consider good. He also states that the citizens of the U.S. in all the states have common rights, and that the government will not be able to restrict these common rights without destoying itself.

Jay was clearly a master of rhetoric, using it to promote his arguments, and thus create the constitutional United States.

Barbara Ehrenreich's Wal-Martians

In July of 2004, Barbara Ehrenreich wrote an opinion editorial on Walmart for The Baltimore Sun. The article can be found here, among other places, including the BYU compilation, Perspectives on Globalization (ISBN: 978-0-74093-121-5).

The author uses an interesting mixture of hyperbole and personification with the intent to vilify Walmart. She does a pretty good job of creating a hostile image, portraying the company as an army of Martians invading Earth. "It's torn cities apart from Inglewood, Calif., to Chicago, and engulfed the entire state of Vermont." She personifies Walmart as an alien who came to Earth quietly, unnoticed, disguised as a human, then grew into the War of the Worlds tripod it is today. She writes, "No one knows exactly when the pod landed on our planet, but it seemed normal enough during its early years of gentle expansion."

This method is effective in appealing to the audience's emotions. As I read Ms. Ehrenreich's article, I began to develop a negative opinion of Walmart. Her science-fiction allusion began to draw me into her designs, and I was left thinking that all those Walmart greeters who were slightly odd in appearance might actually have been aliens. This is an effective use of pathos. Ms. Ehrenreich's creative approach to this topic draws her audience into a "1950s sci-fi flick", with Walmart starring in the villain's role.

After creating a grisly scene for earthlings, and instilling dread, Ms. Ehrenreich changes gears and provides some logos for her readers. She cites the rate of growth of the company, (again using overstatement, "bigger than General Motors! Richer than Switzerland!") as being the real cause for concern. She provides evidence of this growth with numbers of store openings per week, real estate purchases, and employee figures. This is a good transition from pathos to logos, working on her audience's emotions then providing supportive facts.

Ms. Ehrenreich continues her assault on the Wal-Martians after establishing a front line, and goes for the monster's throat, accusing them of criminal behavior. She mentions class-action lawsuits against Walmart involving sex discrimination and failure to pay overtime. Surely there are other suits against the giant, but these two topics she mentions specifically to yank her audience's emotions once again. Who among us likes sex discrimination or not getting paid? She adds insult to injury, essentially calling Walmart a Third World sweatshop.

The conclusion of Ms. Ehrenreich's exposure of Walmart as an invading host of Martians invites the same Martians to assimilate with Earth. "Earth to Wal-Mars, or wherever you come from: Live with us or go back to the mothership." This is an interesting way for the author to present herself. In this statement Ms. Ehrenreich attempts to dissuade the audience of her hostility towards Walmart, and projects the position of wanting to find commonality. It's a good attempt at ethos, but as for the "aliens", the damage has been done. From now on, date night with my wife will take me to new frontiers. No longer can I carelessly browse the aisles of Walmart without paranoia setting in. Henceforth, we will conduct our business somewhere safe, like Sam's Club.

Ra #2

On Rethinking Health Care in California, an article written by Jean Fraser, demonstrates all aspects of the rhetorical triangle. Logos is used in the presentation of facts and numbers. Fraser states, "he (her husband) is paying $3,400 each month for insurance just for his three employees. (he gets his own health insurance through me.) This costs him $41,000 per year, about what he would pay to hire another person." A system where it costs as much to hire an employee as it does to pay insurance for three is obviously not logical, especially in these economicly troubling times where many are searching for jobs. Jean Fraser is a HMO provider, and that gives here an Ethos, she works in healthcare, it is logical to assume that she knows what she is talking about. However she also uses this supposed ethos to establish pathos, which the paper is mostly based on, when she says that she should know what to say when her husband asks for advice. This gives one the idea that the field of healthcare is so confused that no one knows what's going on, most people are confused about healthcare and can identify with the author's feeling of confusion. Pathos is also established in the story about Mr. Fraser's employee who has a wife with multiple sclerosis and may lose his health care coverage because it costs Mr. Fraser so much. Everyone feels sorry for someone who is sick and of course wants to help them, and of course the article demonstrates that healthcare is the solution. Although this article is short it incorporates a bit of ethos, pathos, and logos and is therefore quite an affective argument. (even though it isn't written like a typical argument, which I think only adds to the ethos, your much more likely too take what someone says at face value if you think they're not trying to sell you on something)

Hypoxemia

There is an article in the September 2009 issue of USHPA's Hang Gliding & Paragliding magazine titled "Stinkin' High". This article is written by Boyd Hehn with the ultimate intent of persuading free flight pilots to avoid hypoxemia. The audience for this article is actually pretty small. There are less than twenty thousand hang and paraglider pilots in the USA. Of these twenty thousand, probably less than half are pilots who fly in conditions that would expose them to hypoxemia. So, Dr. Hehn's article is ideally written to an audience of a few thousand pilots. These pilots come from a large variety of backgrounds and experiences. The challenge of convincing people to avoid hypoxemia might seem simple enough, but this audience has many factors to consider when solving this risk: equipment weight, cost, cumbersomeness and maintenance. Another solution is to avoid high altitudes. It can be a tough sell since the use of an expensive oxygen system may only be needed on rare occasions, and good altitude gains are sporadic enough that no pilot wants to stop climbing because of a potential lack of oxygen.

In his introduction to "Stinkin' High", Dr. Hehn uses "we" extensively to appeal to this audience and build some ethos. He is telling his audience that he relates to them on this topic. As we see at the end of the article, Dr. Hehn has experience in flying, and thus his appropriate use of "we" to align himself with the audience. This pacifies his readers by letting them know he understands their culture, instead of preaching to them as a physician. He happens to be a Pulmonologist, a fact that is kept obscured until the end of the article. His credit for writing the article lists him only as "Boyd Hehn". His credibilty is made evident as he outlines the science behind hypoxemia, but the actual notation of him being a physician is saved until the end, when his audience's opinion has already been fully affected. He is writing primarily as a fellow pilot, and secondarily as a physician.

Another interesting approach that the author uses is his reference to altitude in the first paragraph. He says "...pilots aspire to altitude.", and "(Altitude) offers 'safety' for aerobatics". These are statements that especially appeal to pilots. It is counter-intuitive for most people to hear that altitude offers safety, but pilots know this from experience. The author even puts "safety" in quotes to emphasize the esoteric nature of this statement. Altitude offers more time to react to collapses or problems that occur in flight. By demonstrating his knowledge of this inside information, he gains the audience's confidence.

Dr. Hehn's next strategy to win his audience's interest and consent, is to include a narrative by Matt Beechinor. Matt is something of an icon in the world of free flight. His story is intended to show the audience that no one is immune to the risks of hypoxemia, and that its onset can be subtle, even unnoticed. Matt's story has a different language to it than Dr. Hehn's portion of the article. It appeals more to the common attitude of guarded recklessness found among many pilots who fly cross-country. Whereas Dr. Hehn writes in a technical verse (maybe even too technical at times, given his audience), Matt writes in a casual style more familiar to most pilots. This narrative likely develops a good bit of commonality with the bulk of the audience, but Dr. Hehn was worried that he had yet to win their hearts as he said, "Instead of dismissing Matt's story as an isolated incident, we suggest reading Will Gadd's post." Will Gadd is another icon in free flight (and other extreme sports). Dr. Hehn then offers a good perspective of the nature of his audience when he states, "We suspect that more pilots have experienced the effects of severe hypoxemia than would care to admit." This is, of course, implying that his audience is comprised of pilots who see their susceptibility to hypoxemia, while flying high, as a weakness. They might prefer to ignore the issue in lieu of admitting that they can't handle their altitude.

Dr. Hehn moves to a good bit of logos next, providing ample scientific data and argument to convince even the most resistant pilot that his brain will fail without adequate oxygen. More important than the actual evidence however, is the transition that he makes from pilot to scientist. This furthers his credibility with his audience. He has appealed to them on a personal level as a pilot, inserted a narrative on the topic from one of their idols, and finally brings the science behind the argument to the table. It is an effective persuasion.

Advice from Diana Wynne Jones

For my web-log post on audience analysis, I picked an article by a favorite author. Diana Wynne Jones wrote the piece Hints about Writing a Story for a children's website, so it is meant for younger readers who have found they enjoy writing.

To sound friendly to children, Jones adopts a casual, conversational tone, not worrying too much about being grammatically correct. This is evident in the passages "You will come across bits that make you sort of squiggle inside and say ‘Oh, I suppose that will do.’ That is a sure sign that it won’t do," and "You could ask someone to do a drawing and they would draw it just as you had seen it. Promise." I was impressed at how easy it was to understand what she meant by "squiggle," and the impact of her advice was not diminished by her lack of formality. In addition, her choice to speak in second person is good for this audience, because her readers will probably readily agree with her, whereas second person narration can be irksome if you disagree with what what the author says about 'you.'

Jones makes some suggestions and gives some hard, fast rules about writing. For example, she says, "The IMPORTANT THING is that you should ENJOY making up your story," and "You must read your story AS IF YOU HAD NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE." She explains how you should carry out these instructions, but she knows that she doesn't need much further logical support behind them because readers of her essay are probably already familiar with her writing and authority to give advice on it.

But she might sound condescending to children if she were to give all of her advice imperatively. To avoid this, she only uses that style when she considers her observation to be something that doesn't vary from person to person, such as when she says "Everyone is different and that means that everyone is going to need to write a story in a different way. You have to discover how you need to do it," or "To start, you have to have an idea. I can’t help you there."

Jones manages to target children as her audience without sounding too bossy when she says some things are non-negotiable through her understanding that she is already held in high esteem as a writer.
(Too much commentary, not enough analyzing.)

Analysis # 1 Kairos

Dan Simpson's article "Get out of Afghanistan, too" displays the rhetorical tool of Kairis, in that it addresses the right people at the right time in the right place. It argues, obviously, for leaving Afghanistan. The article was published Febuary 4th, shortly after president Obama was elected, in part due to his promise to leave Iraq. Mr. Simpson shows his sense of Kairos by writing and publishing his article just after the president promising to end the war in Iraq was elected, in the minds of many americans the war in Afghanistan and Iraq are connected. By promoting the end of the war in Afghanistan, when the end of the war in Iraq is near Mr. Simpson capitalizes on this perception. The Article is also addressed to the right audience, that is an America weary after 6 years in Iraq and 7 in Afghanistan. Also by publishing the article when the end of the war in Iraq is at least within sight, Mr. Simpson also addresses an audience that is hopeful for an end to American entanglement in major overseas engagements. Mr. Simpson also addresses the right people. It seems to me that he is addressing (in addition to the rest of america) those who wanted an end to the war in Iraq, which they now have. By addressing those who supported American withdrawal from Iraq Mr. Simpson targets those most likely to be convinced that getting out of Afghanistan is good. These people have already ended one conflict, so it is logical to conclude that they will support the end of another. The article was also published in the right place, America, which is the leader of the NATO forces in Afghanistan. By publishing the article in America Mr. Simpson targets the root of the conflict. Mr. Simpson clearly demonstrates an understanding of Kairos by publishing his article at the right time, just after Obama's inaugeration, to the right people, those who supported withdrawal from Iraq (as well as the rest of war weary America), and in the right place, America, the leader of the NATO/UN forces in Afghanistan.

Health Care Reform and its Current Relevance

I will be analyzing the timing of an opinion piece on Barack Obama's health care plans called "Tort reform is a cure for our ailing health care system." It's from The Gazette, a newspaper in Iowa, which I selected out fondness for it while I lived there.

Before I talk about how relevant the arguments are in terms of Kairos, let me give you a brief summary of his article. The author, Duane Schmidt, raises the point that a significant proportion of medical tests are given because doctors are worried about being sued for malpractice. Schmidt claims that health care and health care reform would be less expensive if doctors didn't have to worry about needless tests or their money being siphoned off by litigious patients. He offers the solution of not letting juries who know nothing of medicine being set over malpractice cases.

The issue of health care reform is still in the stages of debate where people are looking for solutions, so this is a good time to give suggestions. Schmidt also takes advantage of the current decreasing approval of Obama by accusing him of pandering to trial lawyers and of putting someone who was formerly a lobbyist for trial lawyers, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, to preside over the investigation. Now is a most opportune time to make such appeals to pathos that invite us to draw derogatory conclusions about Obama without considering whether the facts back them up.

Schmidt's use of the excitement and contention regarding health reform to distract us from his lack of strong logical support for some of his points is most evident in the third and fourth paragraphs, which I will examine more closely.

Addressing Obama, his article says, "Earlier in the summer, you said that you would “never go there” in terms of enacting tort reform. I presume this has nothing to do with the enormous financial support you receive from trial lawyers." Schmidt does not give us any references as to when Obama said the short phrase "never go there," attempting to discourage us from looking at the context of that remark for ourselves. Also he invites us to assume that Obama receiving financial support from trial lawyers means he must be corrupt, without giving any details about the nature of said financial support.

Schmidt goes on to say that Obama has in fact appointed Sebelius to look into tort reform, noting that, "Interestingly, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was for eight years employed as a lobbyist by the Kansas trial lawyers. Is this the ultimate example of the fox guarding the henhouse?" He sets us up to make a generalization about trial lawyers, that all of them must be untrustworthy and focused on swindling doctors out of their money, neglecting to consider that Sebelius' experience lobbying for trial lawyers might make her more qualified for looking into the matter. And he asks the question of is this like the fox guarding the henhouse, but after consideration I have to say, "No. It's more complicated than that."

Then Schmidt says, "We can only guess her findings, and would not wager when, or if, she ever concludes anything," using the plural pronoun to help us thnk we agree with him. I have been using plural pronouns as well, but I feel I am justified in it, because I am trying to encourage you to consider all the facets of the issue, while Schmidt seemed to want us to only consider his side.

As a commentary on my own analysis, I could not refrain from betraying my thoughts about the validity of the arguments I was analyzing, but I did it in addition to looking at how the author uses Kairos.

Just A Game?

I read Just A Game in the August 2009 Ensign. This article was written by Charles D. Knutson of Brigham Young University Computer Science Department, and Kyle K. Oswald from LDS Family Services. The article details many of the rising issues brought about by the online gaming genre. In this case, online gaming refers to the playing of massively multi-player games over the internet, not those of the gambling/casino type.

There are several stories given in the article about individuals dropping out of school, neglecting responsibilities, and straining family relationships as a result of playing video games. David A. Bednar recently addressed the world of virtual reality in a CES fireside. He addresses the subject as having "both immediate and eternal implications".

Why the sudden interest in virtual reality in the LDS church leadership? I have a few ideas. Primarily, subscriptions to these online games is higher today than ever before (Wiki). The brethren have obviously seen a need to address this issue, as we are now in a day where a person can access the internet from just about anywhere. People all over the world and even in the LDS church are being lured into spending much of their time in virtual reality. The timing of these messages from the leadership of the Church is most likely an attempt to stem the assault on its members before the problem gets out of hand.

I also noticed that the article I read was released in the August issue. I'm certain that this was done to coincide with students returning to school this fall. This message was timed to remind students to prioritize their studies and curricular activities, and to be aware of the ever-present distractions offered by the internet. This is an attempt at preventative maintenance. Hopefully, it will be successful to at least a small degree.