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)