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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that the Federalist Papers No. 2 is a good choice for a logos analysis. Jay appeals to the anyone who believes we should work out the issue of central logically when he says "it certainly would not be wise in the people at large to adopt these new political tenets without being fully convinced that they are founded in truth and sound policy," referring to those proposing several confederacies instead of one unified central government.
ReplyDeleteBut when you say "Its point is very clear, and the argument is a good example of Logos, although ethos, pathos, and kairos play a large role as well," I think it would be better to point out in your paper how Jay's argument does these things rather than just say it does. You shouldn't need to specify "this appeals to the reader's pathos" if you demonstrate it in your writing.
Or when you say "he promotes all of his ideas by saying they will be good for the nation, and explaining," that statement is vague. How does he use logos to show that his ideas are good for the nation?
As a formatting recommendation, it would be good to link to a copy of the Federalist Papers, No. 2 so the reader doesn't have to look it up.
Isaac Kurth
There's a missing possessive comma in your 1st paragraph. There's a misspelled word in your second paragraph. Find them.
ReplyDeleteGood work on the analysis! I think you explore the logic really well here.
One note on ethos: he signs the letter "Publius." Did people know Publius was Jay? My guess is that he's trying to create a sense of ethos here that's independent of his specific identity/accomplishments.