ra#5

JFK's speech in which he designated himself a jelly doughnut has many examples of his ethos (not all of them positive). First of all President Kennedy was in fact the President of the United States, at that point in time a respected posistion often regarded as leader of the free world, and thus already had a significant ethos. The citizens of west Berlin were surrounded by communist Germany and appreciated their freedom, and thus would listen to the "leader of the free world". Not only was Kennedy's position respected Kennedy also established himself as a "learned" man by using the latin ,"civis Roman sum" (I am a citizen of rome) this gave him the appearance of being smart. Then Kennedy made a huge mistake, "Ich bin ein Berliner" or in english, "I am a jelly doughnut", who respects a person who calls themself a jelly doughnut. Although Kennedy was trying to establish himself as a metaphorical resident of Berlin what he really did was degrade his ethos, and thus his argument. I disagree with Joel's assertion that Kennedy's use of German increased his ethos, on the contrary Kennedy's failure to use proper german grammar undoubtedly made him appear negligent and superficial to those who spoke the german language, he could not even take the time to learn to say one simple german sentence. Of course President Kennedy was still the president of the U.S. and his ethos as president undoubtedly outweighed his failed attempt at german.

Ra#4

Martin Luther King jr's "I have a Dream" speech is a clear demonstration of audience analysis, as well as language tools. Not only does it adress his literal audience (those gathered to hear him speak), it also adresses those who oppose him, and those who are neutrel. King knows that his audience, the ones actually there, want rights for colored people, so that's what he talks about (duh), but more interesting is how he talks about it. King knew that those opposed to his view would likely read or hear his speech and try to criticize it and disprove it, so he used very credible sources to make his point, sources that his enemies were familiar with. One of these sources was the Bible (amos 5:24, which deals with justice, and Isaiah 40:4-5, which says that "the glory of the lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together"), King knew most of his enemies were from the south, and were very familiar with the Bible, thus he quoted a source his audience was familiar with. In addition King knew that his audience would probably not criticize the Bible, and thus established for himself a solid source for his argument. King's quotation of the Bible also appealed to thise christioans who were undecided on issues of race. In addition to the Bible King also used sources from the American past. One of these sources is the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence, which states "all men are created equal". King's opponents were all americans, who all certainly valued their independence. King's use of the Declaration of Independence shows that he correctly interpreted his audience and presented information that they accepted to prove his point, no american, against, for or, undecided on equal rights would argue with the Declaration of Independence. King also used the song "My country Tis of thee" in which one line reads "From every mountain side let freedom ring" to show his point. King also made great use of language tools. King's primary language tool was the allusion, to the past works mentioned above, the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, etc. These allusions while supporting his point also made him appear smart and well read, which he was. In addition to the obvious allusions to past events King also used a more subtle one, he began the main part of his speech "Five score years ago", comparing his speech to the Gettysburg address. By alluding albeit subtly to the Gettysburg Address king makes his speech an anthem for freedom similar to the Gettysburg Address in that the issue of race rights was at its height, much like the Civil War was at its height at Gettysburg. King clearly understood that not only his friends but his enemies, and everyone in between would see or hear his speech, and thus used documents from American History, and World history to prove his point showing his ability to analyze an audience and use language tools, particularly allusions.

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.

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)

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.