It Seems to Be Heating Up

James Lovelock writes on Nuclear energy as the only potential energy source to save us from global warming. When you read the title you might automatically develop a skeptic attitude towards the article. Lovelock quickly turns the readers skepticism to intrigue by stating, "Sir David King, the Government's chief scientist." He builds enough ethos to keep you reading by connecting himself to the chief scientist. He puts himself in with climatologists as well by saying, "climatologists warn a four-degree rise in temperature is enough to eliminate the vast Amazon forests." This also accomplishes connecting his argument with the ethos of climatologists. This type of logos is all through the article.

The way he really brings logos into the picture is by shocking the reader with facts that make you look for solutions to convincing problems. by saying, "20,000 unfortunates from overheating in Europe last summer," he gets the readers attention by alluding to those 20,000 possibly being you or me if we don't find an answer to global warming. In the moment we look for a solution he offers an unlikely possibility:

"There is a chance we may be saved by an unexpected event such as a
series of volcanic eruptions severe enough to block out sunlight and so
cool the Earth. But only losers would bet their lives on such poor odds.
Whatever doubts there are about future climates, there are no doubts
that greenhouse gases and temperatures both are rising."

Words like "grim forecast," "the odds were 300,000 to one," and the analogy of the sea level rising, give a bleak look on life continuing as normal. Who wouldn't feel like it is bleak knowing that seven meters of rise in sea level would drown London, Venice, New York, and Tokyo? These words followed by his convincing solutions provide a very good connection between what the reader wants to happen and how it can be realized.

In a different light, I would say that he uses pathos a little too extremely. His statistics and large number ratios make me skeptical of his credibility. this damages his ethos and doesn't give the desired pathos effect on me. Then, he tries to connect them to get me motivated. It could work on some audiences and possible his specific audience. I do get his urgency; however, I feel less inclined to act on his connecting ideas than if I believed his argument fully.

A Slightly Heated Topic by Larz Watts analyzes Lovelocks article saying that he "continues to support the theory of Global Warming, until he feels he has proved it enough. Then he is able to take all of that proof and apply it to his principal argument: that we should switch to nuclear power." I must agree that Lovelock continues to support his theory again and again, but I don't think it was as effective as Larz does. In saying that because of the melting ice cap that Greenland will melt faster I don't feel the connectivity that Larz does because I'm skeptic of the whole idea that Lovelock presents. I'm skeptic because he presents it so abruptly and without citing his sources.

I see convincing connections between nuclear energy and global warming, but I also see some holes in Lovelocks argument.

Michelle Obama's Olympic Plea

Michelle Obama pleaded to the IOC for a Chicago Olympics in 2016 and walked away empty-handed as they were sent to Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. Her speech was much more of a plea than a confident assurance that Chicago was the right place. Michelle tried to shift the focus of the IOC from why Chicago was the right place for the Olympics to why the Olympics would be right for Chicago, “Chicago's vision for the Olympic and Paralympic movement is about so more than what we can offer the Games -- it's about what the Games can offer all of us.” Rio understood what the IOC wanted and, “convinced Olympic officials that the city would keep spectators and athletes safe with an increased police presence and other measures.” Rio continues to show that they will increase security in order to alleviate the fears of the IOC. In literature shifting the focus of an argument to something of much less relevance is called a red herring. The application process is explained here. The cities answer questionnaires about how the athletes will arrive. Will they be safe? Are there enough hotels? Can the city handle the huge crowd? What about traffic and food? Is the atmosphere ideal for such a big event? Instead of answering these types of questions, Michelle focuses on other issues.

For example, Michelle tried to create emotional appeal by telling us the stories of how the Olympics impacted her life. The problem with her logic in this area is that it was in direct opposition of her emotional appeal. She tells us that watching Olympic greats like Nadia and Carl Lewis inspired her to believe that she could accomplish something great as she watched from her father’s knee. She follows this by saying, “today, I can dream, and I am dreaming of an Olympic and Paralympic Games in Chicago that will light up lives in neighborhoods all across America and all across the world; that will expose all our neighborhoods to new sports and new role models; that will show every child that regardless of wealth, or gender, or race, or physical ability, there is a sport and a place for them, too.” This hasty generalization never explains to us how the other cities will be lit up by an Olympics in Chicago. In the previous sentences she had just convinced us that it didn’t matter where the Olympics were, children across the world would be impacted. Nadia go her perfect 10 in 1976 in Montreal and it apparently affected Michelle a great deal. Carl Lewis first competed in 1984 in Los Angeles, which isn’t exactly Chicago’s back yard. We’ll just send the Olympics to Rio Michelle, it’s the same to you.

Michelle again tries to create sympathy in the reader by talking about Chicago’s poor inner neighborhoods, ““Ours was a neighborhood of working families -- families with modest homes and strong values.” I’m sure the homes in South Chicago are modest by American standards but in most other countries they would be considered mansions. Some voters at the IOC come from third world countries where most people would do anything to be a working family with a modest home. She didn’t get sympathy from the IOC on that one. Let’s compare the average downtown Chicago home with the downtown Rio home and Chicago might just win. In fact let’s pull up the “pathetic rating level” statistics for major cities. In Africa AIDS is a rampant epidemic in almost every country. Russia is still behind decades economically compared to the US. A lot of people in Paraguay still live in huts. People are willing to risk death crossing the border between Mexico and the US in order to have a shot at a better life. People are starving in Ethiopia. If the IOC were principally concerned with helping a city out, they would have the Olympics in sub-Saharan Africa every 4 years. Instead they choose cities like London, Atlanta, Turin, and Barcelona to host.

Here’s another example of how she tries to paint Chicago as the victim of the world. She says that her dad from Chicago had a really hard life but never gave up. By sending the Olympics here you’ll be helping people like him. My dad could have seen the Olympics and it would have made him happy. Michelle, I doubt your dad would have gone to every event, if even one. The poorer people in Chicago, that she feels so bad for and that will receive so much help, won’t have money to attend the games. He would have watched from home if they were held in Chicago or Beirut. I bet there’s some people in the world with rougher lives than your dad Michelle. Maybe a 50 year old from Cambodia who has worked in a sweatshop since he was 5 and no longer has his right hand because it got ripped off by unsafe machinery. Should the Olympics go there to make up for his hard work and sacrifice too?

Michelle never explains why the Olympics should come to Chicago. She talks about poor neighborhoods needing something to cheer for, something to motivate them. She never connects that need to why the Olympics should be sent to Chicago. Chicago is sad so the Olympics should come here is her entire argument. She needs to connect Chicago’s struggles with the Olympics really supplying that help to the struggling town. That would be much more effective.

This is what we learned from Michelle: she was born from Chicago, the Olympics changed her life and will impact the lives of the whole world no matter where they are held, the Olympics can offer a lot to Chicago just like it could to every other city in the world, her dad taught her how to fight, her dad had a hard life, and some people have small homes in Chicago. To sum up everything into one phrase, “Chicago is so bad and hard that we need the Olympics, therefore the games should be in Chicago.” Or maybe she thought they were supposed to go to Chicago because it doesn't matter where they go but because she was born there they should be there. There’s no logical connection in there at all is there? Michelle tried to make the IOC feel like the world owed her and Chicago the Olympics. She tried to reason with us but came up to no sensible conclusion. She tried to get votes for Chicago, but instead got the least amount of votes and a quick exit from competition.

Michael Vick Back In Action!

Matt Mosley writes about Michael Vick and the Philadelphia Eagles. It seems he is giving reasons for Andy Reid (head coach for the Eagles) signing Vick. He uses logos to explain his major points. Michael Vick was recently released from prison for dog-fighting. He was there for eighteen months.
Matt portrays Andy Reids' motives to be out of jealousy and that is why he signed Michael Vick. Though this is a reason, it is not one that has evidence behind it. Logos can be very effective, but one needs to have significant evidences for each individual point. This can be seen logical, which agrees with logos. Another reason he gives is that Andy Reed has sons, who have been in trouble with the law and everyone needs a second chance. This point definitely has more evidence than the last one. He assumed one point and actually has evidence for the second one. He also states later in the article that Michael Vick will not be listed as the second string quarterback, therefore he is not fully prepared to be the full-time quarterback. Preparation has different meanings, but he has not talked to Reid or Vick, so he has no association with them. He then goes so far to say that Andy Reed signed Vick only because his pride. That he wanted to prove his critics wrong and "rub in their face", so to say. He is another reason for signing with no actually evidence. He gives a comparison between Reid and another NFL coach, but it is not valid. In the end one must have evidences to show reasons.

Global Warming and Eating: Linking with Language Tools

An article published by Jennifer Wilkins and Anna Lappe addressed the link between global warming and the way Americans eat today. To make their point the authors use several language tools that invoke sympathy for the planet and arouse a desire to eat better in order to save it.

Personification was well implemented in this article to give our planet an identity. Word usage such as, "The danger the planet faces..."(par. 2) and "...we'll all be healthier and so will our planet"(par. 16). The planet obviously is not able to literally "face" anything, but by implying that the Earth is going up against something or seeing some kind of opposition causes us to naturally feel sympathetic. The Earth, though treacherous in things such as natural disasters, is often seen as an unarmed, helpless woman that can't defend herself from those who pollute and damage her. The second sentence helps us identify that our actions will help protect the Earth, and this will not only make our motherly-benefactor healthier, but we will be better off as well.

Metaphors with imagery also helped make the point of needed opposition towards global warming through eating healthier. The phrase, "...driving an 18-wheeler to the moon and back 13 times"(par. 5), was used to describe how far New Jersians drive, burning fossil fuel and causing global warming, to satiate "fresh tomato carving[s]." Though completely illogical, driving to the moon in an 18-wheeler creates certain images and connections in the reader's brain: 18-wheelers require a lot of diesel fuel which creates extremely toxic fumes; the moon is extremely far away and driving there and back 13 times would amount to a large, almost incomprehensible distance. Therefore, it is understood that citizens of New Jersey drive significant distances, warming the globe, all because they want to eat fresh tomatos. Put in this light, the reader would see New Jersey's global warming participation as something ridiculous and easily avoidable.

More imagery was used in order to describe how much land is used to grow corn for corn-syrup that goes into highly consumed junk foods in relating the size of the fields to "twice the size of Rhode Island"(par. 13). Though Rhode Island is known as the smallest state in the U.S., saying that any amount of detrimentally-used land is larger than a state immedtiatly wows the reader and puts into persepective that the earth is being misused to feed us junk food.

Citation
Wilkins, Jennifer and Lappe, Anna. "Think Globally, Eat Locally," Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 17, 2007. Web, 23 Sept. 2009.

Mrs. Bill Gates on AIDS

IN 2004, an article called AIDS and India was published in The Seattle Times by Melinda French Gates, the wife of billionaire Bill gates.

Ethos
There are examples of ethos on many different levels in Mrs. Gates' editorial. One is her name. It isn't clear that she is Bill Gates' wife until the end of the article. It is as if mentioning the name of her famous husband gives her some kind of credibility or that her opinions matter more than an average person's. But her hesitation to admit that her husband is a billionaire helps her in two ways. One way is that she avoids offending those who may not like Bill Gates and/or Microsoft, thus broadening her audience of readers. She develops a trust with the reader by concealing her identity until the very end. The second way her name helped her was soley dependant on how she reavealed herself and her identity to the reader. Her sentence of admittance was the following: "Bill and I started our foundation based on the firm belief that every child in our world deserves a chance at good health"(par. 18). Now, the reader understands who she is credibility is not lost, but gained because the context in which Mrs. Gates reveals herself is that of charity.

Despite her name, Mrs. Gates established herself as a "regular person" by writing in a way that
helps the reader identify her as someone normal. Her words and phrases are simple and to the point. She writes in the first-person as if it is two normal people having a regular conversation, yet she maintains the air of knowing a little more on the issue at hand, the problem of AIDS in India, than you do.

She establishes her credibility of knowledge on the issue because she traveled to India with her husband and saw firsthand the problems with the AIDS epidemic in India. Also, her use of statistics and quotes of experts with whom she spoke give her argument substantial credibility and believability.

Pathos
The expression of Pathos in this article was ultimately through word choice. In India, the AIDS epidemic has a lot to do with the "sex trade." Mrs. Gates refers to the women who sell themselves to men as "sex workers" rather than "prostitutes." The word "sex worker" gives the impression that the women were forced to make a living this way, while the word "prostitute" arouses very negative feelings and presumptions. She appeals to the reader's ability to pity.

Mrs. Gates also used the word "empower" in the context of educating these sex workers on AIDS and HIV. If women have to be empowered, that means they are powerless. The idea of women being helpless and powerless definitely induces certain emotions that wouldn't be there if she had said "educate prostitutes."

The last major word choice was the implementation of "we" and "us." Mrs. Gates made it seem like we were on a team, that we were all in this together, and that each of us not only has a responsibility to feel sorry for these AIDS victims, but also act to help them.

Logos
Mrs. Gates through logos connects chains of opinions, thoughts, and arguments in order to help us see implications in her argument.

In the very first paragraph, she says, "India's emergence as one of the world's fastest-growing economies, with a highly skilled workforce and climbing literacy rates, has fueled optimism that the country could one day overcome its crippling poverty. But as I recently saw firsthand, India is on the brink of an AIDS catastrophe that could undermine the country's potential for progress"(par. 1).

This is the main connection she wants the reader to make. India is a growing, improving country which can potentially help with the problem of poverty. However, progress towards solving the poverty problem is stunted by the "AIDS catastrophe."

Mrs. Gates does very well in providing evidence for the terrible effects of AIDS, but she does not have sufficient facts, statistics, etc. to support her claim in India being an up-and-coming economic power. Had she provided information on rates of growth in annual income per capita or any other economic measures, it would have been more convincing that India is becoming stronger. That would have provided a great contrast which would facilitate our understanding that AIDS is indeed threatening a growing nation and something must be done.

Though she fails to connect well her primary argument, Mrs. Gates does succeed in helping us make other connections. For example, we know that Microsoft and Bill Gates are rich, powerful entities. However, without evidence, no one would make the assumption that Bill Gates is charitable. Mrs. Gates' mentioning that the Bill Gates foundation has donated $200 M to fight AIDS in India link these two idea for the reader: Bill Gates, though rich, is a philanthropist.

She also helps us understand the "sex workers." The ideas that seemingly have no link are 1)women in developing countries are not educated, 2) in such countries there is bound to be prostitution, which we sometimes see as the woman's own choice, and 3) rate of AIDS infections can be decreased significantly. What Mrs. Gates does is help us see that lack of education forces women into the sex trade. That ignorance carries over into the sex trade itself and as a result,"shockingly, 70 percent of Indian women have never even heard of AIDS." But, once the women are educated, there is a drastic increase in HIV-prevention.

The most powerful connection that she makes is related to how the reader can make a difference. The bad effects of AIDS in India caused by poverty and lack of education can be combatted by the efforts of outsiders. Mrs. Gates proves this by stating, "Individuals can make a difference, too — there are things that each of us can do to help stop AIDS around the world. For example, you can educate your friends and family about the disease, volunteer for a local AIDS organization, or ask your lawmakers to increase funding for global AIDS programs. You can also donate to organizations such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, which supports AIDS programs in the hardest-hit countries throughout the world"(par. 20).
Citation
Melinda French Gates, "AIDS and India," The Seattle Times, April 11,2004.