Rhetorical analysis

           Thesis statement:

Reading, seeing, watching, all things that influence us daily as we search the web. Filled with words full of impact divided into three categories ethos, logos and pathos. THIS IS A SENTENCE FRAGMENT, AND BESIDES, IT DOESN’T SAY ANYTHNG But as readers how do we distinguish each. HUH? YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO ANSWER THE QUETSION.

          We all search the web and come across articles, speeches, and videos. With sometimes these communicators leaving an impact on us as we either read or watch them. Sometimes the content hitting a place where it makes it personal, causing emotions, while others are just filled with facts and educating us as we read. Some are just ethical with credible sources. Unknowingly these words of impact are divided into three categories ethos, logos and pathos. REMOVE. UNNECESSARY.

Reading through Why Our Memory Fails Us by Christopher F. Chabris and Daniel J. Simons, I was able to distinguish which parts and pieces were which. I came to the conclusion the article is logos. It was telling a story on how memory can be very tricky at times. We might remember a certain situation with details based on a different situation, your memory basically blending the moments together. A circumstance was brought up with Dr. Tyson mentioning on his show what he thought Mr. Bush commented after the 9/11 tragedy, but indeed his memory failed him. He mixed up Mr. Bush’s comment in a different occasion causing a lot of controversy. When no one was able to find proof that Mr. Bush actually said that but were able to find that it was said but in a different circumstance they came to a conclusion that’s where Dr. Tyson’s mix up came about (false memory) Dr. Tyson apologized on his mistake. It had its proven facts with quotes on what Dr. Tyson thought Mr. Bush said after the 9/11 tragedy  (“Our God is the God who named the stars.”) vs. what he actually said (“The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends.”) It also had case studies claiming that cognitive psychologists Henry L. Roediger III and K. Andrew DeSoto tested people on how well they were able to remember words on lists and how accurate they were after being tested. They realized that the more confident someone was about their memory the more accurate they tested but to their surprise others showing high confidence mistakenly recalled words similar to the ones on the list. That’s where the false memory came. All the details about the article indicate logos. It doesn’t make the reader emotional and doesn’t really have much to do with ethics, it educates the reader on how we humans at times have false memories and used examples and case studies to prove it.

From the feedback on the top comments and how the readers expressed themselves looks like a mixture of logos and pathos. One of the comments the reader told his own personal story on a class assignment they had where the professor was demonstrating false memory, he also added the comment “fascinating stuff,” talking about the article. That right there was the reader taking in the information and feeling educated and even relating it to his college assignment. Another top comment gave me the impression that the reader was passive aggressive about it. To me she expressed pathos in this case. She mentioned that people don’t have false memory problems that it’s more of people being lazy and not being thought objectivity. Pathos was also expressed in a comment where the reader felt “frighten” on how our memory can fail us.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: