It does not matter how confident you are about something you remember, you might be saying something that is right but it might also be wrong

Based on the article ‘Why we lose our memory’ I believe [not needed. It’s self-evident that you’re stating your analysis.] the author uses logos and pathos. At the beginning, I feel a sense of logos since Dr. Tyson mentioned that the stars have Arabic names, which is a fact. Also, on how he implied that George W. Bush made prejudicial comments on his speech to Congress after the 9/11 terrorist attacks against Islam, but it was a misconception of his memory where president Bush was doing a tribute to the astronauts lost in the Columbia space shuttle explosion. In addition, I get a sense of logos when they talked about the film “Rashomon” that they made the this point sixty years ago, on how we get an abstract understanding that people can remember the same events differently.

Furthermore, analyzing the article we experienced logos in conducted experiments about memory in such as the one made by cognitive psychologists Henry L. Roediger III and K. Andrew DeSoto [use of ethos, too] on testing how well people could recall words from lists they had studied, and how measured they were in their recollections. Moreover, there was another psychologist named Frederic Charles Bartlett [respected person has ethos] that conducted a series of experiments mimicking the “telephone” game that showed how the story became distorted with some information remaining, with some details disappearing and new details appearing.

In the other hand, I believe that the article contains a Pathos, because at one point in the article where I started reading about the experiments in memory and all the information they took out of it, I started to sense a feeling of confusion since maybe I could have said something that I thought it was right, but it was wrong. Or I could have forget something that it did happen, but I deny it because I forgot. For example, when Dr. Tyson realized that his memory had conflated his experiences of two memorable events that both involved speeches by Mr. Bush and he had to apologized [the pathos].

[Analyze rather than summarize. How do the commenters use the rhetorical triangle to make their points?]  I think on the top three comments on the reader’s choice I found it irrelevant to help other readers get a better concept of the article because they are not talking specifically about it. One of them just started talking about Bush and putting quotes about things he has said, and the other just talk about Dr. Tyson. In the other hand, New York Times top three choices I found it more helpful because the commenters are giving their opinions specifically about what the article is about, which our memory fails.

[not needed. All the points have been made.] Finalizing my analysis, the tone of this article is very objective and impartial since they are not showing any emotion towards the subject they are just informing and I found it amazing and kind of shocking after reading this article that it does not matter how confident you are about something you remember, you might be saying something that is right but it might also be wrong.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: