Joey Hernandez

Rhetorical Analysis Team 1

Joey – Overall, a good first effort. Make sure to edit carefully. It might help to read aloud and check if it sounds right. Ethos is the authority and the trustworthiness of the speaker. When analyzing the use of ethos in teh article, you want to look at the credibility and trustworthiness of C&S as authors. Otherwise, your analysis was very good.

Thesis statement:  Christopher F. Chabris and Daniel J. Simmons utilizes utilize the rhetoric triangle in “Why Our Memory Fails Us”  to explain with case studies the cause of false memory, to convey a message to the audience with emotions, and question the reliability of our memory. This is a bit unclear. Do you mean C&S primarily use pathos in their article?

Christopher F. Chabris and Daniel J. Simons were able to use successfully the rhetorical triangle in “Why Our Memory Fails Us” so that the audience could feel connected and more identified with what these professionals were trying to portray.

Christopher Chabirs and Daniel Simons start off the article with ethos giving the audience credibility about the person that they were going to talk about which was Neil Degrasse Tyson. Remember, ethos is the authority of the speaker or writer. What ethos do C&S have? They started off mentioning that he was an astrophysicist and host of a TV series so that the audience could build up their credibility about this individual.  That same credibility was later affected when he publicly claimed that Busch was decimating against Muslims. This incident cost him credibility because he didn’t have concrete evidence of what he thought the president said and because the president is the person with the most credibility out of the two.

The authors then started building their case using logos and heavily rely on facts and studies. Good. They used the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a case study of false memory as evidence to support their argument. to solve this argument with facts. Effectively, this study revealed that false memory is directly proportional to high confidence of the individual’s memory; exactly what happened to Neil Degrasse Tyson with President Bush’s speech.

Also, the authors resemble pathos being pity with use pathos in describing the false memory of the people mentioned in the article: “Do our heroes have memories of clay?” This statement makes the audience evaluate our leaders and realize that even the most “important and successful” people can be affected by false memory. Good. The authors also suggest that people respond with emotions when our memory is challenged, trying to justify what happened to Neil Degrasse Tyson. “But when our own memories are challenged, we may neglect all this and instead respond emotionally, acting as though we must be right and everyone else must be wrong.” Good point, but you don’t need the entire quote.

Neil Degrasse Tyson gives another perspective in the readers pick. He talks in an ethos perspective with his manager Sean Davis by giving out reliable sources about how he came up with the conclusion that the President was making discriminating comments about Muslims. The comments that Keith Dow wrote were in a form of logos because he is literally giving out facts to prove that George Bush was not as “intelligent and educated” like Christopher Chabirs and Daniel Simons said in “Why Our Memory Fails Us”. Jacob Sommer uses a more pathos style of writing because what he writes and how he writes is very appealing to the audience. He makes the audience feel like if we have criticized them too much as if we were perfect human beings. He makes the audience realize that everyone makes mistakes and exhorts us to become more humane when people make errors.  Good analysis of the comments. Did this approach work for the NYT?

Sebastian Saavedra # 1

Sebastian – Not bad for a first effort. Most importantly, the assignment is a rhetorical analysis of the Chabris and Simons article, not Heffernan. Make sure to read all assignments carefully. Don’t summarize the content of class readings. Your coach already knows them well. With only 500 words, focus on the analysis. Watch singular and plural form. Short sentences often have more impact and clarity. Avoid “I” in formal academic papers. Much of your analysis is good, but you need to edit more carefully.

Thesis: In both of the articles “Comment is King” by Virginia Heffernan and “Why Our Memory Fail Us” by Christopher F. and Daniel J. Simons, mainly seem to focus on Logos with having Pathos examples that support the Logos in both articles, which could lead the articles to have Ethos material for public to determined.

Logos was the main focus in both of the articles “Comment is King” and “Why Our Memory Fail Us” as the authors try to show the facts and statistics on why comments can affect in the journalism world and how it can affect why our memories cannot be the most accurate way to prove a something true.

Heffernan descries the logos of the articles by describing how the negative comment towards Anne Applebaum after people were criticism her for contradicting ideas that she supported in the past that now she goes against. Christopher F. and Daniel J. Simons logos are focus on the reasoning why our minds were not meant to be use as truthful. We tend to fit the memory with a signal of accuracy that might sound like it fit in our heads. Both articles tend to show both of these as the main ideas in the articles as you read the whole articles even with the support of pathos and ethos they always tend to go back to these topics. This is a rhetorical analysis. Don’t restate the content of C&S. Your coaches know the material already.

Pathos are is used in both of the articles to give the reason why these topics can affect the life of someone. In the case of Heffernan article, they start by introducing Anne Applebaum as a important journalist even describing some of her awards and acknowledgment, that the websites like the Washington post would write about her, but then they turn it by saying how the user feel about the post and how she is contradicting her ideas and how there many comments taking bad about her. As for Christopher F. and Daniel J. Simons (Don’t need the full names) article it mentions that relaying on your memories to tell the truth has made people go to jail and has got people in trouble, for not being reliable facts, this definitely shows the emotions that help the topics really be understand. What is the form of rhetoric here?

As for Ethos well in my opinion I would say (don’t use “I” in a formal academic paper. Everything you write is what you say) that the article by Christopher F. and Daniel J. Simons do show shows aspects of ethos then the other article, as I think Heffernan describes the effect of comment in journalism but this only focus focuses on the negative comments only, which I doubt that there would be only negative comments on a journalism that has got recognition and has been writing about in websites like the Washington post. People would probably think that this is not reliable as there not showing the whole picture on comments. Although not part of the assignment, Heffernan’s argument is that good comments are lost among the bad ones, not that all comments are bad.

When it comes to the top I found it appeal more to Ethos as the three top comment being Neil, Keith Dow, and Jacob Summer are talking not with facts but almost like an assumption as they trusted the site enough for them to star speculating on what it could be. All three of them are suggesting different things about how bush (Bush) was smart to remember, or that perhaps is in our brain, but always finishing with an unsure statement.

Why Our Memory Fails Us

Brittany – Very good first essay. Arguments are logical and backed up with examples. Watch your tenses. Don’t be afraid of short, impactful sentences.

Thesis statement: In the New York Times article “Why Our Memory Fails Us”, the authors Christopher F. Chabris and Daniel J. Simons use ethos and pathos when bringing up old indelible events, as well as logos when explaining the studies done on memory, all to support their argument. Good.

Thesis statement: In the New York Times article “Why Our Memory Fails Us”, the authors Christopher F. Chabris and Daniel J. Simons use ethos and pathos when bringing up old indelible events, as well as logos when explaining the studies done on memory, all to support their argument. Good.

Chabris and Simons are the authors of this article and are also both psychology professors which makes the audience more confident in believing what they have to say about the brain and the correlation between memory and overconfidence. This formed a relationship of trust between the readers and the authors which is valuable when continuing the rest of the article. Good, but watch your tenses.

Chabris and Simons had an immense use of frequently used (active voice is usually better) pathos within their argument. An example that can be seen is when they had brought up the tragedy of 9/11. Neil Tyson had spoken to his audience saying that “President Bush was prejudiced against Islam” and blamed them for the tragedy of the plane crash however, “In his post-9/11 speech, Mr. Bush actually said, “The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends”. (2 sentences would be better here) This brings the reader back to a tragic part of the past where Tyson misinterpreted racial standings by the president as well as the catastrophic plane crash on 9/11. Dr. Tyson incorrectly remembered both the president’s words and the events of 9/11.

Chabris and Simons also repeatedly used a profound amount of logos and a strong example is brought up within the study on the telephone game; something that almost everyone recognizes. (2 sentences) “Over repeated telling’s, the story becomes distorted, with some elements remaining, others vanishing, and entirely new details appearing”. (not needed) It is assumed that a majority of the audience is familiar with the game telephone which makes it easy to understand that the game does distort the words that are passed along. ` Making a connection between this childhood game and challenges of our memory makes the reader more confident in believing the argument because it is (assumed) to be a universal correlation that provides logic. 

In conclusion, Chabris and Simons used all three of the rhetorical appeals with an equivalent amount of the usage of statistics and emotional play with the audience. Both of these authors displayed an informal and credible tone. 

The first comment by Neil Tyson used a direct method of ethos. He kept his opening statement short and to the point and then gave other viewers an option to read more into his point of view by providing links. By doing so he created a sense of credibility and character. 

Keith Dow’s comment was comprised of multiple quotations by President Bush of many historic and doleful events. The quotations were a method of logos but the emotional connection the quotes had shows pathos. 

The last commenter was Jacob Sommer who used a great deal of logos to defend the standpoint of the article. His claim was that it’s common for people to clash memories, its human nature! He claimed that people have memories that clash, It’s human nature!

I believe Times did a worthy job at ranking the comments… All three took a different stance and were able to defend it robustly using one of the three rhetorical devices. 

Assignment 1 Marielle Cohen Team 1

Overall, quite good. You get right to the analysis and make strong, cogent arguments. Your writing is good. Watch your plurals (corrections in bold) and consider shorter sentences for greater impact.

In their article, Chabris and Simons appeal to their audience by first providing examples of cases where relying on one’s memory appeared erroneous. The case of Dr. Tyson, former President George Bush, and former First Lady Hillary Clinton are the primary examples. The logical appeal in these cases highlights the practical scenarios which try to convince the reader that the question about memory being erroneous to portend some truth. (The real-life cases provide a logical appeal to convince the reader) For instance, in Dr. Tyson’s case, whatever he heard President Bush note about religious bigotry was part of another speech delivered by the former president. Thus, in their article, “Why Our Memory Fails Us” Chabris and Simmons convince the audience that reliance on memory can result in incorrect outcomes. The authors attain this objective by employing a didactic tone, logical evidence, and common ground to make the reader part of the issue. Excellent.

Chabris and Simons note that the problem with relying on one’s memory is because the element of overconfidence in the same memories creates lack of accuracy in recalling what happened. Although the authors rely on much evidence and facts like the problem of erroneous witness recollection, they equally appeal to the readers’ pity. For instance, Dr. Tyson’s apology and the mere fact that in all cases where there is the memory, the fault isn’t based on the individual lying motivates the readers to believe that the issue under investigation is accurate. Very good.

The authors also employ a didactic tone which makes their appeal to the readers more realistic owing to the academic diction employed through the work. Chabris and Simons use the academic diction to separate the topic in question, the evidence tabled and the reader which effectively makes the work more academic and non-personal. Thus, the same appeal emanates from their professional knowledge and experience. (Need to identify ethos as the mode here)

(Need a new paragraph here) In the top readers’ comments, Keith Dow input on 2nd December 2014 (don’t need the dates here) also entails different appeals. Specifically, Keith argues that contention by Chabris and Simons that Bush was an intelligent person is faulty. Dow employed logic through evidence of various occasions when Bush uttered different words which seem unintelligent. Beyond that she (I believe Keith is a he) doesn’t provide any appeal towards her arguments, as it lacks any ethical connotation and doesn’t evoke emotions of pity or even sadness.

The second reader comment is from Jacob Sommer made on 2nd December 2014. Jacob Sommer reinforces his statement by logical facts, like for instance, such as the times he’s seen people make honest memory mistakes. Sommer’s contention that people who suffer from the problem highlighted by Chabris and Simons usually attribute the same question to malice isn’t supported by tangible evidence but simple logic. Additionally, there is no appeal to ethos and pathos within the same argument. The last reader comment is that of Prometheus. Prometheus notes that the authors should not have used former President Bush as an example to reinforce their point. Instead, they needed to have taken another person. Such sentiments are only stated with logical connotation and lack appeal to ethical and pathos orientation of the audience.