Alexandra Bello Team 16- Assignment One

Throughout the article, the authors use the three rhetorics (logos, pathos and ethos) to express the idea that the human memory is at heart very faulty. One of the main arguments proposed by the authors was the idea of how the credibility of a person can be tarnished as they remember a certain event poorly, which evokes the rhetoric ethos. The human being only has so much memory capacity, which is the reason why we cannot rely on it for such cases. This is also proven true when they also bring up the idea of how people try to be more confident when they don’t truly recall an event or name, in order to make up for the inaccuracy. A whole thorough study was done proving such a phenomenon, which evokes logos. The last rhetoric, pathos, is also demonstrated when another study is shown where people can sometimes let their emotions affect what they remember.

After fully analyzing the article, it can be said that it mainly focuses on facts and studies to support the arguments as opposed to evoking emotions. The only time they try to use the emotions of the audience is when bringing up how people can let their emotions affect how they retell the event, and even then, they barely do so. As previously mentioned, the authors focused on facts, which is seen through their tone. They write very realistic and focus on expressing their main ideas with a serious and analytical attitude. (good points!)

After reading over the reader picks comments, it can be said that some of the comments were very questionable in terms of what they argued and how they did so. In the first comment Dr. Tyson, responded to the article in an attempt to revive his credibility. He does so by providing links to discuss the matters mentioned in the article concerning his reputation as a scientist. The second comment by Keith Dow also uses the same rhetoric as Dr. Tyson. In an attempt to bash on Bush’s reputation based on some of his past quotes, he tries to weaken the authors’ arguments. In the third comment, by Jacob Sommer, he focuses on how humans remember negative experiences with the feeling that these encounters occurred with malicious intent. He logically adds onto the authors’ argument while trying to show how a person’s emotions can impact their memory.

When it comes to ranking the comments, it seems to be very ineffective from what is seen. The first two comments did very little to add onto the matter however, were still able to be at the top of the comment section. Meanwhile the third comment added onto the discussion through logical reasoning and was not ranked as high as it should have been. The major flaw with the ranking system is the inability distinguish which comments are relevant. Overall, the points provided by the authors concerning the human memory are well constructed and use the three rhetorics in a way that allows them to convey their message.

Hi Alexandra,

Good work!  You made some excellent points and discussed the articles very well.