A Modest Proposal Vs Lifeboat Ethics Essay

“A Modest Proposal” V. “Lifeboat Ethics” Distributing limited resources among our rapidly growing economy has always been a cause for concern. There are new lives being brought into this world everyday even though our resources are dwindling down as we speak. In “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift and “Lifeboat Ethics” by Garrett Hardin, each author uses a different method of appeals to propose to their readers a way to help our ever growing population. Hardin uses more of a logic based argument, using facts and figures to back up his statements. Swift takes a wildly different approach by using a satirical “speaker” to bring a more emotional appeal to his readers. He first recommends a very vulgar approach to grab his reader’s attention and then proposes his actual solution. Although both essays are effective in different ways, I believe that Swift’s emotional approach makes for a more effective argument. A key aspect to consider when reading any essay is the author’s credentials and validity. Hardin has a degree in population control, making him an expert in that area. He also uses several …show more content…
Hardin plays emotion into his essay by using the lack of it. He demonstrates a more serious tone and downplays emotion completely out of the argument. Hardin lacks empathy and sympathy with his audience leaving his readers to questioning his overall character and judgment. Swift once again uses the complete opposite approach. He appeals to his readers by empathizing with them and demonstrating an effective solution. Swift uses his “speaker” as a way to interpret emotion while breaking up a logical argument. He never intended for people to take his “speaker’s” proposal as a legitimate one, he only used the vulgarity as an emotional appeal before introducing his serious proposal. By doing this, Swift gained an intrigued audience whose interest and attention was captivated until the very