Rhetorical Analysis Of Can Life Exist On Other Planets?

Rhetorical critique of the article “Can life exist on other planets?”
Danny Faulkner, the author of the article “Can life exist in other planets?”, attempts to answer this controversial question by arguing that the answer can only be derived from the ultimate validation of one of the two major theories of origin, creationist and evolutionist. He being his essay by making a distinction between the evolution of life and the origin of life, which he argues are completely different. The evolution of life refers to the gradual development of various organisms to adapt and better adjust to their current environment, originating from a common ancestor, while the origin of life is a more complex question. The author the initiates to explain the evolutionary perspective on the subject, which is mostly unbiased and informative. Evolutionist theorise that physical existence in our planet arose from solely natural means, for this reason many believe that it would be unreasonable to even conceive the idea that some sort of living organism would not be able to exist outside of earth were some environments could possibly be habitable. As a result the aforementioned theory of evolution most evolutionists presume that life could have originated there also, unlike what the majority of the affiliates of the creationist group believe. Faulkner then begins to illustrate how creationist views are entirely different from those of the evolutionists. Faulkner …show more content…
He does so by employing the rhetorical elements of ethos and logos to persuade the audience to accept his argument as fact, and he's successful for most of the time. Even Though his use of the logos can dissuade some from agreeing with him, the audience members that are part of the creationists group would have already joined him by the time he first logos is