Ethos Pathos Logos In Animal Testing

It is not possible to write an effective essay about animal experimentation without having to resort to an emotional appeal. Though Heloisa Sabin and Jane Goodall could have avoided the use of pathos in their respective pieces, “Animal Research Saves Lives” and “A Question of Ethics,” they choose not to because they understood, to some degree, the rhetorical triangle and its role in formulating effective arguments. The term “rhetorical triangle” makes it evident that ethos, logos and pathos are all related and a well-formed argument consists of all three in near equal proportion. Like legs of a triangle, each type of appeal supports the other two types. Sabin and Goodall both used emotional appeal in their writing to some extent. However, Sabin depended heavily on pathos to develop her argument and to convince her audience that animal testing …show more content…
Goodall’s essay is much more convincing because it is much more different to argue against her statements than it is to argue against Sabin’s conclusion. Goodwill’s argumentative persuasive essay is well-formed because she attempts to understand both extremes of the dilemma, does not see the issue in black and white, personifies animals, mentions alternatives to animal testing, uses all-inclusive terminology and calls for an open discussion. On the other hand, Sabin’s argument is weaker, and her statements are easier to argue against because she does not consider the other extreme, lumps organizations together and tries too hard to humanize her husband, which shows extreme bias. She outright demonizes those who oppose animal testing and indirectly blames them of being ignorant. Sabin’s argument would have been stronger if she stated some reasons why animal testing is considered inhumane and provided some ethical, logical and emotional appeal to debunk those reasons in a mature and appropriate