Edward Wilson The Future Of Life Rhetorical Analysis

According to Hubert Humphrey, “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.” However, when two parties start debating an issue, but neither are willing to compromise, the result is an argument in which nothing is accomplished. Within his work, The Future of Life, Edward O. Wilson wrote two contradictory passages that he set side by side to emphasize the underlying satiristic properties of each and make them easy to compare. One demeans environmentalists and one uproots “people-first critics.” This satire demonstrates the unproductivity of political discussions between multiple organizations, parties, and governments in which both will not budge on their stance. Within the passages Wilson uses rhetorical devices to convey his annoyance towards the unproductive nature of such political discussions. One example of rhetoric used by Wilson throughout his writing is the use of invective language. Wilson uses excessive amounts of this to exaggerate the insults that are used within political debates. Both sides of the argument barrade the other with insult after insult which do not further either side of the discussion. The …show more content…
He used invective language when he demonstrated how parties use pointless insults, he used hyperboles to exhibit the unproductive absurdity behind debate, and he also included some irony which shows the unproductivity of debates by having both sides accuse the other of the same things. Therefore, yes freedom can be hammered out on the anvil of debate, but if the issue is not malleable and neither side will give to form something both sides agree on, the entire premise of the argument is an unproductive throwing of insults. Rather, what Wilson believes is that when going into a debate, parties should be willing to come to a compromise that may satisfy both