Rhetorical Analysis of “The Relativity of Wrong” by Isaac Asimov
In the rebuttal “The Relativity of Wrong,” Isaac Asimov effectively utilizes various simple and complex rhetorical strategies to logically present his persuasive counter-argument; namely by the use of Ad hominem retorts, subtle aporia, and exemplification. These rhetorical strategies rely mostly on an empirical and logical premise but must be primarily interpreted to understand Asimov’s actual purpose.
One of the primary arguments made by the critical letter to Asimov is that he is ignorant; a main point of the critic’s letter is a simple Ad hominem attack on Asimov’s intellectual integrity, so “The Relativity of Wrong” addresses this fallacious argument type with its own Ad hominem claims. The essay begins by explaining the claim and nature of a critique made by a English Literature major on an off-handed comment made by Asimov in which he expressed his …show more content…
Socrates himself had said that he was only the wisest man in Greece for acknowledging that he truly knew nothing. If Asimov claimed to know many things, he must be very unwise, this Literature major expressed. Furthermore, Asimov explained, the actual logical argument furthered by John followed that since an historical precedent (earlier event) for scientists claiming to be right only to be proved horribly and obviously wrong by later thinkers and experimenters, Asimov was undoubtedly just as unwise as these supposedly failed theorists. Asimov finally explains, “John, when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.” By
In the rebuttal “The Relativity of Wrong,” Isaac Asimov effectively utilizes various simple and complex rhetorical strategies to logically present his persuasive counter-argument; namely by the use of Ad hominem retorts, subtle aporia, and exemplification. These rhetorical strategies rely mostly on an empirical and logical premise but must be primarily interpreted to understand Asimov’s actual purpose.
One of the primary arguments made by the critical letter to Asimov is that he is ignorant; a main point of the critic’s letter is a simple Ad hominem attack on Asimov’s intellectual integrity, so “The Relativity of Wrong” addresses this fallacious argument type with its own Ad hominem claims. The essay begins by explaining the claim and nature of a critique made by a English Literature major on an off-handed comment made by Asimov in which he expressed his …show more content…
Socrates himself had said that he was only the wisest man in Greece for acknowledging that he truly knew nothing. If Asimov claimed to know many things, he must be very unwise, this Literature major expressed. Furthermore, Asimov explained, the actual logical argument furthered by John followed that since an historical precedent (earlier event) for scientists claiming to be right only to be proved horribly and obviously wrong by later thinkers and experimenters, Asimov was undoubtedly just as unwise as these supposedly failed theorists. Asimov finally explains, “John, when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.” By