Strengthen thesis
In recent discussion of persuasion a controversial issue has been whether rhetoric sways people’s identity and how it affects society. On one hand, some argue that language is very important to persuade people’s own identity. From this perspective, people’s ethnicities and morals have a major impact on how they impact society. On the other hand, however, others argue that language in social media and politics have a major impact on society. In the words of Morrison, one of this view’s main proponents, “Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge. Whether it is obscuring state language or the faux-language of mindless media”(Morrison …show more content…
For instance, Donald Trump’s election portrays how the American people accepted his ignorance and anger towards America. Trump used the tactic of what the people wanted him to say. Likewise, the viewers saw him as credible and convincing because he said whatever what was on his mind, Therefore, he used the strategy of pathos. Thus, the article Did Democrats 'cry wolf ' too many times before Donald Trump? Explains that Clinton and Wolfson used words in their debates that negatively affected Clinton’s run for president, Wolfson explains that the language Clinton used implied that she was not credible when he writes, "I 'm quite confident I employed language that, in retrospect, was hyperbolic and inaccurate, language that cheapened my ability - our ability - to talk about this moment with accuracy and credibility” ( Woolfson). Woolfson explains that even though Trump used his anger in election e was more convincing because Clinton’s language was not …show more content…
Rhetoric is a way of persauding people. Therefore, rhetoric sways persople;s opinions and it aso affects society. In recent events, rhetoric and language was used in a violent way; therefore, it was an assault. As well, after the presidential debate kess politicely correct languade is a cultural expectation.
My own outlook on this topic is that language is directed to one’s identity. Therefore, when people respect Trump when he uses degrading words and language it’s assaulting to an individual’s background and ethnicity. Likewise, a person’s ethnicity shows their own identity. Eventhough, it’s not right, I believe that less politicallt correct language is a culture expectaion after the 2016 Presidential Debate.
In conclusion, then as I suggested earlier, defenders of language and rhetoric in American society today has changed based off of the presidential debate. Although some might object that many laws in the American society are not true, I would reply that many laws are unjust and many politicians use their status to persuade the people. Overall, the language and rhetoric in today’s society has changed after the 2016 Presidential debate and immoral actions and words are more acceptable
In recent discussion of persuasion a controversial issue has been whether rhetoric sways people’s identity and how it affects society. On one hand, some argue that language is very important to persuade people’s own identity. From this perspective, people’s ethnicities and morals have a major impact on how they impact society. On the other hand, however, others argue that language in social media and politics have a major impact on society. In the words of Morrison, one of this view’s main proponents, “Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge. Whether it is obscuring state language or the faux-language of mindless media”(Morrison …show more content…
For instance, Donald Trump’s election portrays how the American people accepted his ignorance and anger towards America. Trump used the tactic of what the people wanted him to say. Likewise, the viewers saw him as credible and convincing because he said whatever what was on his mind, Therefore, he used the strategy of pathos. Thus, the article Did Democrats 'cry wolf ' too many times before Donald Trump? Explains that Clinton and Wolfson used words in their debates that negatively affected Clinton’s run for president, Wolfson explains that the language Clinton used implied that she was not credible when he writes, "I 'm quite confident I employed language that, in retrospect, was hyperbolic and inaccurate, language that cheapened my ability - our ability - to talk about this moment with accuracy and credibility” ( Woolfson). Woolfson explains that even though Trump used his anger in election e was more convincing because Clinton’s language was not …show more content…
Rhetoric is a way of persauding people. Therefore, rhetoric sways persople;s opinions and it aso affects society. In recent events, rhetoric and language was used in a violent way; therefore, it was an assault. As well, after the presidential debate kess politicely correct languade is a cultural expectation.
My own outlook on this topic is that language is directed to one’s identity. Therefore, when people respect Trump when he uses degrading words and language it’s assaulting to an individual’s background and ethnicity. Likewise, a person’s ethnicity shows their own identity. Eventhough, it’s not right, I believe that less politicallt correct language is a culture expectaion after the 2016 Presidential Debate.
In conclusion, then as I suggested earlier, defenders of language and rhetoric in American society today has changed based off of the presidential debate. Although some might object that many laws in the American society are not true, I would reply that many laws are unjust and many politicians use their status to persuade the people. Overall, the language and rhetoric in today’s society has changed after the 2016 Presidential debate and immoral actions and words are more acceptable