For many people, for persuasion to truly be effective, one needs not only facts and credibility, but an appeal to emotion. The Argument Culture does this quite effectively. Deborah Tannen’s use of Pathos in her rhetorical setting is, for the most part, quite effective. Each one gives a new facet to her overall opinion, and can even change the way one might read the paper. There are, of course, some places where this Pathos doesn’t quite work, however including that, her use of pathos greatly improves the overall quality of this essay.
The rhetorical setting of a paper greatly affects what will and won’t function in the paper. For instance, if you have a scientific paper, you may not want to use pathos too much. In this essay, Tannen is attempting …show more content…
For instance, Tannen mentions on page 488 that often times arguing in our personal lives, like with a spouse, it doesn’t end well. She draws on this personal hypothetical because many, if not all, people have experienced arguing with a loved one, which will draw us all into the essay more. Tannen demonstrates how ineffective arguing is in our personal lives in an attempt to draw a comparison to arguing in our culture. On page 494, she draws on childhood, with the idea of two children fighting, where often times the parent would decide that both were at fault. Tannen wanted to remind us of that feeling of indignity, and spark that same indignity towards the concept of blaming all parties, and to make us realize how unfair it is that when two people argue over a matter, it is always that both are at fault, never one, or neither. On page 496 she recalls the story of a young woman who had a dream of acting. She got into one of the best acting schools, and, full of enthusiasm, she goes. This school, based in New York, had a teaching method that essentially consisted of yelling at and insulting students in an attempt to push them to their extreme best. This didn’t work for the woman, and she dropped out. Tannen uses this situation as a means to draw on our sympathy, and reveal why always attempting to push people with screaming, or going into things with a battle like mentality, ends up hurting people, and in some instances, …show more content…
When talking about arguing, it works because it is something so general. It also uses an equivalency that truly shows us why in the bigger picture, arguing doesn’t work. It even gives us an entirely different view on arguing as a whole. The fighting hypothetical is effective because it, for many people, draws on a childhood memory, and brings out the feelings of injustice, without trying to make you enraged. This is a subtle use of Pathos, but an effective one. The last one, her story of the young actor, is probably the most enraging, but for all the right reasons. This shows us how angry reactions really don’t help with a situation, and it changes our ideas on what pushing can truly
The rhetorical setting of a paper greatly affects what will and won’t function in the paper. For instance, if you have a scientific paper, you may not want to use pathos too much. In this essay, Tannen is attempting …show more content…
For instance, Tannen mentions on page 488 that often times arguing in our personal lives, like with a spouse, it doesn’t end well. She draws on this personal hypothetical because many, if not all, people have experienced arguing with a loved one, which will draw us all into the essay more. Tannen demonstrates how ineffective arguing is in our personal lives in an attempt to draw a comparison to arguing in our culture. On page 494, she draws on childhood, with the idea of two children fighting, where often times the parent would decide that both were at fault. Tannen wanted to remind us of that feeling of indignity, and spark that same indignity towards the concept of blaming all parties, and to make us realize how unfair it is that when two people argue over a matter, it is always that both are at fault, never one, or neither. On page 496 she recalls the story of a young woman who had a dream of acting. She got into one of the best acting schools, and, full of enthusiasm, she goes. This school, based in New York, had a teaching method that essentially consisted of yelling at and insulting students in an attempt to push them to their extreme best. This didn’t work for the woman, and she dropped out. Tannen uses this situation as a means to draw on our sympathy, and reveal why always attempting to push people with screaming, or going into things with a battle like mentality, ends up hurting people, and in some instances, …show more content…
When talking about arguing, it works because it is something so general. It also uses an equivalency that truly shows us why in the bigger picture, arguing doesn’t work. It even gives us an entirely different view on arguing as a whole. The fighting hypothetical is effective because it, for many people, draws on a childhood memory, and brings out the feelings of injustice, without trying to make you enraged. This is a subtle use of Pathos, but an effective one. The last one, her story of the young actor, is probably the most enraging, but for all the right reasons. This shows us how angry reactions really don’t help with a situation, and it changes our ideas on what pushing can truly