1.
The first text, “The Sandra Bullock trade” written by David Brooks is at first about Sandra Bullock. She had just won an Academy award for best actress, and almost simultaneously it came out that her husband was cheating on her. The big question is, is happiness a fair trade for success and wealth. This text claims that you are crazy if you have to think about it for more than 3 seconds because happiness is far more important than money. A successful marriage is more important than money. If you have it then it doesn’t matter how many times you fail. The other way around you will always be unfulfilled and unhappy if you have an unsuccessful marriage and a good career. David Brooks claims that this postulate is backed up by lots of data. …show more content…
The way to do it is with a good and exiting opening. Today people feed on other people’s misfortune and their personal life. Sniffing up as much gossip as you can saves days. Therefor David Brooks made a good call, starting his text out with gossip about Sandra Bullock. It catches the reader and catches the reader’s attention. He uses Sandra Bullocks as an example to raise an important question.
He uses Logos and ethos. He is building up ethos by using several expert’s statements and also a lot of research coming from different research institutes: “Research by Donald A. Redelmeier and Sheldon M. Singh has found that…” . He uses Logos by having a lot of evidence behind his postulates. He talks to our brains. He doesn’t try to reach our feelings. He backs his claims with lots of data: “according to one study, joining a group…” . He also binds the reader to reading the text because he is asking questions, which makes the reader think, and wanting the answer, which Brooks also …show more content…
Rosenbloom, the author of the second text, claims that consuming is bad, because wealthy people loose enjoyment in small things and it won’t make you happier to have expensive material things. The third text almost agrees because it also states that money can’t by happiness, but it also states that there is a little correlation between money and happiness because making money gives life a purpose. Even though people with higher income spent more time in activities associated with negative feelings such as stress and tension, because they use a lot of time on work and they have lesser free time. The third text gives an excellent example of how money can make you happier. It’s about Warren Buffet and what he is doing with his money. Money gave him a purpose with his life and it made him happier. He gained satisfaction by helping others. He helped cure diseases that caused death to millions, by donating big amounts of money to his own charity organization and other organizations. If he a long time ago stopped working and lived with his wife, he would never have reached the satisfaction of helping so many people. But that is a rare thing. Not many people make that much money, and few people would have done like him. Some people try, like Rosenbloom states, to outdo their neighbors, getting the
The first text, “The Sandra Bullock trade” written by David Brooks is at first about Sandra Bullock. She had just won an Academy award for best actress, and almost simultaneously it came out that her husband was cheating on her. The big question is, is happiness a fair trade for success and wealth. This text claims that you are crazy if you have to think about it for more than 3 seconds because happiness is far more important than money. A successful marriage is more important than money. If you have it then it doesn’t matter how many times you fail. The other way around you will always be unfulfilled and unhappy if you have an unsuccessful marriage and a good career. David Brooks claims that this postulate is backed up by lots of data. …show more content…
The way to do it is with a good and exiting opening. Today people feed on other people’s misfortune and their personal life. Sniffing up as much gossip as you can saves days. Therefor David Brooks made a good call, starting his text out with gossip about Sandra Bullock. It catches the reader and catches the reader’s attention. He uses Sandra Bullocks as an example to raise an important question.
He uses Logos and ethos. He is building up ethos by using several expert’s statements and also a lot of research coming from different research institutes: “Research by Donald A. Redelmeier and Sheldon M. Singh has found that…” . He uses Logos by having a lot of evidence behind his postulates. He talks to our brains. He doesn’t try to reach our feelings. He backs his claims with lots of data: “according to one study, joining a group…” . He also binds the reader to reading the text because he is asking questions, which makes the reader think, and wanting the answer, which Brooks also …show more content…
Rosenbloom, the author of the second text, claims that consuming is bad, because wealthy people loose enjoyment in small things and it won’t make you happier to have expensive material things. The third text almost agrees because it also states that money can’t by happiness, but it also states that there is a little correlation between money and happiness because making money gives life a purpose. Even though people with higher income spent more time in activities associated with negative feelings such as stress and tension, because they use a lot of time on work and they have lesser free time. The third text gives an excellent example of how money can make you happier. It’s about Warren Buffet and what he is doing with his money. Money gave him a purpose with his life and it made him happier. He gained satisfaction by helping others. He helped cure diseases that caused death to millions, by donating big amounts of money to his own charity organization and other organizations. If he a long time ago stopped working and lived with his wife, he would never have reached the satisfaction of helping so many people. But that is a rare thing. Not many people make that much money, and few people would have done like him. Some people try, like Rosenbloom states, to outdo their neighbors, getting the