There are many people who believe that college isn’t for everyone and there are many people who believe that it is. Both sides usually have valid arguments, and typically, they both stick to their belief and assume that they’re right. After reading two essays, one called “What’s Wrong with Vocational School?” by Charles Murray, and another called “On ‘Real Education’” by Robert T. Perry, I came to the conclusion that they both agree on the same thing. They both believe that no, a four-year college isn’t for everyone, but people still need some sort of education after high school, whether it’s vocational school, or some type of certificate program. After realizing that they both agreed on the same thing, I had to choose which one was more persuasive
…show more content…
Ethos is the appeal to authority and the credibility of the person writing (Modes of Persuasion). Perry used a lot of credible sources in his essay. In “On ‘Real Education’”, Perry stated that The U.S Department of Labor says we need more people with degrees if we want to exceed competing countries in the world wide economy (par. 2). Obviously, people are going to trust The U.S Department of Labor, so it was very smart of him to add that into his essay. He also used a fact from the National Center for Higher Education Systems Management (par.6). Even though a majority of the people in America have no idea what that is, they’re going to trust it because it sounds reliable and they’re going to assume it’s legitimate. He also used statements from The State Higher Education Executive Officers and talked about the FAFSA (par. 8). They are assumed to be reliable sources, too, so he used ethos very well. Charles Murray on the other hand did not do well at all for ethos. The only authoritative figure in his essay was himself. He never stated facts from any other source but his own. His essay was mainly very opinionated and he could have made his essay a lot stronger and more persuasive by using sources other than himself, but he didn’t, so Perry also wins on the ethos aspect of the two …show more content…
The fact is, although Murray may be a very smart man, so is Perry, and Perry chose to still use outside sources and it just made his essay stronger. Also, Murray’s essay possibly made more sense to people on the subject of the essay, but it still did not use the three means of persuasion as well as Perry’s
Ethos is the appeal to authority and the credibility of the person writing (Modes of Persuasion). Perry used a lot of credible sources in his essay. In “On ‘Real Education’”, Perry stated that The U.S Department of Labor says we need more people with degrees if we want to exceed competing countries in the world wide economy (par. 2). Obviously, people are going to trust The U.S Department of Labor, so it was very smart of him to add that into his essay. He also used a fact from the National Center for Higher Education Systems Management (par.6). Even though a majority of the people in America have no idea what that is, they’re going to trust it because it sounds reliable and they’re going to assume it’s legitimate. He also used statements from The State Higher Education Executive Officers and talked about the FAFSA (par. 8). They are assumed to be reliable sources, too, so he used ethos very well. Charles Murray on the other hand did not do well at all for ethos. The only authoritative figure in his essay was himself. He never stated facts from any other source but his own. His essay was mainly very opinionated and he could have made his essay a lot stronger and more persuasive by using sources other than himself, but he didn’t, so Perry also wins on the ethos aspect of the two …show more content…
The fact is, although Murray may be a very smart man, so is Perry, and Perry chose to still use outside sources and it just made his essay stronger. Also, Murray’s essay possibly made more sense to people on the subject of the essay, but it still did not use the three means of persuasion as well as Perry’s