Part 1
1) Ethos (authority)- this is to establish creditability. This means that you need a good source and work needs to be cited.
Pathos (emotion) – this is when the writer connects with the emotions of the readers.
Logos (logic) – to write logically and make an argument with that is precise so that the readers can understand what the writer is writing about.
2) When writing a research paper it is a good idea to be as credible with your resources as possible and cite them. This will cause the readers to trust in authority. It is advantageous for you to get your reader to trust you as an authority because then you can persuade them to your point of view.
3) Some good strategies for appealing to emotions are by the use of sadness and grief. This can be used in a piece that contains natural disasters. One can talk about how many people suffered and died from the event.
4) There are potential disadvantages when using heavy appeal to emotion because the claim of the writer can be lost because the emotional part is to entertaining. The viewers of the work get so caught up in the emotional part of it that they forget the claim of the piece. An example of this are the coke commercials where there is so much going on that you forget that it is a coke add.
5) The ways you can use logos to build a strong argument by conveying across evidence and reason. This will support the point that the author is trying to get across. It is very important for the author to use logos when formulating a reasonable argument because if not the readers will loose interest.
6) Ethos, logos, and pathos are not separate from each other. Using them all in a paper can really grab a readers attention. An example to support my claim is that people will not read a paper if a credible person did not write it and they also want logic and emotion to be in it so that they can be interested while reading it.
Part 2
The article I real was by David G. Myers called “Do We Fear the Right Things?” This article I thought was very well written and interesting to read. At first when a reader reads the article it sounds like we are going to read about the different kinds of fear but in reality it is about something else. The article tries to tell the readers that we as people fear the wrong things because after 9/11 we have spent billions of dollars to protect the country but in reality there are dangers at home that kill more that terrorism itself like smoking and car accidents. The writer uses all of the three appeals. He uses ethos in the beginning as he quotes Oliver Wendell Homes. He also explains that many Americans feared flying even before 9/11 happened. Then he goes on to tell us how the Airlines have gone out of business because no one is flying anymore. The author uses pathos when he talks about all the people that died from 9/11 and he tries to prove that even though a lot of people died from the four crash a lot more have died from car accidents and smoking. He tried to appeal to the emotion this way. He also used logic when he says that, “Imagine, suggests mathematician Sam Saunders, that cigarettes were harmless—except for a single cigarette in every 50,000 packs that is filled with dynamite instead of tobacco. There would be a trivial risk of having your head blown off, yet enough to produce more gruesome deaths daily than occurred at terrorists’ hands on 9/11—surely enough to have cigarettes banned everywhere.” He tries to convey across that people should start taking on more concerns about how to improve on things that kill millions every year and not spend so much time on something we cannot control. He suggests that we should spend money to protect ourselves from terrorists but also as much on to save ourselves form preventing people to smoke and from car accidents. What happen on 9/11 was horrific to me personally and I would like as much protection form terrorism as possible but I also don’t want global warming so I think the author has a good point in his paper.