In her essay “The Economic Case for Saving Humanities,” writer Christina H. Paxson makes it clear in the first sentence she is in favor of saving humanities. She skillfully explains the rhetorical situation, then by using all three means of persuasion and a well thought out rhetorical strategy, Paxson created a winning argument. She starts by using pathos to try to appeal to her audience. Using the term “in our bones” to appeal to the reader’s compassion and inner self. Her goal is to first sway the reader with emotional examples in order for them to understand her point of view. Then by using logos to improve her argument. By establishing herself as a knowledge individual with her schooling in economics, following up by appealing to emotion and logic she makes a powerful case for the continued need for humanities. The rhetorical situation Paxson faces is whether humanities should be saved in the school system or not. She strongly believes they should and writes her essay with a passion that shows just that. In order for readers to see her point of view she must first establish credibility and gain the reader’s trust. She uses logic and her own authority as Dean of Princeton’s Woodrow School, along with the viewport of the school’s founder to do just that. It’s apparent that Paxson assumes the reader is friendly since she doesn’t give much background on the issues facing the decline of humanities now, but does talk about how throughout history the need for humanities has