The underlying reasons for the belief, impression or thought that the US gov-ernment must continue to fund national parks is often overlooked, misunder-stood or unheeded. In his essay, “Government Must Preserve National Parks.” Author Todd Da-vidson builds a cogent, detailed and absorbing argument by employing a varie-ty of rhetorical techniques and persuasive strategies, most notably, an array of pertinent facts and statistics, appeal to emotions, and a logical argument to persuade his audience that the US government must continue to fund national parks.
It was a cold November 16, 1934 and Everett Ruess was in a sticky situation. He was stuck in a snow igloo hastily made 6 days before his hands were poisoned by a rattlesnake’s bite. The rattlesnake that had bitten him had an owner, Frank Dandis, his greedy childhood friend who moved to Escalante, Utah five years before. Six days ago, they were the best of friends, but now they were bitter enemies stuck in an igloo because of a whirlwind snowstorm. Frank Dandis was a farmer who had always dreamed of being a roamer, one who explores nature’s natural beauty as a profession.
Russel E. Train is the author. Train was the Chairman Emeritus of th World Wildlife Fund. He wrote this text in winter of 1996. The Center for the Study of the Presidency in Washington is the publisher of this text. It was published in Presidential Studies Quarterly, a scholarly press.
Jimmy Carter - Persuasive Techniques Usually, when people have to give a speech or write an essay they have to convey a message or convince the audience of a specific idea or argument. In this instance it is very important for the speaker to use the correct techniques so they can connect to the audience and convince them of their point of view. For politicians especially they must be able to have the audience intrigued and convinced of their ideas. In his speech to prevent those who wanted to industrialize and drill oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, President Jimmy Carter can be seen using many of the common argumentative techniques, such as logos, pathos, and ethos, to convince his audience against the industrialization of the Refuge. To build his argument, the reader can see Carter use his personal experiences, historical evidence, and alternative options to support his claim.
One minute and thirteen seconds. The last entry on the flight transcript: LOSS OF ALL DATA. On January 28, 1986, the Challenger Space Shuttle exploded 73 seconds into its flight. Aboard were five astronauts, one of whom, Christa McAuliffe, was ready to become the first school teacher in space. Sadly, none of the five survived.
In 1979, 15 July, Jimmy Carter, the president of America gave a speech “A Crisis of Confidence”. Only three years ago, on the same day, he just accepted the nomination of his party to be a president of the United States. Also, he was the 39th president of the United States, who represented the Democratic Party. Actually, he has been on service in the army when he was young, and has been the governor of Georgia. When he was in power, he made a lot of contributions to the country and the world, such as establishing diplomatic relations with China and some other communism countries, helping negotiate the war between Israel and Egypt.
With the specific explanation about the influence of the Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act, that it “specifically created the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, doubled the size of the former range, and restricted development in areas that are clearly incompatible with oil exploration”, Carter supports his argument that protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is necessary from a professional perspective of the singer of a relative major act by using ethos, and it not only appeals to the audiences by referring his character as the former US president, but also helps the author to raise credibility of his central argument. In conclusion, Jimmy Carter adeptly utilizes pathos, logos, and ethos to strengthen his argument that the industrial development in the Arctic National Wild Refuge should be prohibited in his foreword to Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons of Life and land, A photographic Journey by Subhankar
In the excerpt the mooallem explains a northern military fort that was known as “the polar bear capital of the world”. with its newfound title came tourists. And with the uprising in tourism comes with the rise in destruction. The author makes a very strong and and almost emotional connection not only to himself but the the polar bears
On January 28th, 1986, Ronald Reagan, the president of the United States at the time, in his speech, entitled “Challenger Disaster,” addressed the Challenger Disaster. He supported this claim by first mourning over the tragedy, then he promoted NASA, also he tried to make sense of this calamity, and finally he informed the audience that the seven astronauts will never be forgotten and as a country we will be forever thankful for their service. Through Reagan’s use of tone, rhetorical analysis, and rhetorical tools he effectively persuaded America to mourn and appreciate the lives of the seven astronauts loss and to convince American people to continue their support for NASA and move forward as a country. Reagan unified America with his supportive
Our beliefs, culture, and needs as humans influence our relationships with wildlife and how we view each individual species as well as how we treat/preserve them. After reading Wild Ones, it is obvious that the author Jon Mooallem and the others mentioned in the book believe that polar bears, birds and bees are specific animals that deem worthy of protection. Mooallem provides many examples of people who give reasoning as to why we should help preserve these animals. Mooallem uses the specific people’s backgrounds to show the difference of opinions in someone who has knowledge of the animal versus someone that only adores the animal because of the animals looks.
In his 1995 essay “The Trouble with Wilderness,” William Cronon declares that “the time has come to rethink wilderness” (69). From the practice of agriculture to masculine frontier fantasies, Cronon argues that Americans have historically defined wilderness as an “island,” separate from their polluted urban industrial homes (69). He traces the idea of wilderness throughout American history, asserting that the idea of untouched, pristine wilderness is a harmful fantasy. By idealizing wilderness from a distance, he argues that people justify the destruction of less sublime landscapes and aggravate environmental conflict.
Since he left office, there have been many proposals to open the Arctic Refuge coastal plain to oil drilling. They’ve all been denied because of the opposition by the American people, including the Gwich’in Athabascan Indians of Alaska and Canada, indigenous people whose culture has depended on the Porcupine caribou herd for thousands of years. The short-term economic gain is not worth destroying their homes. He said the Arctic Refuge may provide 1 to 2 percent of the oil our country consumes each day. We can easily conserve more than that amount by driving more fuel-efficient vehicles, we should just use our resources more wisely instead.
The Alaskan Bush is one of the hardest places to survive without any assistance, supplies, skills, and little food. Jon Krakauer explains in his biography, Into The Wild, how Christopher McCandless ventured into the Alaskan Bush and ultimately perished due to lack of preparation and hubris. McCandless was an intelligent young man who made a few mistakes but overall Krakauer believed that McCandless was not an ignorant adrenalin junkie who had no respect for the land. Krakauer chose to write this biography because he too had the strong desire to discover and explore as he also ventured into the Alaskan Bush when he was a young man, but he survived unlike McCandless. Krakauer’s argument was convincing because he gives credible evidence that McCandless was not foolish like many critics say he was.
Reagan applies oratorical devices and figurative language to explain to the nation the passion and bravery the seven astronauts have. He uses parallel structure and listing to imply the passion and bravery the Challenger crew have. “But, we never lost an astronaut in flight, we’ve never had a tragedy like this” (2). The parallel structure creates a cause and effect to the tragedy. Its shocking devastation, however, it shows the nation how the future is creating new things.
In his emotionally inspiring speech, “Shuttle Challenger Address,” Ronald Reagan expresses his deepest condolences to the people most affected by the Challenger accident. He advances his speech with a gentle yet strong willed facade in order to inspire the future generations of astronauts to not let this tragedy affect their future endeavors. Raegen then briefly puts his presidential status aside in order to further express the depth of his pain, not only at a presidential level, but as an American citizen concerned for the well being of his country. Raegen applies different types of rhetorical devices in order to emotionally appeal to the people most affected by the accident, while at the same time encourage the general public to not let this
