Rhetorical Analysis Of William Damon's The Death Of Honesty

William Damon’s “The Death of Honesty” presents a solemn analysis of the decline of modern virtue due to a “dysfunctional tipping point” where honesty is no longer viewed as a moral characteristic worthy of pursuing. Dishonesty is presented as both a virtue and a vice that is shaping our contemporary society. The Hoover Institution of Stanford University published Mr. Damon’s article in 2012 under the Task Force on the Virtues of a Free Society, which would provide a target audience of students, educators, parents or anyone with an interest in sociology, specifically in the United States. A rhetorical analysis exposes flaws in Mr. Damon’s logic, while the appeal of ethos and pathos are successful tools in creating a connection with readers.

The author starts to develop a bond with the reader by acknowledging that the truth is not always spoken and that dishonesty comes in many forms: acceptable white lies, “courageous deception” and distortion of the truth. This strategy provides a level of respect for the reader, and does not assume a tone of moral supremacy; the reader can relate to the assumption that truth is not always observed. Similarly, exposing politicians as guilty of language that is designed “to hide, soften, or misrepresent” the truth is a statement that many readers would agree with. The focus is then put on the individual with the statement that all liars will be shunned when their dishonesty is exposed; no one wants to be the victim of a public shaming. Ironically, the reader may agree with the assumption that one must lie to get ahead in the world of business. Again, the reader is drawn into the text when the future of society is placed on the moral development of its children. Parents become sympathetic to the message when dishonesty is believed to be detrimental to our children. An underlying tone of fear is created by references to abandoning integrity, breaches in the moral fabric, the danger of departing from truth, and the “lethal threat” to democracy that is created by children not being taught honesty. Using an emotional appeal to the reader is effective because of the personal

Damon fails to create a convincing logical argument to support his thesis statement. Falling guilty to the fallacy of oversimplifying, the author claims that dishonesty alone will be responsible for the demise of civilized society. Laying the blame on the education system as a whole for no longer teaching honesty, or for teachers actively encouraging dishonesty, does not recognize the academic institutions and individual educators that make honesty and academic integrity a core precept. The examples of academic maleficence are valid support for the argument, but do not support the generalization of “organized and systemic misconduct” within the education system. Secondly, Mr. Damon assumes that children learn their moral code exclusively from the education system; offering only a minor concession to parental influence. This fallacy could cause a reaction by parents who feel their role in raising their own children is being usurped. Mr. Damon fails to recognize the relationship that parents and schools jointly bear for instilling a moral code in children. Additionally, the suggestion that children educated during the mid-twentieth century received a higher level of education and moral training because of the McGuffy Readers that were used to “dispense unambiguous moral lessons to students” is a false correlation. Finally, Mr. Damon places absolute value on the virtue of honesty as the basis of a moral code using the Roman goddess Veritas (truth), who was