Rhetorical Analysis: We D Be Fools

Imagine coming across an opinion article about the surge of medical technology in a newspaper, only to discover that the article is permeated with theoretical concepts such as eugenics, Singularity, cyberculture, and more! You notice that the author presents evidence from as far back as the beginning of human society. You barely remember events from three months ago; how are you expected to reason through complex arguments such as these? Clearly, the author should have written a more informal article to present their opinion and provide basic knowledge. James Hughes does just that. From “The Politics of Transhumanism and the Techno-Millennial Imagination, 1626-2030” and “The Human Condition Hurts: We’d Be Fools Not to Better It”, the readers

Hughes pays particular attention to the development of his introduction because he acknowledges the importance of the audience’s initial reaction to the concept of human enhancements in setting the stage as to how willing they would be in accepting Hughes’ argument. These introductions are effective in generating a sense of pride and awe in “The Human Condition Hurts: We’d Be Fools Not to Better It” and reflection in “The Politics of Transhumanism and the Techno-Millennial Imagination, 1626-2030” within their audience. Hughes is able to take advantage of these feelings and evoke his readers to view the debate from different mindsets. For example, in the academic journal, enhancement advocates and dissenters become self-aware of the increasing conflict regarding bio-enhancements. In contrast, the readers of the opinion article open their eyes to an issue they’ve either unknowingly dismissed or secretly feared - they’re now more open to the embracing of human enhancements. In this way, Hughes is able to gain the attention of both experts and non-experts simply through his introduction and sets a stage to further explore a complex topic. Hughes’ tactic of capturing the audience

The stark disparity of word choice needed in order to appeal to different audiences is revealed by the importance of terminology in “The Politics of Transhumanism and the Techno-Millennial Imagination, 1626-2030”, but not in “The Human Condition Hurts: We’d Be Fools Not to Better It”. In the op-ed article, Hughes employs informal and attention-catching language, easy for his audience to understand. In contrast, his academic article is directed towards experts already accustomed to the complex, theoretical ideas bursting within this field; as a result, he employs more specialized jargon. Hughes even adds in a list of keywords towards the end of his abstract: “Keywords: apocalypticism; body; cyberculture; End Times; Enlightenment; eugenics; extropians; libertarianism; millennialism; Singularity; technoprogressive; transhumanism” (The Politics of Transhumanism, 757) in order for academic experts to discover his article easily and provide a concise list of the topics explored in his work. Through this addition, Hughes proves the necessity of readers to be accustomed to these words when referencing his article; a marked contrast from his op-ed article, in which his choice of words are solely inserted for subtle humor, such as when describing the violent backlash that today’s ecologists would’ve stirred up during the adaptation of penicillin. “Deep ecologists warn