The question that was asked to the candidates was "How much can we reduce our foreign oil dependency during your first term? Give a specific number." The first obvious thing I found about this part of the debate was that John McCain was using pathos. He was setting the mood and trying to convince the audience that Barack Obama was making a wrong decision or had a wrong point of view. He tried to put Obama in a corner and make the audience feel the same way he was. He was talking about the NAFTA, North America Free Trade Agreement. He was criticizing Barack for openly talking about trade agreements with other countries. Barack Obama really didn’t pick at McCain. He said his opinion about the question and stated his response clearly. However, he did not jump on anything about McCain. He tried to defend himself in a couple sentences at the end of his response. John McCain is a very credible man. He has served in the Army and has been faithful to our country all his life. I think this is why when I hear the word ethos, I think of him. When he spoke, I believed every word that he said. I can trust in him and his opinion. The answer to the question that he gave, seems sensible and well thought through. I also think that what he wants to do about the problem is obtainable. Barack’s response seemed far-fetched and I don’t know if he really had a plan or a bunch of little opinions stuck together. Maybe when he gets everything put together in a plan, it will sound better. I don’t know why, but when Barack Obama speaks, I have a problem with trusting and believing him. I really couldn’t find that many examples of logos. There wasn’t very many ways and examples of an exact logo. This debate was set up to influence and persuade an audience. I believe that both candidates did a very good job at stating where they stand on each and every topic. It is important for both of them to come off as credible and trustworthy. How you speak and present yourself during a debate is one of the most important parts of an election. If you say the wrong thing, you will lose votes. But if you can speak well and present yourself in a positive way, you will gain votes. Eventually this will lead towards you getting elected as President. Debates are full of different parts of logos, ethos, and pathos. Each part of a debate has a different aspect that is important to hit on. This debate was a great example of all of them put together to successfully persuade people.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Presidential Debate
The question that was asked to the candidates was "How much can we reduce our foreign oil dependency during your first term? Give a specific number." The first obvious thing I found about this part of the debate was that John McCain was using pathos. He was setting the mood and trying to convince the audience that Barack Obama was making a wrong decision or had a wrong point of view. He tried to put Obama in a corner and make the audience feel the same way he was. He was talking about the NAFTA, North America Free Trade Agreement. He was criticizing Barack for openly talking about trade agreements with other countries. Barack Obama really didn’t pick at McCain. He said his opinion about the question and stated his response clearly. However, he did not jump on anything about McCain. He tried to defend himself in a couple sentences at the end of his response. John McCain is a very credible man. He has served in the Army and has been faithful to our country all his life. I think this is why when I hear the word ethos, I think of him. When he spoke, I believed every word that he said. I can trust in him and his opinion. The answer to the question that he gave, seems sensible and well thought through. I also think that what he wants to do about the problem is obtainable. Barack’s response seemed far-fetched and I don’t know if he really had a plan or a bunch of little opinions stuck together. Maybe when he gets everything put together in a plan, it will sound better. I don’t know why, but when Barack Obama speaks, I have a problem with trusting and believing him. I really couldn’t find that many examples of logos. There wasn’t very many ways and examples of an exact logo. This debate was set up to influence and persuade an audience. I believe that both candidates did a very good job at stating where they stand on each and every topic. It is important for both of them to come off as credible and trustworthy. How you speak and present yourself during a debate is one of the most important parts of an election. If you say the wrong thing, you will lose votes. But if you can speak well and present yourself in a positive way, you will gain votes. Eventually this will lead towards you getting elected as President. Debates are full of different parts of logos, ethos, and pathos. Each part of a debate has a different aspect that is important to hit on. This debate was a great example of all of them put together to successfully persuade people.
Chapter 1 & 2 Questions
Chapter 1
~ What is the best way to analyze something rhetorically?
~ What happens if you analyze and take the information different than what the author meant it to be taken?
~ When authors add text to their work is it more affective? Or does it affect how we interpret?
Chapter 2
~ What is the best rhetorical strategey?
~ What makes a logo fail or not appeal to an audience?
~ What makes the most effective logo?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)