Federalist # 10

Father of the Constitution, leader in the War of 1812, fourth President of the United States, and author of Federalist #10 are labels that describe James Madison.  The Federalist #10 is just one of the many articles that make up The Federalist Papers.  Madison’s intended audience is the people of the United States.  The purpose of his argument is to convince U.S. citizens that the Articles of Confederation are too weak and the country will crumble.  In his argument he hopes to persuade people to ratify the Constitution. 

The country was divided in two: “Federalists”, who believed in a strong central government, and “Antifederalists”, who believed in the authority of individual states.  In Madison’s argument, he challenges two major Antifederalists’ objections to the Constitution.  The two objections Madison took on were that the government would be too large and powerful and that the Constitution would replace a direct democracy of smaller state governments with a republic.

Madison uses emotional appeals and logical techniques in his argument.  Madison talks about how some people are afraid of a government that is too powerful and how others are afraid factions that are too powerful.  Madison fears that factions will become too powerful and strong that they might take over.  He argues that we can control the effects of factions with the Constitution.  Madison believes that a republic set up by the Constitution is logical because is would refine and enlarge public views as well as allow broader more diverse opinions.  Madison definitely believed bigger is better. 

This argument makes Madison seem trustworthy by giving a brief background of him.  The article talks about some of his achievements, such as convincing other leaders to call the 1787 Constitutional Convention.  It mentions how Madison’s’ work at the convention earned him the name of “Father of the Constitution”.  It is also mentioned that he was a close friend of Thomas Jefferson and severed as his secretary of state.  Additionally, the article says that Madison served as a member of the House of Representatives and was the fourth president of the United States.  I think all the background information on James Madison definitely convinced readers that he was trustworthy.      

I think Madison’s emotional appeals and logical techniques make his argument successful.  Although I found the article a little hard to read because of some of the language he uses, I think the argument is overall very effective.  Madison achieved his goal and The Federalist Papers, are used by federal judges to interpret the Constitution.       

 

The Art of War

The Art of War, a philosophical text of ancient China, was wrote by Sun Tzu, who was a Chinese general.  It is believed to be written between 400 and 320 BCE, after the fall of the Chou Dynasty, during the Period of Warring States.  The purpose of this argument is to teach others to achieve a peaceful victory without conflict. 

 The article talks about the great military and political influence it has had for nearly 2,500 years.  In recent years, it has also been applied to the business world.  “The Art of War” has become a best seller among American business professions.  I believe when Sun Tzu wrote The Art of War his intended audience was simply army solider and leaders.  However, I think it is interesting that today the intended audience ranges from communist leaders like Mao Tse, who in 1949 used Tzu’s writing to seize power in China, to business men and women. 

Sun Tzu is perceived as trustworthy and honest.  He gained no personal befits from his writing other than personal satisfaction he received when his philosophies evoked thought and when others learned from them.  When writing “The Art of War”, Tzu assumed that people valued human life.  His writings focus on the importance of knowledge and strategy, rather than aimlessly attacking and killing the enemy.  Tzu believed the best strategy is to attack the enemy’s strategy, rather than cities.  Tzu wrote, “The worst policy is attack cities.  Attack cities only when there is no alternative“.  He assumed that others thought it was pointless to use deadly force when it can be avoided and that people valued human life.   

I think the composition has made such an impact and is still referred to today because of the way it is arranged and presented.  It is strutted in short epigrams with little expansion on each point, which provokes thought in the reader.  His language is simple yet effective.  I think the rhetorical effect of this structure makes the argument effective. 

Rhetorical Analysis- A Modest Proposal

Jonathan Swift, author of “A Modest Proposal”, wrote of about the starving people of Ireland in the early 1700’s.   The purpose of his argument is to raise awareness of the issue.  Swift persuades his audience by proposing an extreme and unethical solution, in hopes that he will get others to start thinking about actual solutions.            

Swift, a priest of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, creates positive ethos. He wrote the article because he cares about the poor and wants to see a solution.   Swift wants others to be aware of the crisis.  He assumes people value human life and care about the hungry and the poor.  Swift assumes that his audience will be upset and bothered by his suggestion to sell and eat poor children.  His intended audience is the people of Ireland.  However, this issue is still prevalent today. 

Swift uses emotional and ethical appeals to make his argument.  By swift jokingly proposing that we eat the children he is appealing to paternal feelings.  He knows that many will be emotionally affected by his suggestion because no one would want their own child to be someone’s’ dinner.  Swift wanted to draw attention to the issue and he assumed most, if not all, would believe it is unethical to eat another human being.  I believe he used illogical reasoning and showed no remorse in order to get peoples attention. 

The language and style of his argument is probably why it is still popular today.  Swift used descriptive language to make his argument effective.  He not only suggests we eat children; he gave a detailed description.  Also, his use of satire throughout the article made his argument more effective.  I believe that without his use of satire his argument would not stand out like it does.  His language and use of satire are what makes his argument so effective. 

The purpose of this argument is to raise awareness about the poor starving people of Ireland.  The author, Jonathan Swift, proposes an unreasonable solution to draw attention to the problem.  With his use of satire, Swift hopes to get people thinking about alternative solutions that are more reasonable.  Overall, Swift wants to see an end to the starving people in Ireland. 

George Orwell, an English journalist, wrote about the impact of our language and how we use it.  Orwell wrote “Politics and the English Language” shortly after World War II.  Orwell argues that careless and vague use of language creates a continuous cycle of careless and thoughts.  He believes that if people continue to be lazy and use empty language and dead metaphore, there will be a continuous cycle of thoughts corrupting language and language then corrupting thoughts.  Orwell believes this could ultimately lead to dishonest thought and political corruption.  Orwell’s intended audience was the people of postwar England.  However, I think the article could apply to the people in today’s world and  they could learn and befit from reading it. 

Orwell first presents his argument with a negative attitude.  He presents five examples of common misuses of the Englisg language.  He uses certian words such as ugly, foolish,  to persuade his audience Towards the end Orwell gives the article or postive spin.  He explains many problmes with launguage and how to aviod listening to and misusing language.  Orwell states that he realizes we can’t change everyones language, but we we make a effort to change our own. 

Orwell gives off a positive ethos throughout this article.  His writings show that he cares  about his country and the people.  He also shows that he doesn’t want communism to take over England.  It is clear that his is passionate about writing and doesn’t want the English language or his country to go downhill.  When writing “Politics and the English Language”, Orwell assumes that people value literature and language and don’t want to see it fall.  He also assumes that people share his views about Communism and don’t want to see their county crumble under Communism rule. 

Orwell uses logical techniques as well as emotional and ethical appeals to support his argument.  Orwell cites five passages that he believes “illustrate various of the mental vices from which we now suffer”.  He then shows readers how to recognize things such as ready made phrases or vague language or dead metaphors.  Orwell emotionally appeals to his audience by trying to put fear into them.  He warns the public that if the cycle is not broken they will become vulnerable and may be taken advantage of; ultimately causing the county to fall to Communism.  Furthermore, Orwell is ethical in writing this article.  His motive is to rid the country of political corruption.  He doesn’t want fame or fortune; he just wants to inform the public.  Furthermore, Orwell believes writers have a moral obligation to be honest and sincere.  He thinks that writers who misuse language are unethical. 

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!