Rhetorical Devices
When writing about an extremely controversial topic, such as the levels of which humans and animals should be compared based on mental capabilities, it can be difficult for an author to approach this topic in a respectful way that will also compel their readers to continue reading the entire article. It is important that the author stays respectful while writing about the topic, but also that they focus on which rhetorical devices they are using to ensure that the readers will respond well to the articles purpose. Throughout these two articles, many of the same rhetorical devices are used, such as terminology, pronouns, paper structure, etc.; however, the specific placement and use of these devices differ based on the purpose of each article.
…show more content…
In Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer employs formal yet common terminology that is easy to understand in order to persuade his readers to see his point of view, whereas in Liberté, Égalité, Animalité: Human-Animal Comparisons in Law, Peters uses formal terminology that has more of a basis in law, which would be confusing to the common reader, because this paper is not meant for persuasion. For example, in Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer states that “In the case of applying this to people with severe and profound cognitive disabilities, there is also a problem about saying who the ‘‘we’’ are” (Singer 572). In this example, Singer uses careful, formal diction when approaching a controversial topic: comparing people with “profound mental disabilities” to animals with high mental …show more content…
The use of legal diction is clear in the statement “This extends from the institution of stewardship…the Anglo-Saxon writ of habeas corpus” (Peters 35). The term “habeas corpus” is recognizable by many people, but it is not known unanimously to the general public, therefore some readers would have to use an outside source to look up the term. This suggests the idea that Peters’ intended audience was not the general public, and that her purpose was to inform other legal scholars of the concept of speciesism, rather than to persuade others to agree with her point of view.
Perhaps the most important rhetorical aspect of each paper is the overall structure and order of the author’s ideas as they present their opinions and their purpose to the audience. Throughout Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer presents his information in a very specific way, beginning with the controversial statement that not all humans are above animals, and that there should be a
In Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer employs formal yet common terminology that is easy to understand in order to persuade his readers to see his point of view, whereas in Liberté, Égalité, Animalité: Human-Animal Comparisons in Law, Peters uses formal terminology that has more of a basis in law, which would be confusing to the common reader, because this paper is not meant for persuasion. For example, in Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer states that “In the case of applying this to people with severe and profound cognitive disabilities, there is also a problem about saying who the ‘‘we’’ are” (Singer 572). In this example, Singer uses careful, formal diction when approaching a controversial topic: comparing people with “profound mental disabilities” to animals with high mental …show more content…
The use of legal diction is clear in the statement “This extends from the institution of stewardship…the Anglo-Saxon writ of habeas corpus” (Peters 35). The term “habeas corpus” is recognizable by many people, but it is not known unanimously to the general public, therefore some readers would have to use an outside source to look up the term. This suggests the idea that Peters’ intended audience was not the general public, and that her purpose was to inform other legal scholars of the concept of speciesism, rather than to persuade others to agree with her point of view.
Perhaps the most important rhetorical aspect of each paper is the overall structure and order of the author’s ideas as they present their opinions and their purpose to the audience. Throughout Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer presents his information in a very specific way, beginning with the controversial statement that not all humans are above animals, and that there should be a