Claims of fact are well known for raising controversy and challenging popular beliefs. Taylor Pearson, the author of an epideictic article"Why You Should Fear Your Toaster More Than Nuclear Power", develops an argument that nuclear power is not at all dangerous to human health, and the fear of nuclear power is nothing more than the media over-exaggeration.
In developing his argument, Pearson mainly uses second-hand evidence. When addressing the "the likelihood of a nuclear power plant killing large numbers of people", the author brings in historical example of the Chernobyl accident, "the worst and most lethal nuclear incident to date." He combines it with several pieces of quantitative evidence, such as "the incident has killed only eighty-two people", "thirty-two were killed in the effort to put out fires", and "thirty-eight died...as a result of acute radiation poisoning." Such use of evidence can be called effective - not only does he bring in an example and then support it with factual evidence, Pearson's diction, such as the use of "only" and "few", further contributes to the argument of nuclear energy not being as dangerous as it is often believed to be.
Besides historical examples, Pearson uses expert opinion, another form of second-hand evidence, to persuade the audience of his position on nuclear power. John McCarthy, a computer science professor at Stanford, and his studies are used to prove that "nuclear waste problem is exaggerated." The author also heavily relies on various organizations, such as U.S. Energy Information Administration and U.S. Food and Drugs Administration, to push his agendas forward. Using other experts and organizations in Pearson's argument develops his ethos - credibility - and the reader is more likely to believe in his claim, since he is not the only person who thinks that nuclear energy is not dangerous and is needed - there are others.
In the last section of the article, Pearson for the first time uses his "I". He does so in his development of "limitations" of the topic, "I've done a lot here in an attempt to defend nuclear energy, I still acknowledge it's not perfect." This "acceptance" of "non-perfectness" makes Pearson more trustworthy in the eyes of the audience - he is not just bluntly defending nuclear power and rejecting its negative effects, he agrees that it could be managed in a more efficient and "clean" way. And this is how, with the use of first and second-hand evidence, Pearson created a successful argument of fact.
In developing his argument, Pearson mainly uses second-hand evidence. When addressing the "the likelihood of a nuclear power plant killing large numbers of people", the author brings in historical example of the Chernobyl accident, "the worst and most lethal nuclear incident to date." He combines it with several pieces of quantitative evidence, such as "the incident has killed only eighty-two people", "thirty-two were killed in the effort to put out fires", and "thirty-eight died...as a result of acute radiation poisoning." Such use of evidence can be called effective - not only does he bring in an example and then support it with factual evidence, Pearson's diction, such as the use of "only" and "few", further contributes to the argument of nuclear energy not being as dangerous as it is often believed to be.
Besides historical examples, Pearson uses expert opinion, another form of second-hand evidence, to persuade the audience of his position on nuclear power. John McCarthy, a computer science professor at Stanford, and his studies are used to prove that "nuclear waste problem is exaggerated." The author also heavily relies on various organizations, such as U.S. Energy Information Administration and U.S. Food and Drugs Administration, to push his agendas forward. Using other experts and organizations in Pearson's argument develops his ethos - credibility - and the reader is more likely to believe in his claim, since he is not the only person who thinks that nuclear energy is not dangerous and is needed - there are others.
In the last section of the article, Pearson for the first time uses his "I". He does so in his development of "limitations" of the topic, "I've done a lot here in an attempt to defend nuclear energy, I still acknowledge it's not perfect." This "acceptance" of "non-perfectness" makes Pearson more trustworthy in the eyes of the audience - he is not just bluntly defending nuclear power and rejecting its negative effects, he agrees that it could be managed in a more efficient and "clean" way. And this is how, with the use of first and second-hand evidence, Pearson created a successful argument of fact.
No comments:
Post a Comment