Rhetorical Analysis Of The Myth Of Justice

Authors have the choice of expository, descriptive, narrative, or persuasive when writing. Even though, they are different, they all have one thing in common, the author writes about it for a reason. Whether it’s for themselves or someone else the author has a strong feeling behind what they write and they want to share it. When an author chooses to write in persuasive writing the goal is to make the reader see what they see or to at least make them look at the point in a different way. When writing about broader subjects there are more possibilities people are going to have different ideas, so in The Myth of Justice there are multiple ways someone could look upon it. Personally I found the piece quite ineffective in style and content. In the article,

He first starts off with a few rhetorical questions asking how people began to believe that life was fair and who came up with the thought of justice. According to Dorris people who do believe in justice are too young and naive. He expresses this by giving

He strongly advocated his childhood in which he was brought up religiously and how he should live life with a goal in the end to be accepted into heaven. Also that the tooth fairy was a disappointment by not leaving a shiny quarter he then began to understand the truth. It seems the way Dorris was raised has given him the notion that life is unfair, I’m not saying he’s wrong but if he was brought up a different way maybe he would have different opinion. He even calls himself a downer when addressing that there’s divine justice in how people are assured a future where everyone knows their rewards and punishments. After reading this article I thought of it more as a “I’m right because” rather than a “I believe