Sharing is caring. When two people live under the same roof, they tend to build a strong relationship between them. Sentimental relationship, engaged or married in all of them, a person has to share his or her lifestyle with another person. According to Amie Gordon with her article “The “Cohabitation Effect”: The Consequences of Premarital Cohabitation (Psych Your Mind Wednesday, August 22, 2012) she gives an advice to the reader, to think twice before cohabitating with your partner. Does this article works? I don’t support her ideas. Cohabitation is essential for marriage; otherwise if couples move in together after marriage, chances are they will be involved in more arguments or fights. This article is based on logos. For example, when she writes: “ According to the US Census, nearly half of all marriages end in divorce”. She did research to support her ideas and writes in single, student persona. Her tone …show more content…
If it isn’t right for you –don’t simply slide into marriage you aren’t sure about because it seems like the time is right.” She changed her tone from informative/ educational to an advice. This is her credibility about the article in other words her ethos, but she changed her persona to an advisor. Which is confusing when people make those drastic changes on a paper.
Amie Gordon has reasonable points and ideas that support her thoughts, but for me I feel like everyone is different. For some people cohabitation before marriage is inappropriate and for others is not. I would rather live with someone and learn about his lifestyle and the daily routine, get scared or fascinated by the other person before getting in to marriage. Marriage it’s a big deal, and I respect it and I think people should not be taking it for
The speaker's relationship with her husband had to go over a few changes. At first, she did not want anything to do with her husband, she was still fourteen years old consequently feeling unready on handling such a big responsibility, but she had no other choice but to stay with him as she was a part of an arranged marriage. Later on, the speaker accepts her relationship with her husband and
Quindlen uses logos effectively by using facts from other sources. It shows when she tells us that, “The agriculture Department estimated in 1999 that twelve million children were hungry or at risk of going hungry.” This is only a small example of the facts she uses. Another example is when she tells us that, “A group of big-city mayors released a study showing that in 200, requests for food assistance from families increased almost 20 percent, more than at any time in the last decade.” These examples show how she is using logos to persuade readers.
Logos appeals to reason, which are things like facts and statistics, and it works in the writers favor because it gives more information to the reader, which in turn builds the writer’s case. Nemko opens up almost right away with a “killer statistic” that warns of the fact that even if a student is giving an extended amount of time, if he or she did not graduate from high school in the top half of their class it is very unlikely that they will earn some kind of college degree. That is one statistic that is never heard, which is why it is stunning and a great way for Nemko to start off his argument. The fact that Nemko applies logos to his argument is the first reason why I agree with his proposal that too many young adults go to
One example of Logos is found in paragraph 9: “Three of every five Americans are overweight. One of every five is obese.” Pollan is using a statistic in order to emphasize to his reader the point he is intending to make. Another excellent example of logos would be, “Since the Nixon administration, farmers in the United States have managed to produce 500 additional calories per person every day (up from 3,000, already substantially more than we need); each of us is, heroically managing to put away 200 of those surplus calories at the end of their trip up the food chain.” Most Americans would find this statistic staggering as well as impactful as considering their options in the republic of fat. Another example is when he stated, “Since 1997, an American’s average daily intake of calories has jumped by more than ten percent.” This statistic is showing how the change in calories is increasing our unhealthy eating
The logos aspect appears to be the weakest up until her last few paragraphs. Her descriptions and explanation of trigger warnings and safe spaces provide some logos in the beginning, but towards the end is when she begins citing articles on issues that she is discussing. The sources she uses seem to be reliable—The Chicago Maroon, The New York Times, even the University of Chicago’s
The author uses pathos and logos several times in this writing. Pathos is in use when the author says, “Attempts to add sexual orientation to the federal statute began shortly after the brutal murder of young Matthew Sheppard in Wyoming, apparently because of his homosexuality.” He uses logos when he says, “ the yearly number of hate-crimes charges brought by the Justice Department dropped from seventy-six in 1996 to twenty-two ten years later.
In “Cohabitation instead of Marriage” by James Q. Wilson, he believes that marriage is a necessity in today’s day of life, but you do not get this conclusion till completing the article. He states that marriage is built to maintain a family but we trust teachers to teach our children, daycare to care for them, and police officers to keep them safe and that, that does not leave left for the mother or the father to fo. He then proceeds to say that if the couple does not want children then there is nothing for the marriage to offer and to why not just live together, without the actual title of marred. Just live together with no legal formality and cohabitate. By this statement alone James Q Wilson makes you believe that he is pro-cohabitation
Rindfuss RR, VandenHeuvel A. 1990. Cohabitation: a precursor to marriage or an alternative to being single? Pop. Dev. Rev. 16:703 26
It is not a new thought that today’s young Americans are facing issues, problems and difficult decisions that past generations never had to question. In a world of technology, media, and a rough economy, many young adults in America are influenced by a tidal wave of opinions and life choices without much relevant advice from older generations. The Generation Y, or Millennial, group are coming of age in a confusing and mixed-message society. One of these messages that bombard young Americans is the choice of premarital cohabitation. Premarital cohabitation, or living together without being married (Jose, O’Leary & Moyer, 2010), has increased significantly in the past couple of decades and is now a “natural” life choice before taking the plunge into marriage. Kennedy and Bumpass (2008) state that, “The increase in cohabitation is well documented,such that nearly two thirds of newlyweds have cohabited prior to their first marriage”(as cited in Harvey, 2011, p. 10), this is a striking contrast compared with statistics of our grandparents, or even parents, generations. It is such an increasing social behavior that people in society consider cohabitation “necessary” before entering into marriage. Even more, young Americans who choose not to cohabitate, for many different reasons, are looked upon as being “old-fashioned”, “naive”, or “unintelligent”. This pressure for young people to cohabitate before marriage is a serious “modern-day” challenge; especially when given research that states, “... most empirical studies find that couples who cohabited prior to marriage experience significantly higher odds of marital dissolution than their counterparts who did not cohabit before marriage”, stated by Jose (2010) and colleagues (as c...
N.p., 2013. Web. 11 May 2014. Leckey, Robert. " Cohabitation and Comparative Method.
She uses testimonial device to bring in the well-known reliable source known as Llewellyn Hinkes-Jones from “The Atlantic” to help support her case. She uses pathos to appeal to her audience’s emotions by pulling on their heartstrings. She uses the logos to provide support to her article which she means to convince her audience by use of logic, reason, or statistics. She uses euphemism to make something harsh or distasteful sound in a somewhat positive way. She uses ethos to convince her audience of her credibility. There are very few weaknesses in her article which are greatly outweighed by the many strengths in
Also the article talks about divorce in this kind of society and about if a younger brother wants to leave the marriage. The article then goes into talking about how this marriage is materialistic for this society. Then it goes into Dorje’s reasoning for the marriage along with the wife’s view on the marriage too.
Ethos and logos are used as an appeal in the essay. It was a story with a lot of emotion which she had successfully handled in the whole essay. She presented the essay in the real life with many facts, she gave poetic touch to her essay because of some of the metaphors she used like we didn 't breathe it. She used both logos and pathos in
There are many advantages and disadvantages in living together before marriage. Today there are many couples living together before marriage. Sometimes these kinds of relationships 'living together before marriage' end up with success and sometimes they are unsuccessful. Some of the advantages of living together before marriage are such as getting to know your partner, learning about one's abilities if he/she can satisfy your expectations and more. Also, there are some disadvantages in living together before marriage and they are such as religious and family values, parenting problems and more. I think there are more advantages then disadvantages in living together before marriage, because sometimes disadvantages in this kind of relationship are avoidable.
There are three reasons that cohabitation before marriage is beneficial; it allows couples to learn one another and as a team forms an identity, decide if marriage is for you, and lowers the divorce rate.