Common Sense And Plain Truth Analysis

877 Words4 Pages
During a time of great tribulations, each colonist would be forced to chose a side. Their options were either to fight for their rights and freedom or stay loyal to the royal monarchy of Britain. Both sides had support from people of great power. Two men by the names of Thomas Paine and James Chalmers wrote to defend their position and influence others to do the same with pamphlets titled Common Sense and Plain Truth, respectively. After reading, re-reading and analyzing both of the documents, it is clear that each hold debatable arguments, however, when pinned against each other and set side by side, Common Sense holds more power and influence, whereas Plain Truth highlights greater intellectual and logical arguments.
In order to fully comprehend
…show more content…
Plain Truth breaks Paine’s points apart and continuously addresses each of Common Sense’s memorable statements. Chalmers clearly decides to attack Paine and his words, rather than stating why one should choose Britain over the colonies. In response to how America should stay out of “European contentions,” Chalmers argues that one of the great advantages of staying connected to Britain would be that America would “avoid the horrors and calamities of…show more content…
Paine and Chalmers are both men that are able to argue their points with some testament and truth. They each utilize rhetorical questions within their respective pamphlets as well as pathos and logos, however, the two utilize the same literary tools at different capacities. When reading both documents, one should notice how simple and easy Common Sense is to read. It is compensable to the common man, which is why so many colonists may have sided with Paine over Chalmers. Even though Plain Truth holds more logic within its text, it is rather difficult to read as it uses strong literary references and plenty of indications to
Open Document