More handpicked essays just for you.
Rhetorical analysis way of seeing essay
Rhetorical analysis way of seeing essay
Rhetorical analysis way of seeing essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the article “Bring Back Flogging” Jeff Jacoby writes that prison inmates are given a disservice more than people who used to be flogged in the 1600s. Flogging was a punishment that used for a wide variety of crimes and was usually done publicly with the victim being whipped an appointed number of times. Jacoby writes that flogging is a more educational experience than going to jail because it is an experience that the criminal will never forget. He goes on to say that another reason why prisons are obsolete is because they are so expensive and often times the prisoners do not come out reformed. He claims that prisons are a place that criminals can sharpen their skills and learn from each other so that they can perform even more heinous acts. Not only are inmates becoming better criminals but they also see their crimes as “status symbols” (197) the more despicable the crime the more respect from other inmates. The author writes that if the punishment for even small crimes were as severe a flogging then the measure of status would, over time, disappear. The article “Bring Back Flogging” by Jeff Jacoby writes about an unpopular topic through rational …show more content…
That the author not only has the right to say what they are but that their reasoning is the logical choice. In Jeff Jacoby’s work “Bring back Flogging” he tries to establish credit by starting his article by listing occurrences in the past when people were flogged and then announces what his real purpose is. By opening with a history of flogging instead of giving his position right away Jacoby widens his audience to readers with a different position. Readers will get invested in the argument before the meat of the article and will be more inclined to continue reading. Jacoby’s article is, however, one-sided; he doesn’t write the whole argument so it is difficult for his audience to draw their own
" With violence affecting so many lives, one can understand the desire driven by fear to lock away young male offenders. But considering their impoverished, danger-filled lives, I wonder whether the threat of being locked up for decades can really deter them from crime" (305). Hopkins is definitely not our stereotypical prisoner. Most generally, our view of prisoners is not that of someone who has this profound use of wording and this broad sense of knowledge.
Every civilized society makes laws that protect its values, and the society expects every single citizen to obey these laws. Whenever a citizen of a certain society breaks one of these laws, the rulers of the society dish out punishments they dim fit for the kind of crime committed. With this kind of justice system in place, criminals are either locked up in prison cells, whipped, or exiled from the society. In the essay, “Bring Back Flogging”, columnist Jeff Jacoby argues that flogging is much more superior to imprisonment and should be brought back as a method of punishing crime offenders like the Puritans did in the past. He is convinced that the shame associated with flogging would prevent offenders from going into crime professionally. Jacoby believes that whipping criminals has more educational value compared to locking them up in cells and that it saves a lot of money. Throughout the essay Jacoby attempts to build ethos even though it fell apart due to misconceptions. He relied mostly on the use of pathos by appealing to his reader’s emotions and using this as a base ground for his logos.
Heinrichs begins by explaining the art of rhetoric and laying out the basic tools of argument. He emphasizes the importance of using the proper tense to avoid arguing the wrong issue. Furthermore, he introduces logos, ethos and pathos and shows how to “wield” each rhetorical tool. In Part 2, Heinrichs discusses common logical fallacies as well as rhetorical fouls. He remarks rhetoric’s single rule of never arguing the inarguable and demonstrates how ethos helps to know whom to trust. In Part 3, Kairos becomes an important tool for knowing the right time to persuade one’s audience. In Part 4 of the novel, the author provides examples of how to use rhetorical tools previously introduced in the
The Punishment Imperative, a book based on the transition from a time when punishment was thought to be necessarily harsh to a time where reform in the prion system is needed, explains the reasons why the grand social experiment of severe punishment did not work. The authors of the book, Todd R. Clear and Natasha A. Frost, strongly argue that the previous mindset of harsh punishment has been replaced due to political shifts, firsthand evidence, and spending issues within the government. Clear and Frost successfully assert their argument throughout the book using quantitative and qualitative information spanning from government policies to the reintegration of previous convicts into society.
Likewise, these are used to purposely prompt the audience to think about the point being made, rather than elicit an answer. Further provoking the audience’s exploration into the objection to slavery and war, he expedited his own beliefs in the midst of constructing a commonly rejected belief with an urgent antidote for the people. Thoreau asks the audience why one would allow unjust laws against others to exist: “Unjust laws exist:. transgress them at once? Why is it not more.
One claim said that citizens pay around “$30,000 per inmate each year” (Jacoby 197). This grasps the reader’s attention by connecting their life to the problem; it is their money, a lot of their money, being used to imprison these criminals. The rates have increased on inmates since the 1980s by over 250% (Jacoby 1997). Jacoby declares that the prison system is terrible; he uses accurate and persuading evidence. According to Jacoby, flogging is faster, cheaper, and a more effective alternative to prison.
In “Bring Back Flogging”, Jeff Jacoby argues why the current criminal justice system in America is not effective or successful. As a solution, he suggests that America should bring back the old fashioned form of punishment once used by the puritans, flogging, as an alternative to imprisonment (198). This article originally appeared in the op-ed section of the Boston Globe newspaper. Therefore, the primary audience of this article is people who want to read arguments about controversial topics and have probably read some of his other articles. His argument that the current criminal justice system is not working is extremely convincing. He appeals to pathos and uses statistics to prove that thesis and to persuade the audience.
Throughout “Argument as Conversation,” Stuart Greene demonstrates the concept of supporting an argument through the use of varying conversations to encourage writers to research and support their own personal opinions. Greene begins by expressing that to take a stand on one argument it is necessary to extensive research on all aspects having to do with a topic. Greene also communicates that reading acts as one of the most important things a writer can do. While stating this Greene explains that the research conducted must contain counterarguments, context, and objections to the idea at hand. This research could be done in the form of a conversation. For example, listening to an argument and adding personal input, while receiving criticism
Thus, she creates a smaller audience of readers and weakens her message. This tendency causes her argument to sound one-sided and prevents a formation of common ground. Hooks’s efforts to help others preserve the background that "enable[s] one’s self development in the present, that sustain[s] and support[s], that enrich[s]" however, prevents her voice and opinions from being ignored (91). Bell Hook’s use of logical evidence is not as strong as her ethos. With the aid of facts and studies, an author’s logo is strengthened, and the audience is able to logically follow his or her thoughts, and perhaps come to agree with the claim made.
In “The Death Penalty” (1985), David Bruck argues that the death penalty is injustice and that it is fury rather than justice that compels others to “demand that murderers be punished” by death. Bruck relies on varies cases of death row inmates to persuade the readers against capital punishment. His purpose is to persuade readers against the death penalty in order for them to realize that it is inhuman, irrational, and that “neither justice nor self-preservation demands that we kill men whom we have already imprisoned.” Bruck does not employ an array of devices but he does employ some such as juxtaposition, rhetorical questions, and appeals to strengthen his argument. He establishes an informal relationship with his audience of supporters of capital punishment such as Mayor Koch.
Flogging…What is it? What purpose does it serve? For those of us who have never heard of flogging, flogging refers to “beating with a whip or strap or rope as a form of punishment” (“Flogging” 1). Throughout the 1600s, flogging was utilized by “Boston’s Puritan Forefathers” (Jacoby 1) as a method of corporal punishment for various crimes. Progressing forward, Jeff Jacoby, columnist for The Boston Globe, provides readers with his view of “Boston’s Forefathers’” system of punishment in his essay, “Bring Back Flogging.” Within the contents of his work, Jacoby describes how flogging was utilized as punishment in its day. One such example he utilizes involves a woman who pleaded guilty to committing adultery. He writes that her punishment was “fifteen stripes severally to be laid on upon her naked back at the Common Whipping post” (Jacoby 1). In his piece, Jacoby argues for the revival of flogging and Puritan style punishment in the United States. As well as this, the author illustrates how imprisonment has become society’s general form of punishment and has now become outdated. Jacoby proposes that in order to cut costs and prevent future crime within first time offenders the turn to flogging must be taken. Jacoby’s logic to his argument is that since crime rates are rising, keeping prisoners locked up is expensive, and “the penal system is choked to bursting” (Jacoby 1), prisons should be done away with and flogging should take the reins as the new form of corporal punishment. Bearing in mind the above, Jacoby’s argument on bringing back flogging is unconvincing for the reason that his assumptions are incoherent and flogging itself is inhumane and could prove to be ineffective.
In Western cultures imprisonment is the universal method of punishing criminals (Chapman 571). According to criminologists locking up criminals may not even be an effective form of punishment. First, the prison sentences do not serve as an example to deter future criminals, which is indicated, in the increased rates of criminal behavior over the years. Secondly, prisons may protect the average citizen from crimes but the violence is then diverted to prison workers and other inmates. Finally, inmates are locked together which impedes their rehabilitation and exposes them too more criminal
He suggests flogging, but he gives no evidence as to why flogging would be more effective. Since Jacoby does not consider any other alternatives to prison such as community service, loss of privileges, or in extreme cases, exile, his argument that flogging is the best alternative is unconvincing to the reader. Also, he fails to define flogging or give proof that physical punishment would lower the high crime rate in the United States. Thus, while his article raises compelling concerns about the American prison system, Jeff Jacoby fails to persuade his audience that flogging is the best alternative to
Furthermore, it will be looking at whether punishment could be re-imagined, and if so, what would it entail? The use of prison as a form of punishment began to become popular in the early 19th century. This was because transportation to colonies had started to decrease; transportation was the removing of an individual, in this case an offender, from its country to another country; usually for a period of seven to ten years and in some cases for ever. During this time prison was now being used as a means for punishment, this was in response to the declining of transportation to colonies. Thus, instead of transporting offenders to other colonies, they were now being locked away behind high walls of the prison.
Punishing the unlawful, undesirable and deviant members of society is an aspect of criminal justice that has experienced a variety of transformations throughout history. Although the concept of retribution has remained a constant (the idea that the law breaker must somehow pay his/her debt to society), the methods used to enforce and achieve that retribution has changed a great deal. The growth and development of society, along with an underlying, perpetual fear of crime, are heavily linked to the use of vastly different forms of punishment that have ranged from public executions, forced labor, penal welfare and popular punitivism over the course of only a few hundred years. Crime constructs us as a society whilst society, simultaneously determines what is criminal. Since society is always changing, how we see crime and criminal behavior is changing, thus the way in which we punish those criminal behaviors changes.