Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in My Text

In this post I will be analyzing several different rhetorical approaches in my text. I will be analyzing the ethical, logical and emotional arguments in my text. In each of the of the rhetorical arguments I will be answering several questions associated with them.

Tomisti, "Aristotle in Nuremberg Chronicle" uploaded 27 October 2005 via wikipedia.com, Public Domain.

Ethical

• What are some devices the author uses?
• Expertise- "I hold degrees in physics and have spent a lot of time learning and teaching quantum mechanics."
• Reliable Resources: The author utilizes hyperlinks so the reader can be directed to more information on the subjects.
• Counterarguments- "I’ll hedge my bets: Maybe there’s room for some small quantum effects in the brain, but I sincerely doubt those will be directly relevant for consciousness."
• How and why would the author use these?
• The author uses the three devices above because overall it strengthens his argument. The author uses his expertise by stating that he has taught quantum physics and has a PhD in physics to show that he knows about quantum mechanics. The use of reliable sources shows that he draws his information from sources that don't provide "crackpot" information. Finally the acknowledgement of the counterargument shows that he knows about the other peoples opinions and can put them down in a logical manner.
• How do these affect the audience's view of the author's credibility?
• All of the above device add to the author;s credibility because it makes the audience think that he knows what he is talking about because he has a science background and provides information about the things hes talking about so the audience knows that hes not making up complete bullshit.
• How do these strategies affect the overall message of the text?
• The above strategies overall reinforce the credibility of the article. In doing so the author is reinforcing the message the article by providing less opportunities for the reader to poke holes in his argument.
• Does the author have biases that affect his credibility?
• Yes the author has a bias against people who are not as intelligent. For example, when the author says, "We don’t know exactly how some things in quantum physics work, we don’t know exactly how to go from the brain to consciousness, so maybe consciousness is quantum." which, while seems unbiased, actually has a somewhat condescending tone about it which takes away from the credibility of the author.

Emotional

• What are some devices the author uses? 
• Images:The author has a comic which breaks the text half way through to give the reader a break from reading
• Humor: The comic the author uses has a somewhat dark, yet still relevant humor to it.
• Tone of Voice: "We don’t know exactly how some things in quantum physics work, we don’t know exactly how to go from the brain to consciousness, so maybe consciousness is quantum." This is an example of a somewhat condescending tone of voice.
• What emotional responses is the author trying to create?
• The author is attempting to make the whole idea that is being criticized in the article seem like it is a funny idea that doesn't actually make much sense. This however at some times fails because he comes off sounding pretentious and condescending.
• What is the actual results?
• The actual results from the attempts to make the situation sound funny can come off as sounding slightly preachy. However he does succeed in making the opposing view point sound far fetched and funny.
• Are these strategies effective?
• In this specific situation I think that the strategies are effective because the intended audience is more of an educated audience who knows a little to a lot about quantum mechanics and related physics fields. Even though it may sound condescending, the author's use of it is not directed at the audience but rather people who don't know a lot about physics in general and buy bogus ideals which makes it effective for the audience he is speaking to.
• How does this affect the credibility of the author?
• The credibility of the author seems to be strengthened by using these emotional appeals because it shows that he knows 1) what he is talking about and able to use the humor and comic properly and 2) he knows who his audience is how he should speak to them.

Logical

• What strategies does the author employ?
• Logical tranisitions between sections: Each one of his paragraphs has a main point which ends with a connection to the following main idea.
• Expert opinion: The author uses both hyperlinks and his own expert opinion to help with the logical reasoning.
• Arrangement of text/images: The author breaks the text halfway through with a relevant comic which both ties his ideas together visually and breaks the text for amusement.
• What response is the author attempting to employ?
• The author is attempting to create a logical argument back by his credibility to relate to his audience. His audience is a generally educated audience which means that they relate heavily to the logical argument. This is why it is so important for the article to be logically structured and heavily based on logical arguments.
• What is the acutal result?
• The actual result is that the author produces a logically structured article that is more based off of his credibility and knowledge of the subject. This in turn makes the author's logical argument fall flat while the structure holds the logic together.
• Are these effective?
• To the audience he is talking to I think the effectiveness is not as effective as it could be. The audience, being generally educated, rely on strong logical arguments, which while its present in the article is not the strongest argument.