Both are introspective “by pursuing activities that dovetail with

Both authors of the articles “The Secret to Deeper Happiness Is Simpler Than You Might Think” by Ginny Graves and “Happiness is Other People” by Ruth Whippman had opposing views on achieving happiness. Although the articles have certain similarities and differences on how people can achieve happiness. Graves’s article seems to be more persuasive as her claims are backed by scientific research and logical reasoning. Her professional style and the tone of words she chose to use are likely to sway the opinions her audience. As compared to Graves, Whippman seems to be inconsistent in her stand on how happiness can be achieved. Moreover, the claims that she made are not sufficiently backed by evidence and her article carries strong language and a threatful tone that made it seem unprofessional in comparison to Graves. Firstly, both authors started off having similar perspectives on pursuing happiness. However, Whippman’s (2017) stand shifted from saying that “happiness should be engineered from the inside out” (para. 4) as the “search of happiness should be an individual, self-focused enterprise” OSX1 (para. 6) to saying that “our happiness depends on other people” (para. 12). This inconsistency in her article made it hard for content interpretation for her audience which ultimately undermines the reliability of her article and hence making it less persuasive as compared to Graves’s. On the other hand, Graves’s article excels in what Whippman’s article lacks in. In the entire article, Graves (2017) has been saying that happiness can be found when we are introspective “by pursuing activities that dovetail with your values” (para. 2)  and by “learning to cope with the tough stuff(s)” (para. 8) which “can go a long way toward(s) making you happier” (para. 8). The consistency in her article triggers thought processes of the audience which increases the persuasiveness of her article contrary to Whippman’s.Secondly, Graves was more efficacious in quoting evidence to support her claims. Unlike her, Whippman (2017) made claims like “neglecting our social relationship” being “dangerous to our health” (para. 15), which are not supported by clearly cited evidence. As such, a rational person may not see any correlation between how does one neglecting their social life brings harm to them. This article, in turn, could come off well as just an assumption. Hence, Whippman fails to effectively sway the audiences’ perspective on achieving happiness which resulted in her lack of persuasiveness. In contrast, Graves argues that happiness comes from within rather than from external factors. The claims that she made are backed by sound reasoning, scientific research and professionals in the related fieldsOSX2 . As opposed to Whippman, Graves (2017) quoted Robert Lustig, a Medical Doctor, that happiness can be achieved by controlling our inner desires of attaining materials for short-term satisfaction as “the brain releases the reward chemical dopamine” (para. 4) each time it happens and “over time (we) need more and more of those hits to get the same effect” (para. 4). This ultimately results in “the constant seeking of pleasure” and makes it “harder to feel happy” (para. 4). This depicts the vicious cycle of satisfaction which implies that the source of happiness should come from within.OSX3  Hence, instead of seeking happiness externally, we should work from the inside by incorporating “tiny hits of joy and gratitude” and training our “mind to incline toward joy” (para. 6). Therefore, the reliability and appeal to ethos OSX4 of Graves’s claims far exceed that of Whippman’s, which made her more persuasive.Lastly, Whippman’s strong language and her choice of words undermine her credibilityOSX5 . She employs words like “shockingly dangerous” and “premature death” when conveying her claims on the consequence of a lack of social connections (Whippman, para. 15). Her choice of words carries an exaggerated tone which may trigger doubts regarding her claims. This threatens the persuasiveness of her argument. In addition, she uses phrases like “investigating her own innards trying to locate her bliss” (Whippman, para. 3) which is rather unprofessional and unpleasant for her audience. This would likely have a negative impact on her persuasiveness. Contrary to Whippman, Graves uses a more advisory approach and pleasant tone which would increase the receptiveness of her audience. She uses words like “allow happiness to bubble up” (Graves, para 2) by doing activities that “dovetail with your values” (Graves, para 2). The use of such words gives the article a relaxed feel, placing readers to be in an open-minded state and hence making her more persuasive than Whippman.Overall, Graves’s provision of strong supporting facts, tone, language, and the use of pathos triumphs over Whippman’s attempt at convincing the audience. Additionally, Whippman’s unprofessional choice of words, strong language and inconsistency severely weakened her persuasive appeal towards the audience as compared to Graves’s.