Graves andWhippman present their arguments of how happiness is derived using differentpersuasive techniques and structure. Graves has presented a more persuasivecase using all three modes of persuasion, which are engaging the audienceemotionally and provide sufficient evidence to back up her point.
Compared toWhippman, Graves appeals more to the audience on an emotional level with theuse of several persuasive techniques. Graves asked a couple of rhetoricalquestions such as ” You’re ecstatic, right?” and “But will all thismake you happier?”. Thought-provoking questions capture the interest of theaudience (Furtick) and allow readers to reflect. As the reader respondsaccordingly to those rhetorical questions, he subconsciously agrees to Graves’point of view as well.
(Huggard, Keaney, & Breuer, 2006) Graves also usescolloquial style to approach the readers in a friendlier manner. He uses wordslike “(sigh)”, “Yes, it sounds downright un-American”. The reader will feel asif the author is directly engaging the reader in a conversation and will beable to relate to the author on a deeper level. It is evident that Graves isusing pathos to reach out to the readers emotionally, allowing the author tobring out her argument through psychological connectivity. In contrast,Whippman uses formal language to convey his argument. Whippman uses words like”truism”, “natural byproduct” which makes her sound veryknowledgeable.
However, since the topic is on happiness, simple and concisesentences will bring a greater impact. Hence, Graves did a better job ofengaging the audience. Incontrast, Whippman excels better in appealing to credibility. In her article,she provides two sides of the issue on happiness.
She expresses her view thatsome soul-searching and reflection are necessary for a healthy psychologicallifestyle. At the same time, she proves her argument that the “individualistculture” is reducing communications among people, which is also an essentialpart of happiness. Her counterargument increases her credibility as her writingshows unbiased. She further proves her credibility by using anecdote and herexperience of “Having spent the last few years researching and writing a bookabout happiness and anxiety in America”. Whippman uses ethos to persuade herreader that she is fair and has expertise in that field.
Throughout thearticle, Whippman tries to build her reputation to make herself worth listeningto. In Graves’ article, she only explains howhappiness is obtained from within from the start to the end of the article.There was little sign of experience in that field as well. However, she seemsto have done her research well on the topic as she is able to provide somescientific terms such as meditation “gray matter concentration in the parts ofthe brain”.
This helps to increase her trustworthiness and proves to herreaders that she knows what she is talking about. Therefore, Whippman excelsbetter in ethos than Graves.