Analysis of Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised
Why the pledge of allegiance should be revised, by Gwen Wilde, is a very well written essay that the reader would most likely deem convincing. Gwen Wilde states that the Pledge in its latest from simply requires all Americans to say the phrase “one nation, under God,” when many Americans do not believe in God. She uses many different writing strategies to get her point across in a very precise and appropriate manner. Although there are some minor problems, this analysis will explain how Gwen Wilde uses certain writing strategies that are able to back her argument with a very convincing approach. In the essay, the author appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos very well. Although she appeals to the reader mainly through reason, there are instances in which she also appeals to the emotions of the reader and to her own character that make the essay better. Had she strictly given examples which appeal only to logos, the essay would not be as convincing. Gwen Wilde gives a good sense of character in her essay by having written it properly and appropriately. There are few instances of non-rational appeal that don’t cloud the essay and provide clearer understanding to her reason without putting the reader off. One example of non-rational appeal would be her use of irony in which she acknowledged that the Americans who don’t believe in God “may be wrong” and “may learn of their error at Judgment Day,” which is contradictory to her argument, but provides the reader with a sense of connection to her opinion and her argument. An instance in which the author appeals to the readers’ sense of emotion would be how she connects the reader with a convincing sense of true patriotism and pride by stating that some Americans who are not religious by any means have fought and died keeping America free. Although she gives no statistical evidence in this claim, this statement does have emotional connection. As for the authors...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document