Comparative rhetorical analysis

There are two articles about different stances on arguing. One writer, Tannen, writes in her article that arguing is getting out of hand in the media. Everywhere we look arguments have to be taken to the extreme to excite the audience and ultimately leads to humans being disconnected from one another. The other article, written by Heinrichs, writes about how he teaches his kids to argue and argue correctly. He uses these methods to increase harmony within the family. Although both articles are very well written, the article written by Heinrichs’ has more merit. Teaching his little ones to argue correctly and valid logical reasoning to back it up. Using this type of method his kids are able to behave themselves enabling Heinrich to interact with them in a way dumbfounds other parents. The article “For Arguments Sake,” focus more on pathos, trying to appeal to our emotions mainly. Tannen writes about how she was invited to a talkshow to talk about her book and another guest speaker chews her out about the book. The guest speaker talks to Tannen about her book before the show he tells her that he actually likes the book, but he has to chew her out on it to get a reaction from the audience. This is his sole job that he is hired for. This fact is there to upset us and get her on her side of the story that arguing is out of control. She adds many more examples that get us flustered and gets us ready to sign up for the movement away from arguing all the times just for arguments sake. This method does a great job of persuading, but Heinrichs pulls off a great article, as well. Heinrich uses mainly pathos in his article as well. Instead of the angry tone of Tenner, he tells cute stories of his kids and how he uses teaching his kids to argue to bring a bit of stability and civility in interacting with a child. As these writers go through their various examples they are building up their credibility of the authors, therefore, applying ethos to the articles. Heinrichs’ articles start off by stating that it has been nominated for awards already showing off his credibility. And as Tennen’s article goes on it tells of shows she has attended, books she has written and has a radio show showing that many people listen to her and agree with her point of views. Although both essays use similar rhetorical appeal, Tennen really hits it home by connecting with the audience and with more real life examples. Tennen’s article is targeted towards a broad variety of people. She uses examples from TV programs, legal battles, political mishaps, and examples from the classroom. In one of her example of the history teacher that is listening to her students arguing and not getting much learning content out of it, but the history teacher is patting herself on the back for this. Tennen uses this example as a reflection of the state of the classroom, but this is flawed logic as most respectable classrooms a debate would be closely monitored by the professor. Any points veering off topic would be brought back around and the professor. The professor may also go around the room calling upon the quieter students to make sure that they understand the material. Heinrichs’ article more geared towards parents to read. First of all it is published in a Disney Wondertime magazine, a magazine that teaches parents about the various tips on how to raise their kids. In the article, he builds credibility as he reveals that he is a parent himself of two children. His different stories really ring home with parents as these are stories that can be taking place within any family. In each example, he really leads his kids with meticulous resolve, and great patience that is very admirable quality. The main fallacy with Tenner’s essay is that she is putting a blanket statement that all forms of arguments are barbaric, and is a form of ritualistic fighting. Her stance is that the verbally combative individuals will only take part in this type of fight, and this animosity will spread like wildfire over a crowd. It leads to road rage and shooting sprees. Arguing, according to Tanner, really rips people apart and makes them disconnected with one another. To make such a statement is dangerous. There are other forms are arguing such as the stance that Heinrichs is taking. Where he is stating that arguing really puts you in the other person’s shoes. “An argument is good; a fight is not.” To win an argument you have to successfully put yourself in other opposition’s shoes and to bring them over to your point of thinking. The arguing that Tenner is talking about is not arguing at all. It is more a fight or argument by the stick, a verbal lashing that will only hurt and incite revenge. Tanner tone in the article feels more like a rant from past experiences that left her slightly bitter. She follows up her examples with somewhat sweeping generalizations that make her fall out of the ethos. Whereas Heinrichs calmly states real life examples like Tanner did, but he follows them up with real life conclusions where we can really read about what a positive impact this is having on his kids. In Tanner’s conclusion, she doesn’t address what kind of implications must go into place as Heinrichs does. The author’s tone can have a significant impact on their credibility. If you watch an episode of Jerry Springer you can see that some forms of arguments in the media has gone overboard, but it is not wise to attribute this to shooting sprees. In actuality, we can use arguments constructively as they did in ancient Greece and in Heinrichs’ kids. To bring the opponents over to agree with us, not to throw a chair at them and have security guards pull us apart.
Works Cited
Heinrichs, Jay. "How to Teach a Child to Argue." Disney 's Wondertime Magazine (2007). Magazine Article.
Tannen, Deborah. "For Argument 's Sake: Why Do We Feel Compelled to Fight About Everything." Ainsworth, Alan. 75 Arguments an Anthology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008. 46-52. Book.

Cited: Heinrichs, Jay. "How to Teach a Child to Argue." Disney 's Wondertime Magazine (2007). Magazine Article. Tannen, Deborah. "For Argument 's Sake: Why Do We Feel Compelled to Fight About Everything." Ainsworth, Alan. 75 Arguments an Anthology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008. 46-52. Book.