On January 24, 1936 a response letter was written to a little girl named Phyllis written a letter asking "Do scientist pray, and if so, what they pray for." At the end of the paper, it seems that Einstein himself never answers Phyllis’s question definitely, never really leaning either way, but by using rhetorical writing he doesn’t really have to. By giving rational exchange of viewpoints, he gives the reader the choice to answer her on question. Albert Einstein is rhetorically effective to help Phyllis to her answer by using context and purpose; subject, speaker, and audience, and appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos,
Albert Einstein understood that rhetoric is always situational: it has context and purpose. The context of his letter stays clearly and firmly on the purpose of whether or not scientists pray. In the letter there in a poignant contrast between a research scientist and a devoted scientist. Beliefs of research scientist according to Einstein "will hardly be inclined to believe that such can be influenced by a prayer. The context of that being that a regular scientist does not believe in saying words and hopping something will happen. The purpose of that being in the letter is for Phyllis to get another viewpoint to guide her to her answer. The belief of a more devoted scientist to Einstein's is "everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe." The context of this excerpt being that a "spirit" has to create something of this great nature, not something that just happens to be there. The purpose of this to show Phyllis that there could be a "spirit vastly superior to that of a man" made everything possible. Albert Einstein usage of context and purpose made him rhetorically effective in the letter written to Phyllis.
The way that Einstein uses Aristotelian triangle in the letter helps guide Phyllis to an answer. The Aristotelian triangle describes the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document