I need guidance in responding to two listed below discussion post: A simple response is needed below that addresses these questionsDoes the thesis statement make an assertion and make it clear that
the reader is about to read a rhetorical analysis? If so, how? If not,
what advice could you offer?
What rhetorical terms are covered in the body paragraph provided in
the post? How does the author develop examples of those rhetorical
terms?
Are the paragraphs well organized for you as a reader? Explain your response.
Did you notice any issues of clarity or any errors that impacted
your understanding of the paragraphs? If so, be sure to point out a
specific example(s).
Did the author properly cite examples from the essay according to APA guidelines? Explain your response.
What do you see as the strengths of the paragraphs so far? Be specific.
1.) This article, “A secret weapon to fight climate change: Dirt”
(2015, December 15), Authored by Debbie Barker and Michael Pollan
explains how It’s possible to stop and even reverse the consequence of
carbon in the atmosphere by using specific agricultural practices. The
reader or anyone that is studying climate change is the target audience.
The Authors present the situation as Dire, yet not impossible to overcome. The authors list the problem at hand, but also what we can do
to fix the problem.Ethos is present by using scientific studies. In 2015 new studies have found that if the number of carbon emanations does not decrease soon, there will be unsafe ecological changes. Our planet’s atmosphere is and has been altered in ways that influence our climate,
land, and seas. It has also altered how society reacts to these changes.
The softening of Permafrost is causing vegetation to grow in areas that used to be covered in ice. Our oceans absorbing heat, and the great ice sheets are beginning to melt. 2.) In Exploiting the Neuroscience of Internet Addiction,
author Bill Davidow discusses the malignant infection of electronics in the modern era. The narrative in the article revolves around likening internet addiction to the addictions surrounding gambling and drugs. The author of the article is a published book author who also works as an advisor to a capital marketing corporation, which specifically invests in early-stage technology startups. He starts his argument by paralleling the corporations responsible for developing “compulsions loops” to Thomas Edison and his marvelous inventions.
In this article,
Davidow illustrates the problem of internet addiction by discussing the physical reactions to interfacing online, revealing the nefarious intent of gaming companies, and appealing to the parental instinct to dissuade perpetual screen time. A basic understanding of cause and effect is all that is necessary to build a successful marketing structure. The consumer feels good when they accomplish a task or receive good news, so give them tasks to complete and feed them the good news. Gaming companies intentionally design their games so that the player gets periodic senses of accomplishment, while also being baited to keep playing. There is never a final payoff that fulfills the user’s dopamine need. The companies use this neurological phenomenon to keep pumping their patrons for money and time. As someone who plays video games routinely, I can relate to this article and the warnings that come with it. The fact that
I am being baited by some corporation that has no sense of my well-being sickens me. Davidow has successfully evoked an emotional response from me, the reader.
Requirements: a paragraph or less
