Watch the Ted Talk by Terri Trespicio where she insists we should not search for passion when exploring employment opportunities and occupations.
2. For general understanding, try answering the questions below while we watch (take notes during class discussion!).
Consider “Stop searching for passion at work” as her position and formulate the number of logical points – reasons she makes to explain and defend her position (Ask “Why” question to arrive at her reasons).
Consider what she uses as evidence to back up these reasons.
Look her up to have an understanding of her background.
Is she logical? emotional? credible? Explain.
Is she convincing you? Why and How?
3. Next, discuss with peers and professor to gather information that can be used for rhetorical analysis of this speech (your first essay).
Below is a general guide on how to conduct a rhetorical analysis, and you can apply these principles to Trespicio’s talk once you have the details.
Context/background:
Briefly summarize the context of the argument. Try answering “Journalist’s Questions” – Who speaks? to whom? When and where does it take place? What is being argued? Why and how?
Later you can add details to your brief answers.
Argument structure (logos):
What is her position and claim?
What reasons does she offer to explain the logic of her claim? Formulate the reasons and examine the logic – does it make sense? If you are familiar with logical fallacies, examine reasoning and see if there are any errors.
What evidence is used to back up or illustrate reasons? Formulate the answer (facts and data? opinions of experts? observations? personal experience? anecdotal), illustrate with textual support, and then evaluate the evidence as effective, sufficient, trustworthy (logos overlaps ethos here) or ineffective, insufficient, untrustworthy.
Does the arguer acknowledge the opposition? How is it done? Does the arguer refute the opposition? How is it done? Explain, illustrate, evaluate.
Bonus: if you are familiar with models of argument and can identify the model used, name it and comment whether this choice is appropriate for the context of the argument.
Evaluate the emotional component of the argument – appeal to pathos:
Assess how the speaker appeals to emotions.
Does the talk include personal anecdotes, emotional stories, or other elements that create an emotional connection with the audience?
How does each emotional element make the audience feel? How does it make you feel? Name the evoked emotions.
Evaluate the ethos – credibility of the arguer and her values, moral, character (if you can draw such conclusions based on information available).
Who is the speaker?
How does the speaker establish her credibility?
Does she reference any sources, and are these sources reputable?
What does the speaker value? What seems important?
Do you feel the actual audience shares the same values? Do you?
What makes you trust or distrust the speaker?
Evaluate kairos – the appeal to time (or time and place):
When and where did this argument originally take place? Who was the audience? what were the important events or ideas of that time?
When are you reading/listening to the argument? How is this time period different? How are you different from the target (here – original) audience?
Does the argument sound the same today as it did when it originally take place?
Establish Personal Context and Potential Bias
Acknowledge any potential bias you have. For example, do you like the speaker and therefore tend to agree with her based on personal sympathy? Or vice versa, do you dislike her (appearance, tone of voice, accent, occupation) and therefore have a hard time accepting her argument based on personal dislike?
Do you share her position from the start and therefore do not need convincing? Alternatively, are you a vehement opponent who simply can not be convinced?
What personal or generational values and what personal experiences make you side with or against the arguer?
How do you keep your personal bias in check when evaluating this argument?
