Rhetorical PrecisPlunkett in the article, "How to Vote on Aid in Dying", suggest that there are three steps to consider when voting on the aid in dying. Plunkett supports his suggestion by first saying that we must consider whether or not this would be considered as suicide. He then says that people who vote based on religion should acknowledge the fact that such a reason is not a firm base to decide on. Lastly, he states that we should determine whether the decision would put stress on the family in question. Plunkett's purpose is to help people decide on whether they approve the Proposition 106 or not. The author writes in a conflicted but didactic tone for those who plan on voting on the Proposition 106. This work is significant because instead of pushing his own decision onto the readers, he only offers advice and allows them to decide for themselves.
|
|
Rhetorical Analysis: SyntaxPlunkett expresses his confusion on the vote of Colorado’s Proposition 106 clearly throughout his article. Like many others, are confused on whether to appose it or approve it. Plunkett writes this for readers in order to help them think about how to vote on the proposition 106. With the use of Rhetorical questions, Plunkett allows readers to think deeply and carefully about their answers. Depending on how they think of the question and what may be their answer, the reader has a better guess on how or what they should vote on. Plunkett also uses antithesis in order to help the reader decide. By stating "I would hate to live a life where I couldn’t enjoy a young boy’s first graphic novel, but I also would hate a system that pressured those who wish to fight to the end to instead give up." he is contrasting how one person would be willing to give up their life while the other wouldn't; giving the reader a better example that would best influence their decision.
|