Question

logos is an appeal to logic; it is a means of convincing the audience through rational thought and reason. how can you incorporate logos? you can use research and statistics to back - up your arguments. (87% of students benefit from textbooks, so...) you can use logical processes to explain your point – if this... then that... (if you dont want gum disease, then you should brush regularly.) you must give convincing, solid evidence and reasons to support your claims. (i need a car: it would make me more independent; save me money; improve my life.) why use logos? if you can present a logical, rational ar their intellect and sense of reason, the task one: for each of the following, explain whether or not you 1. all men and women will die. you are a man. therefore, you will die one day. 2. everyone has children. therefore, everyone needs to think about the schooling of his or her children. 3. you dont need to jump in front of a train to know its a bad idea; so why do you need to try drugs to know if theyre damaging? 4. cigarette smoke contains over 4,800 chemicals, 69 of which are known to cause cancer. so why start smoking? 5. every morning the rooster crows, then the sun rises. therefore the rooster causes the sun to rise.

Explanation:

1. Effective? Yes. Explanation: This is a valid logical syllogism. The general statement "All men and women will die" is a well - known fact, and the specific case "You are a man" leads to the logical conclusion "you will die one day".
2. Effective? No. Explanation: The premise "Everyone has children" is false. Since the premise is incorrect, the argument based on it (everyone needs to think about their children's schooling) is not a valid use of logos.
3. Effective? Yes. Explanation: It uses an analogy. Just as one doesn't need to jump in front of a train to know it's bad, one doesn't need to try drugs to know they are damaging. It makes a logical comparison.
4. Effective? Yes. Explanation: It presents factual evidence (cigarette smoke contains over 4,800 chemicals, 69 are cancer - causing) to support the argument against starting smoking.
5. Effective? No. Explanation: It confuses correlation with causation. Just because the rooster crows before the sun rises doesn't mean the rooster causes the sun to rise.

Answer:

1. Effective? Yes. Explanation: Valid logical syllogism.
2. Effective? No. Explanation: False premise.
3. Effective? Yes. Explanation: Logical analogy.
4. Effective? Yes. Explanation: Factual evidence.
5. Effective? No. Explanation: Correlation - causation fallacy.