It wasn't the empathy seeking pathos in the first paragraph that got my attention, but the logos introducing the second paragraph that made me realize the significance behind animal prostheses. Maybe it's because propaganda today has over stimulated us with too much material meant to persuade our emotions and now all that pathos has evolved into something I've learned to overlook. Or maybe it's because Sayre's line, "surgeons [are] learning how to transform lifeless pieces of metal and plastic into working feet, legs, tails..." is such obvious logic I’d never given it any thought.
Therefore still allowing me to be emotionally involved at the concept of these surgeons being so passionate about helping the impaired their work can turn such ordinary and bleak material into a life changing limb for an animal of an entirely different species. It’s the logos, nowalso resembling pathos, which leads me to empathize with both the humans and the animals. Especially when taking Kayla’s words into account, the article really convinces me of the dependency humans and animals have on each other. I also agree with her views on the rhetoric, Sayre switches between pathos and logos to keep the general public interested. In my case, the logos kept my attention, while the pathos seemed to keep the interest of many of our classmates.
Animal prostheses has my support as well as the research and spending it requires. Aside from the pets we’ve domesticated, humans depend on animals a lot more than they do us. From our daily diet to advances in the medical field, animals have given us unmeasurable amounts. Providing them with prosthetics is a way we can even begin to return the favor, while continuing to support medical studies.
No comments:
Post a Comment