For the article "The Wild World of Animal Prostheses", I noticed she used both pathos and logos to grab the readers attention and intrigue them to the article and also she wants us to feel what the animals are going through with missing limbs and such plus to inform us on how they work which I think makes a good balance between the two because if you use to much pathos it to me becomes to over exaggeratedly sappy and if we use to much logos it becomes to informative and can become incredibly boring to the audience which will cause them to lose interest. This article on the other hand did a great job mixing the two so the readers get emotional while reading it but they also learn about it as well. In my opinion if she had used more pathos I don't think I would continue reading it because it wouldn't have had any or much info to back up why we should give prostheses to animals or how it works it would just be about making us feel for them.
My side of this article is I do believe animals should have prosthetics for many reasons. one reason would be if people can have them, animals should have them to because we are no better than them. I also believe in them because they can help the animal move around more so it wont be a struggle or painful for them to do so. so yes, if people truly loved these animals as they say they do, I don't think it should be a problem for prosthetics such as a dog who needs a leg because if it was my pet who needed one I would indeed get it for them if it includes helping them to stay healthy and move around and preventing them from being miserable or hurting their self esteem.
No comments:
Post a Comment