Analysis of two reading assignment to their persuasiveness: their effective and ineffective argument - Essay Example

In David Holcberg’s “Human Organs for Sale,” the effectiveness of persuasion is determined by the proper use of pathos and logos. In the quote, “A father, for example, may decide that one of his kidneys is worth selling to pay for the best medical treatment available for his child,” the author effectively uses pathos to draw out the emotion of love and care from the reader. Thus, parents and children are both struck hard by such a statement and are most likely persuaded that indeed organ selling is basically a matter of love.

Logos or the use of reason is also another effective way to draw out support for the sensibility of organ selling. In the quote, “The fact, however, is that human beings (poor or rich) do have the capacity to reason, and should be free to exercise it,” the author is showing a basic fact and a reasonable stance on the issue. It is a fact that humans have the capacity for reason and thus a right to make decisions for themselves. Although Holcberg fails to consider the possibility of unsound and unhealthy decisions, he is illustrating a basic fact that is most likely to convince so many readers.

Holcberg’s also has its share of unpersuasive and ineffective statements, and mostly these could be anything from exaggerations to fallacious statements. In the quote, “Of the 82,000 waiting for kidneys or livers, about 6,000 will die in the next twelve months,” the point of the author is not only exaggerating but also discouraging. This statement actually has the danger of convincing the readers not of the urgency of approving the legality of selling body organs but of the futility of the decision to do so.

There is also the danger of shouting out statements that are by nature fallacious. The quote “If the law recognizes our right to give away an organ, it should also recognize our right to sell an organ” is an example of this. The law may actually only recognize the person’s right to give away something but definitely it cannot recognize the right to sell. The statement does not particularly strike the reader as something logical or reasonable. If one wants to give away old clothes as donation, it somehow does not follow that it is also right to sell these clothes and make money out of it.

The conclusion of the statement, therefore, obviously does not follow from the premise. Joanna MacKay, in her “Organ Sales Will Save Lives,” is also as adamant as Holcberg in presenting her stance in favor of organ selling. She particularly capitalizes on logos and pathos which are both intricately combined. In the statement, “In the year 2000 alone, 2583 Americans died while waiting for a kidney transplant,” MacKay is trying to present a fact that has a particular effect on the emotion of the human reader.

The fact that 2583 Americans died in 2000 alone because they were not able to have kidney transplants was a sad fact and something that could not be helped without the legalization of organ selling. Thus, with such an emotion, the readers are convinced that organ selling is the only way that can save people from dying. In the same way, the author uses a fact to elicit an emotion in the reader in the line “If legalized and regulated, the sale of human organs would save lives.” In this particular statement, the author is somehow making a sane statement that legalization and regulation of organ selling will be able to save lives.

It is like defending it while not exaggerating the details.