Immigration Wars Issues - Essay Example

?Gaurav Sandhu Lace May 19, English 101 Rhetorical Analysis Illegal immigration in America can be a heated and contentious topic in today’s political environment. Eduardo Proctor presents a rhetorical argument contesting economic claims levied against the illegal immigrants’ impact on California’s high school dropout workers. (Proctor) His dissent states the affect on low wage California workers is in part exaggerated. To support his claims, Proctor primarily relies on statistics and quotes from credible sources. In doing so, Proctor has little emphasis on pathos and emotive response. However, the under utilization of pathos can be a highly effective tool in delivery of an argument when seeking to avoid an overly emotive response in politically charged subject matter. It is well known in the written rhetorical argument the writer is wise to embrace the concepts of logos, ethos, and pathos. The more difficult the subject matter, the more critical it is to master these rhetorical elements. Eduardo Proctor tackled a difficult topic in an aspect of illegal immigration. In Proctor’s lack of pathos, he successfully demonstrates the effectiveness of coupling logos and ethos as standalone tools of the rhetorical argument. Eduardo Proctor’s primary argumentative focus in the “Cost of Illegal Immigration May Be Less Than Meets the Eye” was logos. Proctor not only established credibility with his apt usage of statistics, he used them to maintain his credibility throughout the article. The best application of logos is found be in the statistical comparison of wage loss percentages between that of California and Ohio during the years of illegal immigration surges. He clearly identified that while illegal immigration critics cited wage declines in California, Proctor competently demonstrated Ohio, which has little to no illegal immigration saw nearly three times the low-income wage loss in the same period. By doing this early in the write, Proctor effectively attracted attention by using factual data that many may not have been aware. This effective use of logos literally forced the reader to continue hearing his argument. While starting the argument with statistics, Proctor was hardly done with logos. He continually reinforced credibility by repeatedly referring to the dates and time line in question. Why was this effective? This hit the mark for Proctor because he was referring to a period of spanning some 25 years. An important aspect of this article is the fact that the period in question is not a snapshot. This was originally introduced in the second sentence of the article because Proctor identified this as the key element of his argument. Proctor effectively applied the statistical date reference by referring to it no less than six times. He further built his credibility with this statistic by subtly referring to it in varying manners. By stating it as “quarter decade” and “since the 1980’s” allowed the reader to grasp the scope of time without losing interest through redundancy. Proctor was also effective in his use of quotes to build credibility. He quoted well-identified, credible sources. To establish his sources, he listed them by name, profession as it pertained to his argument, and organization. Proctor utilized appropriate quotes to support his argument without belaboring the quotes with inappropriate or off topic information. The quotes were precise, direct, and factually based. To achieve success in this, Proctor identified the individuals he cited, as “economists” to establish they were on the same level of those from which he was dissenting. In quoting one of the economists he cited, "’Illegal immigration had a little bit of a role reinforcing adverse trends for the least advantaged, he said, but there are much stronger forces operating over the last 25 years.’" This was an ideal quote because it both builds credibility and solidifies Proctor’s use of statistics. The element of logos has been highly effective in this article. However, Proctor did not solely rely on this element to deliver or build his argument. As with logos, Proctor effectively utilized ethos. To expand the readership, Proctor employed language that was easily understandable on a topic that could have delivered over the head of many readers due to the economic subject matter. Moreover, Proctor delivered a fair minded, restrained, and sincere argument presentation. This was crucial given the volatile nature of illegal immigration and its impact on local economies. Proctor could have easily gone on the offensive with language delivery. This clearly would have offended those in opposition to argument, thus undermining it through the lost readership. In ethos, Proctor simplified complex economic processes. While the more economically advanced may find themselves wishing he had gone more in depth, Proctor’s article has been written with good cognitive balance aimed at broad understanding. Pathos is the weakest delivered element of this rhetorical argument. It was clear Porter sought to persuade the reader through his cognitive approach. Attempts to elicit emotive response were at best, vague and insinuated. To find the existence of pathos one can look to the plight of the “least advantaged” as it compares to the economic impact of illegal immigration. In the name of optimism, pathos is minimized by design. Illegal immigration has been politicized in a nature that generates heated debate. Porter has taken a position in his article that he desired to be read and cognitively understood from both the positions of supporters and those who stand in opposition to illegal immigration. Inciting emotion could easily result in the loss of readers that he sought to provide clarity to on the misrepresentation of the origin of the rhetorical argument itself. While many can argue this to be a shortcoming of the article as it compares the effectiveness of logos and ethos, Proctor’s limited use of pathos was for the best. Upon conclusion of the article, the reader was left with informative information that was not tainted by emotional connections to a given point of view. While this was an effective application of pathos, a shortcoming did exist within the article. Porter writes, “… ignores half the truth.” This statement tells the more critical reader of opposition the half they oppose is in fact true. In essence, he has just unintentionally validated an argument against his position generating a fallacy of self many readers will embrace. When presenting the rhetorical argument, one must be careful to avoid unwittingly relinquishing the credibility of the argument itself within the confines of the argument. Porter was more than likely presenting an honest perspective, but the manner he selected to do so shined light on the fact that he is in part incorrect in his position. Logos, ethos and pathos are tools that when perfected, can establish highly effective written arguments. Each has its own unique benefit of aiding in the art of persuading. Proctor has demonstrated in this article the ability to determine when and how to deploy these tools is of equal importance. Logos and ethos were so effectively used that using pathos beyond that of the subtle nature he utilized would have jeopardized the argument itself. The beauty of logos, ethos, and pathos lays not only in their individual value; it equally lays in the ability to finesse their application appropriately. Work Cited Proctor, Eduardo. "Cost of Illegal Immigration May Be Less Than Meets the Eye." 16 04 2006. NYTimes.com. 17 05 2011 . Read More