In order to craft a compelling argument and introduce it to the target audience in a convincing way, a set of rhetorical strategies needs to be considered. In his article “Marxism, morality, and human nature,” Phil Gasper demonstrates the use of several effective rhetorical strategies as the means of enhancing the argument. Although the rhetorical devices such as hypophora are quite effective, several logical fallacies, such as the appeal to authority, weaken Gasper’s argument. Gasper’s article features quite a number of rhetorical devices, hypophora being one of the most noticeable. Defined as a question that is immediately answered by the author, the specified device is expected to draw the audience’s attention to a specific issue.
In Gasper’s essay, hypophora is used twice: “Where, though, do our ideas of morality come from?” and “SO HOW does this relate to morality?” (Gasper par. 4; par. 18). As a result, the author marks the key points in his argumentation, drawing the reader’s attention to them successfully.
However, afterward, Gasper introduces an obvious appeal to authority as a means of supporting his statement. Namely, he alludes to the assertions made by one of the scholars as the unquestionable truth: “As the anthropologist R. Brian Ferguson points out” (Gasper par. 11). Therefore, the overall argument is slightly weakened, even though Gasper introduces rather sensible ideas in his statement. Despite the positive impact that the use of hypophora as a rhetorical device has on Gasper’s argument in “Marxism, morality, and human nature,” the logical fallacy of the appeal to authority reduces the extent of his statements’ credibility. Overall, the rhetorical strategy that Gasper uses in his article can be considered passable since it encourages an active discussion and introduces a new an insightful idea to the discourse. Nonetheless, the argument could be improved by addressing the fallacy in question.
Work Cited
Gasper, Phil. Marxism, Morality, and Human Nature. International Socialist Review, n.d. Web.