Introduction
The present paper is devoted to a rhetorical analysis of the essay “On ‘Real Education’” by Robert T Perry. The purpose of the work is to refute the thesis of Charles Murray that is expressed in his book “Real Education” and consists of the idea that higher education is romanticized, which is why too many people seek it even though not all of them are capable of benefiting from it. Charles Murray suggests that the majority of students are not needed by the country.
Perry’s purpose consists in refuting Murray’s arguments. Perry’s essay is meant for higher education stakeholders (especially those from South Dakota); it uses logos to refute Murray’s statement and supports it with pathos and ethos to persuade the audience that the author had chosen.
Main Body
The rhetorical situation is a broad term that unites all the elements of the situation in which the communication occurs and involves the rhetorical triangle and the context (Enos 75-76, 282-283; Glenn 1-5). For Perry’s essay, the following aspects of the rhetorical situation can be of interest for the analysis. The author is the “executive director of the South Dakota Board of Regents” (Perry para. 17). His work does not exist on its own, and the essay continuously refers to Murray’s arguments.
The audience is likely to be any person who is interested in learning about higher education, but Perry focuses on South Dakota and the US population. Also, the audience is likely to include those who had read Murray’s book and those who visit Inside Higher Ed, where Perry’s work is published. The situation defines Perry’s rhetorical choices.
Most of the means of persuasion in Perry’s work are logic (for example, the knowledge economy), facts (for example, the situation in the job market as described in par. 6), and statistics (numbers of students worldwide and in the US). All these arguments are likely to convince the majority of the audience. Apart from that, the author refers to reputable sources of information (such as the US Department of Labor) and their position on the topic.
However, the author fails to provide hyperlinks or references to most of the information, which limits its credibility. Also, Perry appeals to emotions (primarily patriotic ones, which is explained by his job and the audience he had chosen, but also to the feeling of justice, especially in the final paragraph). The author focuses on the development of his argument, admits the imperfections of the existing education system, and makes suggestions for its improvement, which can be regarded as the advantages of the work.
The means of persuasion of the author fall primarily within the logos rhetorical strategy that principally revolves around the arguments of the specifics of the knowledge economy. However, his referrals to reputable sources (mostly governmental ones, like the U.S. Department of Labor) can be regarded as ethos, and together with pathos, this strategy supports the logical arguments.
Conclusion
In the final sentences, Perry highlights the logos strategy by insisting that his arguments and suggestions are “common sense.” The closing sentence, though, states that “our future” is dependent on the availability of higher education (par. 16). Thus, to conclude the work, the author appeals to emotions to win the audience as he rightfully believes that the previous parts of the work have provided sufficient proof to his conclusion.
Works Cited
Enos, Theresa. Encyclopedia Of Rhetoric And Composition. New York: Routledge, 2011. Print.
Glenn, Cheryl. The Harbrace Guide To Writing. Boston: Wadsworrth Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.
Perry, Robert. “On ‘Real Education’.” Inside Higher Ed. 2008. Web.