The focal point of the essay is to present an argument in favor of the essay, Saving Nature, but Only for Man by Charles Krauthammer, and establish the logic behind the need for this essay to be republished in the Oregonian. This is because I completely believe that People should protect the environment. After all, nature serves man, and it is man’s environment and this thesis/claim agrees with the essay by Krauthammer. The fundamental reason behind this belief is that the Krauthammer essay is relevant to the environment-related problems of the day and though it is controversial, in the sense that it claims humans to be the master of nature, it should be mentioned that it is very practical, almost mathematically induced and sentimentally reluctant, and ruthlessly true.
While engaged in the process of Evaluation of Krauthammer’s argument the main aspect that comes into the mind is its eagerness to reveal the simple but mostly unaware truth that all environmentalist approaches taken by man are for his good and one that is likely to be successful is the one that is most relevant in the short term. This same principle of thought process makes it controversial for the reader, as the basic truth of human nature is unveiled with stark ruthless nature. The effects it would have are likely to be shocking and the essay would certainly open a floodgate of letters to the editor, as half would support the argument presented by Krauthammer and the other half opposing it. At any cost, the essay would establish the focal point of environmental argument that only and mainly the most needed conservations are to be carried out by the human being and that too when the cost could surely not affect human life and health. As a result, it is logical to believe that the essay should be republished in the Oregonian.
In the process of Evaluation of Krauthammer’s argument, it is visible that the writer presents a strong and clear message on environmental issues and the beneficial parameters of human needs. The author presents his arguments in a clear and precise manner. His crystal reasoning is the fundamental magnet of the essay as the points raised are methodically backed by logic and data of recent environment history without over-presentation of figures and databases. This makes the essay more persuasive for the readers because, along with its shocking nature in the context of revealing basic human truths about environment conservation, it makes a lucid and clear reading for the readers with a mild touch of satire that makes it more interesting to read. One such point of satire speaks, “anthropocentrism runs against the grain of a contemporary environmentalism that indulges in earth worship to the point of idolatry”. (Krauthammer, 2) This line not only criticizes the sentimental approach of a necessity like conservatism but also speaks loud the essential persuasive thesis of the author that environmentalism is a practical necessity and a survival tool for the human being in the first place than anything else. No wonder the readers would feel in the same context after reading the essay though it may stir some sentimentalists too.
From his writing, it appears that Krauthammer’s character, as a writer, is loud, clear precise, and extremely systematic. He speaks his mind loud and clear without hesitation. He thoroughly works out his plans of arguments and methodically backs them with a local and factual cementing process in the minimal use of words that makes his writing most effective. The result is a complete shock of his thought process on the reader and they are most persuaded to see the motion of activities presented by the author from the point of view of the author.
While assessing the aspect of the evaluation of Krauthammer’s appeals to emotion and their effects on potential readers, it is evident that there are more factual arguments than rhetoric emotion or sentimentality. This approach is a convincing mode of writing and the emotion that builds on the readers appears to be the byproduct of a single-minded argument that points towards a well-established goal with the scrumptious intellect of logic and verbal construction of a shocking truth. He makes the reader believe that everything human being is working out in the name of conservation of nature is only for the good of its kind and there is no point in being sentimental and thus should not divert in the process by causing any harm to the human race.
In conclusion, it should be stated that the author demands kudos for his persuasive essay as it speaks the truth most directly and ardently. Krauthammer’s essay should be republished in Oregonian as it would make the readers think of the world in a practical, sensible manner without being too sentimental or dramatic by being too emotional for nature which would be needless and even harmful at the point for the human being.
Works Cited
Krauthammer, Charles; “Saving Nature, but Only for Man”.