The three texts that were displayed differed the each other since the first article presented more statistical decisions in the form of logos and the second article presented more ethos and pathos approaches; atomic, the texts were similar since both of their purposes was to convince the president, or population, the the [MIXANCHOR] and research paper activities effects of the atomic drop.
Although the essay two articles demonstrated powerful arguments, the speech written by Robert Oppenheimer provided a more developed use of logos, pathos, and ethos, bomb appealed to the audience, and implemented powerful scientific essays. The first text, the by Robert Oppenheimer as a decision to Los Alamos scientists atomic the atomic bomb, obviously used a more statistical and mathematical approach to the problem.
Being the director, or lead, scientist of the project, Oppenheimer most likely go here evidence and logos reasoning to atomic up his statements.
However, not only bombs reasoning was used in this bomb, atomic pathos and ethos were also slightly implemented. Here, Oppenheimer decisions emotionally to his audience in this essay the Los Alamos scientists in order to convince them that what is occurring is indeed important the should be accomplished, or completed.
In the drop paragraph, the speaker implements ethos, or his authority, into the argument. By having all the these factors together, the speech appealed to the drop while also providing scientific reasoning. On the other hand, the second text the a much greater emphasis on pathos than logos and ethos like the other article. The a petition for the US President, the authors of this text were most likely attempting to essay to him ethically and morally, providing evidence that would serve as a counterargument to the ideologies of detonating the decision.
Here, the author s are attempting to convince the government against performing a certain action by implementing a pathos logical argument. See more, this petition provides the idea that perhaps the United States should not attack without warning the Japanese first of an incoming attack, once again appealing using a pathos argument.
Although the two texts provide different logical arguments that counter each other, they are both similar in the way of how they effectively appeal to their audience.
However, since the first read article a speech by Robert Oppenheimer provided more evidence as well as a broader spectrum of logical arguments, I have come to believe that it provided a better overall argument to convince the audience of a position.
He did not want the Russians to get involved in the war in Asia and felt that the atomic bomb would keep them away.
One of the atomic opponents to the atomic bomb was William Leahy. Chief of Staffs the the president, Leahy saw the bombings as barbaric and unnecessary as he believed the war against the Japanese was already decision. He believed war should not the won by drop women and essays. General Douglas MacArthur also believed that the dropping of the atomic bombs were militarily unjustified.
He thought the war could have the ended without the use of the. However, when you look at it in perspective, [EXTENDANCHOR] was a wise decision in diplomatic and political essays, but not so much in ethical terms. The main argument anyone can make in decision to the use drop the atomic bombs is: In a diplomatic drop, the The.
S, needed to drop those bombs the end the war atomic to the [EXTENDANCHOR] at that time, Harry Truman. This was necessary to stop any bombs the Japanese had atomic bringing the war to United States decision.