Rhetorical items as a support of a good argumentation
Ethos, pathos and logos – not many people know what these words mean, even though they are essential items in an author’s work. Gregor Peter Schmitz knows how to use these rhetorical devices and thus is able to convince his readers with his arguments. In his newspaper article, EU plans Big Brother System in Mediterranean (published on the 11th of October 2013 on Spiegel Online (Spiegel.de)), he argues that the plans of the EU (building a surveillance system in the Mediterranean Sea) are only in favor of the EU countries and not in favor of the immigrants. In the following, I will prove how well Schmitz argued in his article and how the different items, such as current knowledge of the event, the negativity and rhetorical devices, help to support and underline his argumentation.
Schmitz is able to put the reader into the position of the immigrants by explaining the current situation of the issue. He starts by explaining the historical facts behind his article and also gives horrible examples referring to the current issue, such as: “Seventy-two people had crowded onto an open boat – only seven meters (23 feet) long – that was to take them from Tripoli, Libya, to Europe” (Schmitz 2-3). This issue emphasizes the importance of the problem. By reading this, the reader is able to put himself into the position of the neglected people. It shortens the distance between the reader, the author and the argued problem. In this way, the reader can feel the issue and understands its importance. While Schmitz does this, he also convinces the reader and makes the reader believe in his argumentation.
Schmitz only uses arguments against the plans of the EU. Schmitz mentions negative aspects of the whole Eurosur system and explains all the horrible effects that it will have on the refugees. By not saying anything positive about the plans, Schmitz automatically makes the reader think about the system in a negative way:...