Salveta 1 Kaylee Salveta Professor Susak English 1020 October 14 2018 Contribution of Self Interest: A Rhetorical Analysis of Can Selfishness Save the Environment? Making a contribution toward the planet isn t a major concern for society s best interest. So, how does one make that a priority? In the article, Can Selfishness Save the Environment? written by Bobbi S Low and Matt Ridley, they argue that in order to change the ways people act on global ecological disasters, it is better to persuade them through their best self-interest. In this essay, I will explore how the authors use the strategies of appealing through credibility, statistics, and emotion to persuade the uninformed audience about ecological issues, such as how it can affect us collectively and individually. They use this strategy in order to fulfill the purpose of getting the argument across that it is not the best intention to try and change the selfish habits of society. I argue that Low and Riddley use ethos, logos, and pathos, to state a well crafted argument in order to persuade their audience in hopes of making a better change. Low and Riddley argue how they think it is ineffective to use the persuasion of changing habits of other people. They attempt to convince the unaware audience that in order to make a change, it is in the author s best attentiveness to think of the audience s, short term self-interest, (Low and Riddley). The audience targeted in this article is the people who are careless to the topic of our environment. The fact that our planet is progressively declining through the effects we take part in, such as, water supply, pollution, and nature. Low and Riddley appeal to this audience by getting to their emotional side. The way they do this is setting up the
Salveta 2 concept of incentives. The authors also use economists and biologist theories and ideas to further prove their argument to be right. The purpose of this article is to inform the audience of what is going on in the world. In order to achieve this, the authors state specific problems that are unknown, such as the city of Fowler, Kansas in the Artesian Valley, which is, the surrounding land is pockmarked with giant discs of green--quarter-section pivot-irrigation systems water rich crops of corn, steadily depleting the underlying aquifer (Low and Riddley). Using such a small city that many people do not have knowledge on can make the audience think about their own living situation and how something like this could happen. Contributing to these situations is what, I believe, the authors want their audience to consider. Low and Riddley use the claim of value in order to express their beliefs. They want to state what they believe to be right and what to be wrong. The authors use evidence from the wide range of biologists and economists to support the claim that individuals are important (Low and Riddley). By stating, nobody knows how best to persuade the human race to exercise self-restraint (Low and Riddley), gives the audience the idea that since humans are more interested in themselves, there should be ways to motivate them, for the time being. Another way practicing this claim of value is showing how other opinions are wrong. Those who do recognize this problem often conclude that their appeals should not be made to self-interest but rather should be couched in terms of sacrifice, selflessness, or, increasingly, moral shame. We believe they are wrong (Low and Riddley). The authors state the specific claim and explain that cooperation is the main concept. They are not just telling their audience what they believe to be wrong, but also explain that their claims are correct. In my opinion, they seem like they are inputting their own ideas and explaining how others are wrong, to appear more persuasive.
Salveta 3 An approach that the authors use to support their argument is through showing the credibility of the resources used. This is one form of a rhetorical strategy to get their point across and communicate with their audience. In order to show that the evidence is reliable, Low and Riddley add the institute and expertise of each economist, biologist, and socialist that is mentioned. First, the authors bring up recent people such as, Gary Becker, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in economics last year, has been reading biological treatises for years (Low and Riddley). By showing that these people have recently been awarded demonstrates that what they know must be effective. Another example using this rhetorical device is stated later on in the article, Lester Brown, of the Worldwatch Institute, in his State of the World for 1992 (Low and Riddley). In this example, the author states the institute that he went to, to show the credibility. Even though the date is old, the usefulness overpowers it. To get more into specifics, Low and Riddley provide information more on the side of economists, where they explain certain games that come into play called the prisoner s dilemma and tit for tat. The significance of this is for them to explain how economists take part in the way of showing how society behaves under certain circumstances when dealing with cooperation. It is stated, In the language of game theorists, individually rational strategies result in a collectively irrational outcome (Low and Riddley). What the authors are trying to convey is that in order to determine how people cooperate, they use a skillful strategy, like this. Economists relate this to how our behavior correlates to the behaviors of animals. It is stated by the authors that the threat of retaliation makes defection much less likely to play, (Low and Riddley). This refers to the games and how this can play a role in how we react in certain environments, such as ecological crisis. Tying back to the thesis, using this kind of rhetorical
Salveta 4 strategy shows the audience how these examples from economists can be applied to real life situations when dealing with the environment. Not only do the authors use credible sources to provide evidence to their argument, but also address the reader s emotions. One of these ways they appeal to the audience is through pathos. The interesting way the authors do this is by mentioning the counterargument. The authors state the two arguments, The real divide comes between those who believe it is necessary to impose such incentives, and those who hope to persuade merely by force of argument (Low and Riddley). By doing so, the authors are not only subconsciously telling the audience to pick a side, but also making you feel like you should choose their own side. When appealing to emotion, you must also consider the factor of what emotion you want your audience should feel. In order to do this, using the correct word choice plays a big role. The authors use guilt as a major emotion as stated as, people are generally not willing to pay for the long-term good of society or the planet (Low and Riddley). In this example, the authors not only appeal to emotion, but also provide evidence for their argument to be correct. The last way I will explain how pathos is used is that the authors persuade the audience with evidence to how people help out. People are more likely to make donations if they are rewarded with even just a tag or a lapel pin. Tit for tat (Low and Riddley). Seeing how other people help out by getting rewards convinces the audience to want to get a reward too, proving their argument even further. The authors account the use of logic to appeal to the statistical evidence. By using statistics, the authors state a well crafted argument. To run a human body, 75,000 different genes must agree to cooperate and suppress free-riders (Low and Riddley). By using number, the authors can tie back to the behaviors of humans versus animals. Studies have also been
Salveta 5 mentioned throughout the entirety of the article, to even further use persuasion toward the audience, In one Michigan study recycling rates were less than 10 percent for non refundable glass, metal, and plastic, and more than 90 percent refundable objects (Low and Riddley). Using statistics like these also tie back to the argument that people act on their own self-interest. The authors find useful evidence like this to help prove their argument. They go even farther and say, Sixty-five percent of households in my survey expressed negative attitudes about the reserve, because the reserve took away many rights of local citizens (Low and Riddley). This quote was from Joel Heinen, who talks about the aims of conservation programs (Low and Riddley), that contributes to what other factors, like religion, can have on overexploiting nature. As you can see, Low and Riddley effectively uses the rhetorical strategies to get their argument across. By tying all the evidence back to their argument, I can evaluate a claim based on the article. From the use of ethos, pathos, and logos, I can see how the authors create a well crafted argument to persuade the audience in trying to make a better change. Throughout the article, they prove how other methods of contributing to the environment, like collectivism, are wrong. By stating their opinion, they disprove others and give more evidence in how they feel they are right. Correctly using rhetorical devices helped them along the way and got their point across to the now knowledgeable audience.
Salveta 6 Works Cited Low, Bobbi S, and Matt Riddley. Can Selfishness Save the Environment? The Atlantic, Sept. 1993, www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/09/can-selfishness-save-the-environment/305865/? single_page=true.