Steven Pinker Rhetorical Analysis

Words: 663
Pages: 3
Open Document
Steven Pinker immediately captures the reader’s attention, and raises the reader’s blood pressure, when he opens his article by listing provocative questions in a very assertive manner. As it is the very beginning of the article, one has very little concept of the author’s view, beliefs, or intentions; for all we know he may very well support these “dangerous ideas”. He uses this as a strategy to invoke a sense of personal involvement in the reader’s mind. Pinker also uses this section to not only define, but exhibit exactly the type of dangerous ideas he will be addressing in his writing. Apart from the assertive tone used for his opening questions, Pinker remains academically formal throughout his article; he even evaluates his argument from both sides, something scholars will rarely do. …show more content…
Pinker clearly knows how to take his paint brush and illuminate his ideas through creative and intelligent expression. He structures his article in a way that shows he is not merely trying to prove his point, but that he desires to open the reader’s mind to a new train of thought. Towards the end of his article, he takes a stand from the opposing side and argues against all of his previously presented logic and evidence. Subsequently, the reader is enlightened of both sides of this debate. Now they are not only thoroughly educated in choosing their side, but they have the ability and knowledge to debate against the opposing side. Ultimately, Pinker does acknowledge that he supports the open discussion of dangerous ideas as opposed to censorship, yet he does not do this in an imposing manner. Immediately preceding his statement of personal preference, he openly states that the issue needs to be debated regardless. Pinker shows extreme maturity and wisdom by not claiming to be right; he is open and willing to partake in an open discussion on dangerous
Show More

Related Documents: Steven Pinker Rhetorical Analysis

Critical Perspective In Accounting

“no access to reality other than through structures of representation” (Robson, 1992, p. 690). One such “structure of representation” is metaphor. Critical examination of accounting knowledge should involve “not only the employment of literary, rhetorical and discursive analyses, but require[s] interpretation of the . . . consequences that flow from the operation of . . . metaphors” (Robson, 1992, pp. 703–4). ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: Amernic@rotman.utoronto.ca (J. Amernic). 1045-2354/$…

Words 7091 - Pages 29