Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in Computer Science is for Everyone

In this blog post I will be analyzing rhetorical strategies in the TEDx talk "Computer Science is for Everyone". Specifically, I will be addressing the speaker's appeals to credibility, emotion, and logic.

Screenshot from my computer, 10/4/2015

Appeals to Credibility or Character

• Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Credibility and Character (Ethos)" on page 182 can you recognize in your text?

One item that is immediatley used by the speaker, Hadi Partovi, is a personal story. Partovi actually opens up his talk by retelling aspects of his childhood where he was able to learn computer science while his native country of Iran was at war. Another appeal to credibility comes when Partovi lists his own accomplishments in the technology industry as a computer scientist.

• How and why would the author(s) use these strategies?

Partovi most likely used these stories to give the audience a couple reasons to trust him and what he has to say. If Partovi jumped right into the core of his argument, fewer people would engage with what he had to say and Partovi's goal as a speaker would not be achieved.

• How do these strategies affect the audience’s perception of the author's/authors' credibility and character?

These strategies garner respect from the audience and allow Partovi to speak with authority in regards to education in computer science.

• How does the use of these strategies impact the effectiveness of the text’s overall message?

The use of these strategies is paramount in increasing the effectiveness of the text's overall message. It's the difference between some random man with a microphone preaching nonsense and an accomplished computer scientist giving an intellectual talk on education.

• Does/do the author(s) seem to have any biases or assumptions that might impact their credibility?

The author could very well have bias towards his topic. A computer scientist is much more likely to promote their field in education than any other person. I would not say this hurts his credibility, but this potential bias prevents Partovi from having the utmost credibility.

Appeals to Emotion

• Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Emotion (Pathos)" on pages 182-3 can you recognize in your text?

Once again, Partovi's usage of personal stories provide an emotional appeal to his talk. Specifically, Partovi tells the story of him and his whole family suffering through a war that took place very close to their home. Partovi and his family were at constant risk of being bombed when he was a child.

• What emotional responses is the author attempting to create?

The author is attempting to create a sense of discomfort in the audience. If successful in taking the audience out of their comfort zone, Partovi can more easily connect with the audience and instill his ideals in the audience.

• What is the actual result?

I believe this strategy works like I forementioned, but not exactly. This story also just makes the audience sad and upset, which could actually hurt the overall persuasiveness of the talk.

• Are these emotions effective or ineffective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation?

Some of these emotions, like discomfort and curiousity are effective, while sadness and anger are ineffective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation.

• How do these emotional appeals affect the credibility of the author(s) or the logic of the text?

These emotional appeals definitely give credibility to the author. Knowing the speaker has gone through hardship adds a certain appeal and credibility to what they have to say.

Appeals to Logic

• Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Logic or Rational Decision Making (Logos)" on page 183 can you recognize in your text?

The organization of the talk was excellent. Beginning by building his credibility, then laying out all the facts, and finishing with his ultimate message was very effective in persuading the audience. Also, use of relevent statistics and graphs contributed greatly to the talks logical appeal.

• What response is the author attempting to create by employing these strategies?

The author is attempting to create an intellectual stimulation by employing these strategies. Partovi wants the reader to be able to take what he is saying and convince themselves of the things Partovi is saying.

• What is the actual result?

For the most part, I believe this to be the actual result. The audience at a TEDx talk would definitely respond to concrete facts and a clear organization of thoughts.

• Are these strategies effective or ineffective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation?

These strategies are very effective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation.

EDIT:

After reading Lawrence's and Chloe's posts, I realize that my text is unique in a lot of ways, but similar in many others. For example, Lawrence's text contains personal stories as a way of giving the author credibility, just like in my text. Also, a clear organization of thoughts seems to be universal in effective pieces of rhetoric.

Where my text differs is in the logical appeal. Neither Lawrence's nor Chloe's texts utilized statistics or graphs in their logical appeal. Stats and graphs were very important to the overall effectiveness of my text. Without them, it's much harder to believe in what the speaker has to say.