Afterreading and analyzing two articles that have opposing views from Ruth Whippmanand Ginny Graves, I believe that readers will be more convinced by the articlefrom Ruth Whippman who shares the view of experiencing happiness throughinteraction with others. The use of appealWhippmanhas presented a more persuasive case for the audience from the use of appealsas compared to Graves. From Graves’ argument, it is clear that she uses the appealof logic to convince her audience on her viewpoint. She presents her argumentin a structured and coherent way, with factual and agreed upon information toprovide a foundation for her claim. However, Whippman adopts an emotional andethical appeal. Whippman opens her argument with an anecdote which showcasesher own personal story of being “friendless and lonely”. (Whippman, 2017)Whippman also mention that “she has spent the last few years researching andwriting a book about happiness”.
(Whippman, 2017) This makes the audience feelthat she is trustworthy. In addition, from the use of her personal story, itreveals to the audience that Whippman has a personal connection to the topicshe is claiming for. Her words will impact more on the audience as the topicthat she is claiming means something to her. As such, Whippman’s appeal toemotions and ethics has shown that she is establishing trust with her audiencewhich can be more convincible to author who only appeal to facts. Structure of argumentBased on theargument’s structure, Whippman has clearly presented a more persuasive case forthe audience. Midway through Whippman’s argument, she attempts to convince theaudience that her viewpoint is better by explaining how self-reflection is”part of a psychologically healthy life” instead of the cause of happiness.
Whippmanwent on to defend her point by appealing to authority as seen from “Study afterstudy shows that good relationships are the strongest, most consistent predictorthere is of a happy life.” On the other hand, Graves’ remains unbiasedthroughout her argument by presenting a series of well-reasoned ideas ratherthan offering any sort of opinion. This suggests that she tries to focus onproviding facts that will allow the audience to make the decision forthemselves as opposed to Whippman who attempt to convince the audience on takingher viewpoint. As such, Whippman is more persuasive as compared to Graves. Byportraying views and beliefs that are contradictory to Whippman’s contention,it indicates to the audience that her opinion is valid she has done extensiveresearch for both sides to support her claim.
Theuse of evidence (Add credible sources in)BothGraves’ and Whippman has strong evidence to support their claims. However,Whippman’s use of evidence will be more persuasive as compared to Graves. ThroughoutGraves’ argument, she uses numerous credible sources such as experts’ opinionsand research findings to strengthen her claims.
In her article, she quotesvarious opinions from author of books that are related associated withhappiness. In addition, she also cited authority that is a relevant expert ofthe topic as seen from “David, who is a psychologist at Harvard MedicalSchool”. Whereas for Whippman, her source of evidence comes from her ownpersonal story, statistic and studies. From the emphasis of herself being anauthor of books which relates to happiness, it suggests to the audience thatshe is a qualified authority of the claim that she is making. Ultimately,audience will still be convinced by personal story as it is more compelling andbetter remembered as opposed than stating facts supported with experts’opinions. As such, Whippman’s use of evidence has a more convincible case.
Inconclusion, audience will be more convinced by Whippman instead of Graves. Undeniably,Graves’ has borrowed plenty of expert opinions to support her claim. The reasonfor her doing so is that she is not a qualified authority to make the claim of”Happiness is from within”. However, Whippman is proficient in the subject ofhappiness which shows that she has sufficient background knowledge to make theclaim. Therefore, if we do not trust someone who has the competency to make theclaim, then who should we trust?