1
Logical Thought
Fall 2004
Homework 13 - answers
Identify (e.g., by underlining and naming) any rhetorical devices you find in the
following passages. Note that some passages may not contain any rhetorical devices, and
some may contain words or phrases that are hard to come to a decision about (these ‘grey
area’ rhetorical devices will not be marked, by the way, but we may discuss them in
class).
1. “If the United States is to meet the challenge posed by Japan, Inc., we must rethink
the way we do everything from design to manufacture to education to employee
relations.”
’Japan, Inc.’ is a dysphemism.
2. According to UNICEF reports, several thousand Iraqi children died each month
because of U.N. sanctions.
On the one hand, ’According to UNICEF’ reports may seem like a proof surrogate,
but on the other hand it seems like an appropriate appeal to authority, given that
UNICEF is the kind of organization that specializes in gathering the sort of data
presented in the sentence.
3. Maybe Professor Smith’s research hasn’t appeared in the first-class journals as
recently as that of some of the other professors in his department; that doesn’t
necessarily mean his work is going downhill. He’s still a fine teacher, if the student’s
I’ve talked to are to be believed.
’Maybe’ and the clause beginning with the semicolon (“; that doesn’t…”) function to
downplay the fact that Smith’s research hasn’t appeared in the right journals.
’Maybe’ is not functioning as a weaseler/hedge, because the author seems perfectly
content to concede that Smith’s research has not been appearing in the right journals.
That is, the author is not hedging the claim about Smith’s research.
Note also that the last sentence – about teaching – might be a red herring, if by
“work” the author means “research”, for teaching has nothing to do with research.
4. “Let’s put it this way: People who make contributions to my campaign fund get
access. But there’s nothing wrong with constituents having access to their
representatives, is there?”
’Access’ is a euphemism for ‘influence’.
2
The second sentence is a proof surrogate – whether gaining ‘access’ is wrong is
precisely the issue.
5. “A few years ago, the deficit got so horrendous that even Congress was embarrassed.
Faced with this problem, the lawmakers did what they do best. They passed another
law.” (Abe Mellinkoff, in the S.F. Chronicle)
’even’, in the first sentence, is innuendo, slanting Congress.
The 2nd and 3rd sentences (‘did what they do best. They passed another law.’) may be
seen as downplaying or innuendo or both. The author seems to try to get the reader
to believe that passing laws is somehow just more of the same ineffectual behavior,
thereby either downplaying the process or implying it is somehow wrong (innuendo).
6. “Marriott Corporation struck out with patriotic food workers at Dodger Stadium when
the concession-holder ordered them [in a memo] to keep working instead of standing
respectfully during the National Anthem…Concession stand manager Nick
Kavadas…immediately objected to a Marriott representative.
Marriott subsequently issued a second memo on the policy. It read: “Stop all
activities while the National Anthem is being played.” Mel Clemens, Marriott’s
general manager at the stadium, said the second memo clarified the first memo.”
(Associated Press)
In the last sentence, ‘clarified’ is a euphemism. ‘Contradicted’ seems more
appropriate!
”struck out’ does not seem to be a slanter, as it doesn’t cast Marriott in a negative
light (innuendo), is not hyperbolic or a proof surrogate, and does not seem to be a
euphemism or dysphemism. Instead, it’s merely a baseball-themed metaphor for ‘did
something the food workers did not agree with’.
Amphiboly or equivocation?
7. Now’s your chance to have your ears pierced and get an extra pair to take home too!
(Auburn Citizen-Advertiser).
Equivocation on ‘pair’ – pair of ears or pair of earrings?
8. Parks will not issue parking permits to fish. (Highland Park Advertiser)
Equivocation on ‘to fish’ – ‘to fish’ as in the verb, or ‘fish’ as in the animal?
And…here are two informal fallacies. Which fallacies are they instances of?
3
9. Bill: “It’s Friday! Let’s party. I’ll stop by the store and grab some soda.”
Ted: (Sarcastically) “Yeah - that’s a party – hah!”
Bill: “What do you mean? Last weekend, I had scotch and soda, and got wasted. The
weekend before that I had Cuba libre’s [i.e., rum and Coke] with Donna and we had a
blast. And a month ago I had Jack and cokes at a party, and ended up drunk as hell.
Soda rocks!”
False cause. Bill mistakenly infers that the soda causes his drunkenness.
10. Dr. Herzheimer has written a number of essays criticizing self-help books from the
standpoint of logic and science. I realize Dr. Herzheimer is a famous philosopher, but
I think it is immature and cold-hearted to criticize people who are trying to help
others get their lives together.
Abusive ad hominem. The author implies that we should discount Herzheimer’s
arguments on the grounds that she is immature and cold-hearted.