For one of my sources, I chose a blog entitled “What is Pride?” by Jason Cangialosi. I wish to analyze the source’s credibility in reference to my research paper on the definition of pride. There are many instances within the short blog that Cangialosi attempts to establish credibility with the reader.
The use of ethos is apparent in the first several paragraphs where Cangialosi mentions pride as one of the seven deadly sins and examines its role in possibly producing the other six. In my paper I wish to answer whether pride is a good thing or a bad thing. This blog would support the idea that pride is a bad thing.
Cangialosi then throws in the idea of humility as a component or synonym of pride. He gives the readers familiar names such as Benjamin Franklin and Socrates in hopes that the reader will be able to relate to their opinions about the magnitude and beauty of the universe.
The author then moves his attention to Greek mythology to tell of pride’s tendency to build up one’s ego and then to knock him back down to earth. A final attempt to build credibility is made near the end of the blog as the author states that he is not worthy to preach on the topic and that the reader should take it from the experts. Cangialosi continues to give quotes from famous people such as Einstein and Abraham Lincoln. I feel that one of Cangialosi’s downfalls is that he throws out too many names.
Thanks for giving my essay on pride a critical read. In defense of "throwing out too many names" I would be so bold as to quote another, Issac Newton, who said "if I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
ReplyDeleteMy overriding idea is that these "giants", these quotable names, continually remind us how small we truly are in the greater scope of things. Though I appreciate that my downfall in the essay is in trying too hard to establish credibility, and not focusing enough on the issue at hand.
Be well.