Emotions in Rhetoric, Our Friend or Our Foe?

http://oddpad.com/exclusive-check-out-this-official-limited-edition-inside-out-screenprint/

      

If you are anything like me, when you think of emotions, you instantly think of Disney's Inside Out. That movie portrayed emotions in a way we have never imagined, as characters. These embodiments of emotions behaved similarly to commentators in The Atlantic and people who enjoy debating the ethics of embryonic stem cell research.

     I believe emotion should be used in civil discourse, as a way to connect with your audience on a personal level, alongside the facts. For instance, when something like the 'prank' at Old Dominion, it can have an emotional impact on everyone. The facts show the signs that Sigma Nu created had an effect on the community. Some people were shocked, while others were not even moved by their signs. However, the comments showed a different perspective. Everyone in the comments section of The Atlantic used pathos to guilt the reader into believing two sides. On one side, this as the norm in today's "rape culture", and on the other this is a crime that should result in the imprisonment of a fraternity. Although people who comment enjoy interjecting their opinions, it did not take away from the main message.
     In my controversial article, there is debate whether or not embryonic stem cells are the cure for all disease, or is considered the murder of innocent lives. Science is beginning to use facts to prove this research is beneficial to humanity. On the other hand, it is also considered one of the most unethical because it ties into other controversies including abortion, genetic modification, and human testing. In this field, emotions have steamrolled the logos, leading to many misconceptions about stem cell research. However, with enough logos and pathos, as well as new breakthroughs in medicine, I am confident that the science will come out on top.