MLK March on Washington

What is the author arguing?

Martin Luther King Jr. is arguing that everyone should be treated equally and that we should not be judged by the color of our skin. He believed that the pigment of our skin does not change who we are as people. It bothered him that over 100 years prior to his speech they passed the Emancipation Proclamation to free all slaves, but at this point in time there seemed to be no change. Yes, the blacks were no longer slaves technically, but they were not treated any differently. He was pushing for a change in the treatment of all humans.

How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

MLK appeals to logos by pointing out the fact of the Emancipation Proclamation. Though it was agreed upon 100 years earlier, not much has changed. America is supposed to be a free country but people of different races aren’t allowed to use the same water fountains, doors, bathrooms, schools, and restaurants. Nor are they allowed to have the same jobs or ride in the same part of public vehicles. He points out that it is stated that all Americans are created equal but our treatment is not equal. He appeals to pathos by giving some of his own personal experiences and observations. He explains all of the hardships that people of color have experienced and that he is their voice since their voices have been dwindled down to nothing. MLK had a very strong personality. He knew what his morals were and stood by them no matter what. In his speech he does not set them aside. Instead of bashing on the white man, he just showed his point of view. Instead of dwelling on the past he told everyone his dreams of the future. He knew that stooping down to the level of the white man and pointing out everything that was wrong would get him nowhere. He genuinely spoke from his heart.

What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

Everyone has heard this speech at one point in time. It is one of the major parts of the civil rights movement. If MLK had not given this speech I feel like things would not have moved as quickly as they did. This gave the blacks the motivation to do what was necessary to get their rights up to par. This speech helped segregation get outlawed. If it wasn’t for this speech I would not have the friends I do and I would not be in the classes I am in. To be completely honest, my family would probably still be living in Kenya.

Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

I completely agree with his argument. The color of a person’s skin does not define who they are. A person’s personality and character should be the deciding factor on if they are a good person. A white person can be just as ignorant as a black person. When “all people are created equal” as written, there was not a side note that said, “unless they aren’t white.” Therefore, everyone should be treated equal.

John F. Kennedy Inaugural Address

1. What is the author arguing?

John F. Kennedy is not exactly arguing anything. In his address he is mostly reassuring the Americans that their choice was a good one. He shares his hopes for the country and is honest with them about it. He makes a point to show them that he is not making empty promises because he realizes all he is hoping for can not be accomplished in his term. Kennedy is not trying to prove an argument at all. He is trying to give America hope for the future.

2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

Kennedy's address is very moving. He makes a point to appeal to the logos, pathos, and ethos. For the logos he has the idea of becoming civil with all of the countries that we were rivals with. He makes a point to point out that it is not a sign of weakness and we could actually use our resources to work together to improve the world instead of burden it. For the pathos he talks about helping the pour not only in our country but others as well. He goes as far as pledging to the countries below us to convert our good words into good deeds. He shows that he genuinely cares for the well being of the less fortunate and is willing to help them is the Americans stand behind him. I believe the line "ask not what your country can do for you-- ask what you can do for your country" sums up the ethos perfectly. Though he wants to help everyone, he knows that he is going to need support and help from the Americans.

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

This was the beginning of John F. Kennedy's position as president. These are all the promises he made and the vision he had for America's future. Even though he did not get the chance to see the end of his term, I feel like American's still tried to achieve his goals for him. 

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

Though it was not an actual argument, I found this very convincing. With each thought her had, he had a way of doing it. I liked the fact that he wanted Americans to know that he wasn't making empty promises and he actually was working towards all of this happening. I know a lot of us worry that the president is just saying stuff to look good, but with that we know that he was sincere. If I was a person of this time i would be ecstatic for him to be my president. He has dreams and he wants to find a way to achieve them. Not only are they just on our home soil, but they would help us internationally to make more allies and to have a better conscious. In this address there is a sense of sincerity that you can not fake, and that is why I believe what he said.