Ryan Higgins
Professor Jasmine Mulliken
English 1113
3 November 2011
A Matter of Life or Death
The next presidential election is just over a year away. The candidates are on the campaign trail, talking about jobs, the economy, and health care. Sometimes, they talk about their views on abortion. However, they rarely talk about their stance on an issue that is just as controversial as abortion, the death penalty. Most people are either strongly for or against the death penalty. There seems to be little in between. Two reporters, Liz Goodwin and David Walsh-Little argue against the death penalty. Goodwin, who writes for The Lookout, describes the story of death row inmate Troy Davis in her blog, “Are Last Minute Supreme Court Stays Cruel and Unusual Punishment?” Davis was nearly granted a last minute stay before he was put to death. Walsh-Little, who is also a lawyer, tells the tale of his client, death row inmate John Booth-El, in an America article entitled, “Waiting for Good News.” Booth-El had already spent 23 years on death row when the article was published in 2007. Both authors make their argument that the death penalty is wrong by primarily using pathos with some supportive use of logos and ethos.
It is a good idea to use pathos when arguing for or against a sensitive subject. Emotions can be quite convincing by forcing readers to think with their hearts and their heads. By illustrating the sad circumstances of their subjects, both authors want the readers to feel sorry for the condemned and agree that the death penalty is wrong. Goodwin takes the reader to the night of Davis’ execution when she describes in detail everything from his last meal to how we would hopefully “stave off death one more time,” It is difficult for the audience to not feel sympathetic toward a person who is staving off death, no matter what he did to deserve it. Walsh-Little describes two emotional stories to support his
Higgins 2
argument, which is a wise use of pathos. Walsh-Little writes about visiting his client, who had been on “Supermax Prison’s” death row for 23 years, a few days before Christmas (Walsh-Little). It is difficult for the audience to not feel pity for someone spending the holidays on death row, especially if he has been there for 23 years. It is also a good strategy to reference the holiday season to evoke more sympathy from the readers. Like Goodwin, Walsh-Little uses imagery to paint a negative picture of death row when he later describes the case of death row inmate Angel Diaz. Walsh-Little graphically describes Diaz’s execution by writing that the lethal injection needles “were inserted in and through Diaz’s veins, causing the poisonous chemicals to be pumped directly into Diaz’s flesh. This prolonged the killing process” (Walsh-Little). His use of pathos is most effective when he continues. “Witnesses to the execution reported Diaz licking his lips, grimacing, and appearing to speak 24 minutes into the execution. A second lethal dose of poison was necessary to kill Mr. Diaz, who clearly suffered both unnecessary and severe pain” (Walsh-Little). The visions of someone suffering a slow and painful death certainly support Walsh-Little’s argument against the death penalty. The imagery of an execution effectively plays with the audience’s emotions. It is important to note that neither author went into detail about the crimes the death row inmates committed. That would make their use of pathos less effective because the audience would not feel as much sympathy for them. The fallacy in the authors’ use of pathos is the fact that not every death row inmate suffers like the inmates in these articles. Most inmates do not have multiple last minute stays of execution nor have to wait 23 years on death row. Most inmates also do not suffer terrible pain for half an hour during their executions.
Both authors argue against the death penalty but for different reasons. Goodwin believes multiple stays of execution and the long waiting period on death row cause unnecessary mental and physical stress, which she calls “cruel and unusual punishment” (Goodwin). Walsh-Little is more concerned with the methods of execution, which he argues are inhumane. Despite the fallacy that not all
Higgins 3
death row inmates suffer like the ones mentioned in the articles, both authors use pathos effectively to not only support their argument but also illustrate the reasons for their arguments.
Both authors rarely and less effectively use logos to support their arguments. Goodwin provides only two figures. She says that in 2008, American death row inmates spent an average of 13 years on death row (Goodwin). This statistic backs up her argument that death row inmates must wait too long for their executions and is an effective use of logos because it logically links her argument with actual numbers. This statistic could be strong enough to make some readers believe that waiting this long to die is cruel and unusual, which supports Goodwin’s argument. She uses a comparison with more numbers to try to strengthen her use of logos even more when she writes, “In some countries, waits of more than three years are outlawed as inhumane” (Goodwin). The use of the word inhumane is an effective use of pathos and comparing the three year wait in some countries to 13 years in the United States could be considered a strong use of logos. However, the fallacy with this comparison is it is too vague. Goodwin does not define which countries she means by “some” countries. What if she is referring to some third world countries whose justice system has little in common with ours? Also, what does “outlawed as inhumane” really mean? Does it mean that waits of longer than three years are against the law?
Walsh-Little uses logos when he describes some historical information. He points out that in 2006, Florida Governor Jeb Bush ended all executions in his state because there were too many questions about the pain and suffering of the person being executed (Walsh-Little). He also cites the story of a federal judge in California, who banned lethal injections, which “raised questions about the legitimacy of capital punishment in principle” (Walsh-Little). Using historical references to support his argument is an effective use of logos because it provides precedent that supports Walsh-Little’s argument against the death penalty. In addition to opposing the death penalty because of the methods of
Higgins 4
execution, Walsh-Little supports his argument with other reasoning based on historical references. He refers to his home state of Maryland, whose governor “declared a moratorium” on the death penalty in 2002 until DNA evidence could be used to make sure those on death row were guilty and because there was evidence of racial bias in death row cases (Walsh-Little). The fallacy in Walsh-Little’s uses of logos is based on the fact that just because it happened in Florida or Maryland does not mean it should happen everywhere else. Florida had some trouble with lethal injections but that does not mean all states do. Maryland had a racial bias problem but does that mean the death penalty should be eliminated everywhere? Using historical references from specific places weakens the use of logos.
The authors use logos in different ways. Goodwin uses statistics while Walsh-Little uses historical references. Their arguments were not strengthened by the use of logos as much as they are with their uses of pathos. The statistics need to be more meaningful and the historical references less specific for their use of logos to be more effective.
Both authors use ethos to effectively support their arguments. While Walsh-Little does not directly quote any experts, he describes the actions of some experts in the field to strengthen his argument. Plus, since he is an experienced lawyer with clients on death row, he can be considered an expert on death penalty cases. Since Goodwin is not an expert in the field, she effectively quotes authorities such as Amnesty International, Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, Stephen Breyer, and John Paul Stevens, and the UK Privy Council.
Goodwin’s most effective use of ethos comes from Justice Breyer, who once argued that the Supreme Court should consider whether the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment, which is illegal under the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution (Goodwin). The use of Breyer is powerful when he quotes an 1890 Supreme Court decision.
Higgins 5
When a prisoner sentenced by a court to death is confined in the penitentiary awaiting the execution of the sentence, one of the most horrible feelings to which he can be subjected during that time is the uncertainty during the whole of it (Goodwin).
She effectively ends her article with a quote from the UK Privy Council that said waiting on death row is inhumane because it adds the “additional torture of a long period of alternating hope and despair” (Goodwin). Goodwin uses these authoritative sources to argue against extended waits on death row, the primary reason she opposes the death penalty. This is a very effective use of ethos with no fallacies. Most of Walsh-Little’s use of ethos is in his own words. As mentioned earlier, he points out the federal judge in California’s decision to ban lethal injections and Maryland Governor Paris Glendening’s moratorium on the death penalty. The historical reference is a use of logos while the fact that these people are authorities is a use of ethos. Walsh-Little says in the first paragraph that there is “hope for its (death penalty’s) abolition” (Walsh-Little). Immediately, his audience knows that he opposes the death penalty. Later, he describes the death penalty as a sickness that we must confront (Walsh-Little). However, his most effective words are found in the last sentence of the article, when he refers to the Bible.
Maybe at the right moment, when leadership is most needed, shepherds like those described in Luke’s infancy narrative will emerge to announce the good news. Lord knows, the abolition of the death penalty in the United States is good news long overdue (Walsh-Little).
Although the audience is not made up of only Christians, the Bible is universally recognized by people from all faiths and even those who have no religious convictions, which makes citing in an allowable use of ethos.
Both authors make their argument that the death penalty is wrong by primarily using pathos with some limited uses of logos and ethos. Their strategies and fallacies are similar in that they use pathos and ethos more effectively than logos. Although there are some fallacies in their use of pathos, such as graphically describing only three death row inmates, overall it is an effective rhetorical device because it
Higgins 6
elicits emotion from the readers. Many people base their decisions on emotions. The authors do not use logos as effectively because although the statistics sound convincing, the fallacy is they are very vague. Finally, the use of ethos is perhaps the most effective rhetorical device because there are few, if any fallacies. Goodwin uses quotes from respected experts since she is not an expert herself. These powerful words support her argument against the death penalty well. Walsh-Little has an advantage over Goodwin since he is an expert himself. Although it is clear that Goodwin opposes the death penalty, especially the long waiting periods, she never comes out and actually says it. On the other hand, Walsh-Little leaves no doubt with his final comments about abolition of the death penalty being long overdue.
Higgins 7
Works Cited
Goodwin, Liz. “Are Last-Minute Supreme Court Stays Cruel and Unusual Punishment?”
Yahoo! News. Yahoo! Inc., 21 Sept. 2011. Web. 29 Sept. 2011.
Walsh-Little, David. “Waiting for Good News.” America. 10 Dec. 2007: Academic Search
Premier. Web. 2 Nov. 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment