RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

Rachel Pierce
RC 2001
September 30, 2015
Rhetorical Analysis
Rhetoric is a tool that can be utilized in many different ways. Authors use it to make their
discussions more elaborate and more relatable for the intended audience. The two articles,
About Alzheimers Disease: Alzheimers Basics and Running exercise delays
neurodegeneration in amygdala and hippocampus of Alzheimers disease (APP/PS1)in transgenic
mice, both utilize several different rhetorical techniques such as pathos, logos, and ethos to
convey their points and appropriately address their audience. They both discuss topics regarding
Alzheimers, but the first one is much more basic and easy to understand because of the audience
it is intended for; where as the second one definitely requires to knowledge in the field in order
to understand it. They are somewhat similar in the topics they discuss, but they both utilize
different rhetorical techniques to convey their point.
The first article I read was called About Alzheimers Disease: Alzheimers Basics. It
just explained the basic concepts of the disease and what it is and how it affects people and their
brains. Throughout the article, I found it very easy to follow and understand, very formal, and
impersonal. It was clear that the purpose of the article was to inform the general public about the
disease, as it was found on a website that consisted of current topics in psychology. The website
is very accessible, it can be found with a simple search about Alzheimers disease. I was
surprised at how easy it was to understand what the article was saying how well it conveyed the
point without using an abundance of jargon that the average person would not understand. For
example, the article begins with this statement; Alzheimers disease is an irreversible,
progressive brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills and, eventually, the

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

ability to carry out the simplest tasks. (About Alzheimers) This introduction is very short and
simple, and explains very clearly what Alzheimers is in terms that the average adult can
comprehend and relate to.
While reading the article, I made sure to pay careful attention to what adjectives, if any,
they used to describe the disease, in order to determine how pathos was used. Throughout the
entire article I only counted the one; the use of the word devastating. Which of course is true, but
I found it very interesting that the author(s) decided to keep it strictly factual. When covering
topics such as Alzheimers it is almost impossible to discuss it without human nature interfering
and using pathos or certain vocabulary to help the reader better understand the full capacity of
the disease. So I found it almost impressive that the author was able to fully explain in detail
what Alzheimers is, how it affects people and how the rate of deaths from Alzheimers is
increasing very rapidly without including any emotion. So with that being said, it is clear the
author focused mainly on utilizing logos, not pathos. Throughout the article, no specific authors
are noted, and it does not cite any specific sources. However, I believe it is still a credible
document and has good ethos because it comes from the National Institute on Aging website,
which is a government sponsored organization, and it does provide a mission statement.
The exigence behind this article was the issue of the average population not being very
well versed when it comes to Alzheimers disease and how it affects people. Even doctors and
researchers do not know everything there is to know about this disease, so of course the general
public knows even less. But with an increasing death rate from Alzheimers, due to the aging
population, there needs to be a more common knowledge of the disease and what kind of
preventative measures there are that can be taken and what type of symptoms to know to look for
in order to catch them sooner and begin treatment. The visuals in the article were not really very

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

good; the article itself only included one picture of a brain. This could be an example of logos;
the author decided to not include many illustrations to better help the reader focus on the facts of
the reading and not evoke any emotions with pictures. However, it did include a link to a short
animated video that better explained the process of Alzheimers and what exactly it does to the
brain itself. It was very clear and easy to follow, and in my opinion, very helpful. The
organization of the article made it very easy to read and follow. It was divided up into sections by
questions that are common about the disease. The purpose of this could have been an effort to
keep the reader engrossed in the article. When addressing the general public about this topic, the
author probably realized that the average person might not be too interested in brain
degeneration; so the easy to follow organization of the article might make it a little easier for the
reader to remain engaged throughout.
Overall, the tone in this article was formal, but not to the extent that it could be
intimidating to a reader. There was no medical jargon that the average person would not
understand, and it was very easy to follow and understand the purpose of the article. The author
did an excellent job of excluding any emotions in an effort to persuade the reader, it was
completely factual. So, in my opinion, this article was very effective for its intended purpose.
The second article I read was called Running exercise delays neurodegeneration in
amygdala and hippocampus of Alzheimers disease (APP/PS1) transgenic mice. It was
significantly harder to follow and understand and it took me a very long time to get through it
because I had to stop and look up the things I was reading about. It was full of medical and
scientific jargon like, Pathologically, Alzheimers Disease is characterized by extracellular
deposition of A peptides in the amyloid plaques and intracellular accumulation of hyper
phosphorylated tau in the neurofibrillary tangles. (About Alzheimers Disease) Clearly, it was

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

not an article meant for the average population, since most people do not have a background and
are not familiar with neurodegeneration and the different parts of the brain that Alzheimers
affects. It was meant for a particular discourse community such as a group of researchers,
scientists, or professors that have the required knowledge to comprehend this reading and have it
be useful to them.
This article also did not use any emotional adjectives, but that was not expected for this
type of material anyway. It was very formal and very impersonal, and talked only about the
research for that particular experiment; it did not give any background information on the
disease. It was implied that anyone reading that article would already have knowledge of the
information and would be reading it for a certain purpose, not just for leisure or out of curiosity.
In this article, no pathos was used; it was mostly just logos. There was also some ethos
because the author seemed very knowledgeable in the field and had many citations of other
creditable sources. The exigency of this piece was to address the research and the experiment
that had been conducted, and results that were found. It was the opposite of the other article
where the main purpose was to inform the public of a disease and symptoms they should look
for. This article was not meant to be informative to just anyone, only those who have the
knowledge to understand and utilize the information.
The visuals in this article were excellent. There were several different types of graphs to
support the research they had done, and other images of the work as well. They are all very well
labeled, but once again even the wording in the labels on the graphs are hard to understand if the
reader has no existing knowledge prior to reading. The organization was also very good; the
article was broken up into numbered sections that followed and corresponded with the
experiment and the steps that were taken. Overall, this article was much more difficult to

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

understand and somewhat intimidating to a reader who has no knowledge of the vocabulary and
concepts that are being discussed. However, the purpose of the article was satisfied because it is
not meant for the general public; it was written to document and discuss an experiment within
that field to further the research of the disease.
Both of the articles succeeded in their intended purpose. Although the second article was
significantly harder to read and understand, it would not have been so for its intended discourse
community. It laid out all the facts of the research very clearly, and discussed the findings and
conclusions very well. It did exactly what that particular community would need it to do. As did
the first article I discussed. It was very well organized with all the facts that one might need to
know about the disease, it was just intended for a different community. The author clearly had a
very good understanding that its intended discourse community would not have the knowledge
and vocabulary that a scientist or researcher would know, and therefore constructed it to fit the
needs of that community. Both articles fit their discourse communities very well, and satisfy the
purpose they were needed for.

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

References
About Alzheimer's Disease: Alzheimer's Basics. (n.d.). Retrieved August 23, 2015, from
https://www.nia.nih.gov/alzheimers/topics/alzheimers-basics
Lin, T., Shih, Y., Chen, S., Lien, C., Chang, C., Huang, T., . . . Kuo, Y. (2014, December
24). Running exercise delays neurodegeneration in amygdala and hippocampus of Alzheimers
disease (APP/PS1) transgenic mice. Retrieved August 26, 2015, from
doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2014.12.005