Wedding Rings as a symbol of commitment?

First off the research for the rhetorical analysis has been quite interesting. I have chosen wedding rings as my artifact. This artifact holds value and is important to many people. Many people look at wedding rings as a sign of commitment; they see the ring as a symbol of love and trust. However, I wonder why someone feels they HAVE to wear a ring to symbols love, commitment, trust, everlasting love.

Why do so many people feel persuaded to buy a material item to wear and tell the world I am committed? Why can’t trust be enough? I am going to talk about these questions in my rhetorical analysis.

So the basis of my argument will be divided into two sections. First off, why are people persuaded to buy and or wear weddings rings? This one question has a lot to it. The second is why am I not?

For my own personal reasons I am not a huge fan of “wedding rings” but so many others are persuaded to buy them, wear them, acknowledge them as a symbol of something greater than human life; this symbol human life is melting together, two people becoming one.

I have found that through commitment and trust there is not a need for a material item to yell to the world I am married. Let me say that I am NOT opposed to other people wearing rings; this is only my personal ideals.

I am currently just beginning to draft my ideas, warrants, etc. But just from brainstorming I believe that ethos logos and pathos will drive my discussion. If you have any ideas to help me better argue and write my paper please leave me a comment!

Ethos Logos Pathos underlines our choices

After today’s class I realized that ethos logos and pathos are not just terms that can be discussed within a classroom setting, but yet are terms that can be used in everyday life. Within every detail of our life’s we, as people, can analysis how everything we do relates back to motivation which is persuasion and how within persuasion ethos logos and pathos come into play.

To begin, I believe that rhetoric will and has helped me throughout my life, an example: in a classroom setting many different types of students are placed together all with different moral beliefs, religious backgrounds, and different cultures. Suppose a discussion arose when talking about the War in Iraq. Many of the students would be pron to speak their parents view points, what there friends think, what the television says, what they have heard in their political science classes. All of these arguments are driven through ethos logos and pathos and depending on where their argument lies depends on what persuaded them to think a certain way.

I understand how through arguments within ethos logos and pathos the beginning for these has to start with rhetoric. Rhetoric in the most simply form starts from persuasion. Each idea that people has. Like Mr. Garrison says, was thought of before by someone else who persuaded them to think that way.

I believe that through rhetoric people are persuaded through their life to make certain choices depending on their belief system and within those choices others follow and they were somehow persuaded through ethos logos and pathos.