A Modest Proposal Vs Lifeboat Ethics Essay

“A Modest Proposal” V. “Lifeboat Ethics” Distributing limited resources among our rapidly growing economy has always been a cause for concern. There are new lives being brought into this world everyday even though our resources are dwindling down as we speak. In “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift and “Lifeboat Ethics” by Garrett Hardin, each author uses a different method of appeals to propose to their readers a way to help our ever growing population. Hardin uses more of a logic based argument, using facts and figures to back up his statements. Swift takes a wildly different approach by using a satirical “speaker” to bring a more emotional appeal to his readers. He first recommends a very vulgar approach to grab his reader’s attention and then proposes his actual solution. Although both essays are effective in different ways, I believe that Swift’s emotional approach makes for a more effective argument. A key aspect to consider when reading any essay is the author’s credentials and validity. Hardin has a degree in population control, making him an expert in that area. He also uses several credible sources when citing his facts and figures throughout the essay. Swift on the other hand isn’t an expert and neither is his speaker. However, what Swift lacks in education he makes up for in experience. He has lived on both sides of the spectrum firsthand. He knows what it’s like to be both dirt poor and wealthy upper middle class, and that gives him experience that Hardin lacks. Sometimes personal experience and knowledge can outweigh someone who has simply researched the topic more. It’s better to be able to empathize with your less fortunate readers than to only be able to merely try and sympathize with them. Making an essay logical and easy for a reader to follow is also very important. Without using logic in an essay matters are hard to relate to. Hardin’s main argument is based on logic, and although this makes his argument effective it also makes it very dry. He uses several facts to help put his reader’s minds into perspective, but this doesn’t keep their attention. Trying to follow an essay with a bunch of numbers thrown at you that you’re unsure about what they even mean isn’t an effective means of an argument. Swift also uses logic throughout his argument, but uses them from two completely different perspectives while keeping his readers entertained. He first uses his “speaker” to incorporate satire by proposing that people indulge in the cannibalism of babies in order to create more resources. This type or logic appeals to the readers …show more content…
Hardin plays emotion into his essay by using the lack of it. He demonstrates a more serious tone and downplays emotion completely out of the argument. Hardin lacks empathy and sympathy with his audience leaving his readers to questioning his overall character and judgment. Swift once again uses the complete opposite approach. He appeals to his readers by empathizing with them and demonstrating an effective solution. Swift uses his “speaker” as a way to interpret emotion while breaking up a logical argument. He never intended for people to take his “speaker’s” proposal as a legitimate one, he only used the vulgarity as an emotional appeal before introducing his serious proposal. By doing this, Swift gained an intrigued audience whose interest and attention was captivated until the very