It is the duty of the president to address the a nation in shock when disaster strikes. The president must explain the situation, express personal sorrow, and address how to fix the situation. It is imperative to do this as the president is the head of the country and the figure which citizens of the country base their own beliefs off of. One of the most effective tools presidents use when discussing disaster is an appeal to emotion, or in terms of Aristotle, pathos. After watching Reagan’s Challenger Disaster and Obama’s Sandy Hook Speeches, one must question wether Reagan and Obama use pathos effectively to display their own sorrow, explain the situation, and address how to fix it. Reagan uses pathos to address the audience from the beginning
…show more content…
Frank, describes how Obama’s eulogies reflect on the issue on gun violence, and if it is acceptable to do this. Frank describes how in his Tucson eulogy, the president does not address how lack of gun control may have caused the incident. The writer describes how “Obama replaced the more fatalistic theology…with a spirit of preservers and renewal rooted in 2 Corinthians.”(Frank 653) Obama reached out to his audience on an emotional level by bringing religion and preservation into discussion. Frank observes how Obama talks about the lives lost of an innocent girl who could have grown up and done great things. He talks about the girl saying “To be the first woman to play in the major leagues,and as the only girl in her little league team,no one put it past her.”(Frank 663) On the other hand, Obama is also praised for not bringing up gun control as that generally effects peoples emotions negatively. However, in his Sandy Hook eulogy Obama directly talks about guns control as a viable solution to mass shootings. For this, the president gets great disapproval by people. This is due to the fact that he is using pathos to address his audience, and when mentioning gun control, he is turning away from pathos and looking into a more logical view on the solution. Obama still uses emotion to depict his message to the citizens of America.(Frank 664) However, is the use of some logical standpoint a bad thing? No, because “the Newton address better met the aspirations of civility because it led to a consideration of policies designed to reduce gun violence.” (Frank 653) The author of the article seems to think that having a logical standpoint did not affect his solution. His call to action was not only logical, but included a great deal of emotion to convince his listeners. This makes his Newtown eulogy much better than Tucson as it has a purpose and a call to action while still using emotion to
Frank, describes how Obama’s eulogies reflect on the issue on gun violence, and if it is acceptable to do this. Frank describes how in his Tucson eulogy, the president does not address how lack of gun control may have caused the incident. The writer describes how “Obama replaced the more fatalistic theology…with a spirit of preservers and renewal rooted in 2 Corinthians.”(Frank 653) Obama reached out to his audience on an emotional level by bringing religion and preservation into discussion. Frank observes how Obama talks about the lives lost of an innocent girl who could have grown up and done great things. He talks about the girl saying “To be the first woman to play in the major leagues,and as the only girl in her little league team,no one put it past her.”(Frank 663) On the other hand, Obama is also praised for not bringing up gun control as that generally effects peoples emotions negatively. However, in his Sandy Hook eulogy Obama directly talks about guns control as a viable solution to mass shootings. For this, the president gets great disapproval by people. This is due to the fact that he is using pathos to address his audience, and when mentioning gun control, he is turning away from pathos and looking into a more logical view on the solution. Obama still uses emotion to depict his message to the citizens of America.(Frank 664) However, is the use of some logical standpoint a bad thing? No, because “the Newton address better met the aspirations of civility because it led to a consideration of policies designed to reduce gun violence.” (Frank 653) The author of the article seems to think that having a logical standpoint did not affect his solution. His call to action was not only logical, but included a great deal of emotion to convince his listeners. This makes his Newtown eulogy much better than Tucson as it has a purpose and a call to action while still using emotion to