Shanker references to many credible studies to back up her claim that organic produce is not worth the extra cost. Thus, Shanker utilizes logos to get her points across by showing her skill as a researcher and the fact that she also looks at the other side of the argument. Although her wording makes the point on her side, none the less she does acknowledge the fact. For example, she states that organic food does contain slightly more nutrients than conventionally grown produce. She also argues the claim that organic food is better for the environment by showcasing reports that contradict that theory.
I feel that Arom’s style of writing is very persuasive, since it feels that the reader has a choice to decide whether to buy organic or not. I felt more interested as nothing was pushed on me but I as the reader feel power and the ability to decide for my self what is right or not. Arom states that organic food is healthier as the number of pesticides is lower than conventionally grown food. The author states that organic food may not be healthy. Thus, I feel this author is only giving the facts and letting you decided what’s right.
I feel that Biemiller’s work may be a bit biased due to the fact that the author mainly looks at the pros of Antioch college’s healthy dining style. I feel as researcher the author is not as credible as the others due to word choice, such as him describing the salad bar as ‘beautiful’ or the fact that he describes the food as ‘plain but tasty’. I feel these are just opinions and that only facts should be laid out in the article.
rhetoricalresponses 