Gordin Adams’ argument is effective because of his persuasive appeal to logos, pathos, and ethos. In the beginning of his petition, he starts with his general occupation and present education. Adams ends it with a clear purpose of why he entered college. From this part, he shows credibility and character. Adams adds in much more ethos to defend his claim by first representing himself as a person; the high achievements he has earned during both colleges, SCC and ASU; and the education he gained. With this amount of intelligence and awards, he grows his credibility and sets a character presented to the committee. Adams presents himself as confident, hardworking student by saying, “ [he] will enter the ASU College of Law to study Indian and criminal law during the Fall of 1992 if this petition is approved.” He has a game plan and is determined to serve his tribe. Further more into the petition, he backs up his claims with job occupations and projects he has done in the past, stating that he “used geometry and algebra commonly in the design of many welded structures.”
Adams then shows he has much credibility and knows what he wants. For every question that he had about the requirements of college algebra, he uses supportive evidence to back up his argument, where he used algebra. Adams uses a large amount of ethos during the whole petition to keep the committee from loosing he’s attention. As for logos, he points out his case and claims he doesn’t need algebraic skills for his future profession. He piles up all of his achievements, awards, outstanding grades, and honors; shows information about himself. With the questions Adams thought about, he asked professors of the college to give the committee evidence, quotes, and responses. He shows them he doesn’t need algebra by backing it up with real supportive evidence of other college staffs of ASU. He “contacted Dr. _____ of the ASU Mathematics Department”, “consulted Mr. Jim ____ of the Justice College”, and then he contacted his friends who were practicing attorneys.
They responded “no” to all of Adams’ questions. From this evidence and responses, he’s able to support his argument. As for pathos, he made “a vow of moral commitment to seek out and confront injustice.” Adams sends out a emotion of loyalty, impressive, and proud. Adams also said he is the first in his family to enter college. He presents himself to the committee as outstanding individual, making them feel impressed towards Adams. The petition says if he has it approved he will “vigorously prosecute [their] right to sovereignty before the Congress of the United States.” Adams shows he is determined and has a purpose of his life. In the ending of the petition, Adams makes the committee feel sympathy and guilt because the examples of the problems the Native Americans are experiencing and wishes to resolve them. By promising the committee that he will be faithful and assured, he shows them that ASU will have no changes of accreditation and wills still continue to achieve. It sends out an emotion of faith and trustworthy towards Adams from the committee. Thus, by using hard evidence, emotion appeal, and credibility, he is effective in appealing to logos, pathos, and ethos.