Essay, Pages 2 (264 words)
How rhetorically reliable is Einstein’s action? Albert Einstein’s response does a terrific job using rhetoric to respond to Phyllis Wright’s questions as to whether or not scientists pray. Einstein did an excellent task developing his topic, or the purpose, in this letter. He made it really clear that he was explaining whether scientists hope. Due to the truth that this letter was composed to a 6th grade woman, Einstein chose a suitable tone for his audience; Einstein made his response apparent a succinct so that Phyllis’s question was answered.
“For this factor, a research study scientist will hardly be inclined to think that occasions could be influenced by prayer, i.e., by a desire resolved to a supernatural being” (Einstein 10).
The purpose of Einstein’s letter to Phyllis Wright, or the point he’s trying to get across, is done beautifully as he explains at the end of the letter, “In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naïve” (Einstein 10).
Of course, for the occasion of his letter, his context is well put with many examples and explanations within it. Einstein effectively includes logos, or clearly exemplified reasons, pathos, or the emotion behind the answer, and ethos, the way he answered Phyllis’s question, rather the tone he used. Because of the fact that Einstein uses his subject, speaker, audience, context, purpose, and appeals to logos, pathos, and ethos, his letter in response to Phyllis Wright’s question as to if scientists pray or not is rhetorically effective.