occupy walmart

OCCUPY WALMART:

A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

By: Amanda LeBlanc

Kayla Parr

Savannah Durr

Emily Vela

DEFINITIONS Diction- style of speaking or writing as

dependent upon choice of words Logos- using logic in an argument Hyperbole- use of exaggeration Irrelevant conclusion- rhetorical strategy

that diverts attention away from a fact in dispute rather than addressing it directly

Pathos- rhetorical strategy that creates an emotion response

Allusion- a figure of speech that makes a reference to well known people, places or events

DEFINITIONS Ad Hominem- a claim or argument is

rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact

Fallacy of False Cause- incorrectly assumes one thing is the cause of another

Ad Populum- appeal to the majority Non Sequitur- an argument in which its

conclusion does not make sense. Straw Man Argument- attempts to refute

opponent's position but instead attacks a position not held by his opponent.

GRAYSON’S APPROACHGrayson was the representative of the small coffee shop. He argued that his shop should not sell out to Walmart.

•Professional, collected diction• Ex: “moral scruples,”

“bourgeoisie,” formal vocabulary (“populous movement,” “currency,” etc.

• Gave Grayson ethos through a professional appearance

•Pathos• “These kids…” • Shows coffee shop in a good

light, and makes Walmart look bad. It puts the audience on his side.

GRAYSON’S APPROACH Logos

Gas pricesWalmart destroying American currencyGives Grayson credibility, makes Walmart

look bad Allusions

“Les Mis,” “Occupy Wall Street,” “Dante’s Inferno”

Appeal to the population (ad populus), fights for empathy

GRAYSON’S APPROACH Irrelevant conclusions (fallacy)

“You belong in the 10th circle of hell!” (Dante’s Inferno) Tries to show how Calen is bad, but the

argument is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. Slight ad hominem

Resorted to physical violence (fallacy)Let emotions get the better of him. This

argument was supposed to be verbal. Damaged his credibility as a composed

businessman

CALEN’S APPROACHCalen is the representative of Walmart. He hopes to buy out Grayson’s privately owned coffee shop.

• Diction• “Sir,” other professional

diction• Shows that he is a

respectful man just looking for a business deal

• Logos• “3 billion… dollars!”• Intends to logically

prove that his offer is a deal by giving exact figures

CALEN’S APPROACH Fallacy of False Cause

“Those kids… are the ones who voted in…” Implies that Grayson’s patrons caused the

money problem Straw Man Argument

“…Those stupid kids are what’s ruining this country!”

Attacks a point – the state of the country – that isn’t relevant to the argument

CALEN’S APPROACH Non Sequitor

“…I should occupy your butt with my foot!”Nonsensical threat that barely pertains to

the argument. He’s just being plain rude.

WINNER? Physical violence aside, who won this

argument?

We feel that Grayson won the argument.

WHY? In presenting his argument, Grayson

focused on using rhetorical devices such as diction, logos, and allusions to prove his point. Although he resorted to ad hominem and irrelevant conclusions, we feel that his argument was better supported and presented. His strong points outweighed his fallacies.

Calen mainly used fallacies to make his point, which destroyed his credibility and emphasized Grayson’s points.

CREDITS Special thanks to Calen Durr and

Grayson Quay for being themselves and allowing us to film it.

Thanks to Mount Olive Lutheran Church for allowing us to film in their conference room. (and throw their bibles…which they do not know about)

Thanks to Get Go for putting up with our craziness for hours upon hours and providing free wi-fi and yummy food.

BECAUSE WE CAN…

An appeal to pathos…