In our society, we are increasing the appeal to visual arguments. Visual arguments can enhance the, “logos, pathos, and ethos of an argument by supporting or clarifying an argument’s logical core, moving audiences imaginatively and emotionally, or enhancing the writer’s credibility and authority.” (Writing Arguments, 161) As appealing as visual arguments are, it does have one flaw. It is harder to make a connection between the verbal and visual parts of the argument.
Although the written arguments don’t have the special fonts or photos, it justifies to the audience the point that is being made. In a visual argument the audience has to interpret the point of the argument because it is not as straightforward.
I find that visual arguments are more appealing due to photos, and fonts that grab the attention of the audience. However, written arguments can also have this grabbing affect, but in a different way. The arguer really has to examine the audience they are making their point to and choose a visual argument or a written argument depending on what they think will grab the audience better.
2 comments:
Although you clarified the difference between visual and written arguments, as we all did in several previous blogs, as well as explained how visual arguments can sometimes be more appealing, you failed to give examples of how we are moving toward more visual arguments in society. You did, however, outline the strengths and weaknesses of each one, so it wasn't a complete failure.
Oops, never mind; I guess I did my blog on the wrong thing...
Post a Comment