Discussions For English 1302 , Gandhi (1982) Speech Pathos

DISCUSSION 2
1 No, what Steven and John did may not be completely considered wrong. In a consequentialists’ perspective, the moral status of an action, whether the action is morally right or wrong, will depend on the consequences of that action. In this case, the action being referred to is the taking of money whereas the consequence is to pay for Steven’s daughter medical procedure. Thus, even if the action was morally wrong, if the consequence of that such action, which is to help another child live, is morally right, then the action is justified by the consequence and what John and Steven did was not wrong.
2 Yes, there would me harm if Steven and John simply left. Since there was proof beyond reasonable doubt that the pastor was a paedophile and potential murderer, then John and Steven could have let another child die if they did not do something about it. As deontological ethics would suggest, what matters with regard to whether an action is right or wrong is why the action was done. Hence, in this case, what matters is why John and Steven did what they have to do, not the consequences of such action.
3 Yes, Steve and John would have the responsibility to take matters into their own hands. It is a moral obligation on their part to see to it that the pastor would have no more victims. It is their moral obligation to see to it that these children will be protected from any wrongdoings. However, such participation should be limited and controlled. There are other ways to do such duty, even without causing harm to the pastor. They may ask help from higher ranks of the Government, or at least try harder to look for an authority who can investigate on such matter.
DISCUSSION 3
Gandhi (1982)
In this speech, Gandhi mainly used Pathos. His argument was about how Indians should not be treated like animals and that violence must stop even if what it takes is his life. He appealed to the emotion of his fellowmen by describing the new law that was passed by General Smut. He appealed to his audience by creating an argument that would, in a manner create emotional response. Two passages from his speech that would indicate that it was indeed a pathos type are, “I am asking you to fight. To fight against their anger, not to prevent it. We will not strike a blow, but we will receive them and through our pain, we will make them see their injustice,” and “I praise such courage. I need such courage, because in this cause, I too am prepared to die.” In these two lines, Gandhi clearly was convincing his audience to respond to what their hearts are saying. Gandhi knew that they felt oppressed and so he used this feeling to convince them to fight.
There was also an ethos in his speech where he convinced his audience through credibility. “They may torture my body, break my bones, and even kill me. Then, they will have my dead body, but not my obedience,” and “I too am prepared to die,” are the passages he used.
Lastly, there was also the used of logos or the appeal to logic. The passages he used are: “Let us begin by being clear about General Smut’s new law. All Indians must now be fingerprinted like criminals. Men and women. No marriage other than a Christian mar...