A Rhetorical Analysis Of Unnatural Selections By Barry Schwartz

In the article, “Unnatural Selections” by Barry Schwartz, he explains how a “default” choice affects what choices we make. His use of wording and evidence evokes emotions to help persuade the reader to think a certain way about “default” choices. Schwartz uses an example about organ donors to show the reader how default choices affect us. He says, “More than 90 percent of Europeans are organ donors, while only about 25 percent of Americans are- even though most Americans approve of organ donation.”(10). He also states that the reason this happens is that the “default” choice here in America is to not be an organ donor and while in Europe, you are an organ donor unless you sign a form saying that you don’t want to be one. This evidence supports that the most common choice that

According to the T.G.I. Friday´s example, that would mean that as more sizes are offered for a dish, more people would chose the ¨regular¨ option. To help get his point across better and seeming more credible, he adds that the statistics, about the organ donations,are found in a 2003 science journal. Also at the bottom of the page is says that Barry Schwartz is a professor of psychology at Swarthmore College.
The article was written very well but I do find some faults with it. He did not provide statistics for all of the examples, maybe because they didn 't support his claim or it didn 't make him look completely right. It also seems that he did not explain the examples about 401(k) and ¨no fault¨ insurance well enough. He also reference all of the examples more than once, except those two. I feel that he should have left out those examples, because it just confuses the reader.
The author, Barry Schwartz, did achieve his goal of stating that default choices do make a difference when people are making