Peter Singer's Rhetoric Argument

Prior to analyzing the direction or quality of an argument it is important to gain a greater understanding of the author. To begin I did a little bit of research to get a grander picture of who Peter Singer is and his ability and credentials to speak on the topic of ethics. From what I gathered in my opinion which could vary from other opinions is that Peter Singer is qualified to speak on the knowledge of ethics. He has studied the topic as well as taught the topic at some of the top schools, Princeton to speak of one and has written several books.

It is important to have an understanding of who is behind the scenes to be open to what you are going to read. Having a academic respect for the author contributes to the ability to take in what they are saying as truth behind the opinion. It also is an aspect of one of the elements of identifying the rhetorical situation in an argument, which a will address after first identifying the academic argument.

There are different ways that one is able to achieve this when making an academic argument, by explanation, by persuasion, or by reconciling disputes. It appears that with Peter Singers argument on ethics he is both knowledgeable in the subject as well as has the ability to “dumb down” the concept and tell it with a story that is easy to understand and helps the average person see the big picture. A great example was with the story of the child in the pond, and having to make the choice to save your expensive shoes or the child who would drown. As most people would say, they would save the child, Singers point, the money originally spent on the shoes could be used to save many children in the world. Why does it take the death of child in your face to make the ethical decision to spend your money