cliparts.co |
With that in mind, let's see what my audience for my rhetorical analysis should then be. For instance, continuing with my previous example of child psychology and technology, people who might be interested in the issue would mostly consist of any parent with children, those attending elementary or high school, and those who live in technologically advanced countries. However, psychologists themselves can have an interest in and be a significant influence on the formulation of my argument. Based on my argument, the most opposed to it will be the people who believe that technology is detrimental to the mental development of children because they are quick to accuse technology as the primary culprit in juvenile delinquency instead of personal choices.
Considering that technology became increasingly advanced over the last hundred years, many will be familiar with the concept of technology and children, especially since many have heard news about the "corrupting evils" of video games and movies. Therefore, even regular TV watchers who could have no interest in video games or movies might encounter something about those two things with (as they seem to be most associated with, nowadays) public shootings and become interested about child psychology, and those who want to assess the learning abilities of children could come across the topics of technology in childhood. The extent of basic information required for this argument will be extensive: they must know what video games, television, movies, and child mentality are. And that is it. Seriously.
No comments:
Post a Comment