Rhetorical Analysis Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Rhetorical Analysis Paper - Essay Example Notwithstanding, it is also accessible and comprehensible by the larger non-scientific community of individuals and researchers who wish to keep themselves up to date about matters of the brain’s evolution. The writer attempts to explain the diminishing capacity for the brain’s expansion by drawing from previous research by scientists as well as comparing the structure of the human brain with that of other animals. That way, he provides sufficient background for any reader to follow in his analysis of the human brain as he discusses its internal workings and the various scenarios that could play out in its evolution. Logic has been used extensively in this paper as it is has been written with heavy reference to empirical evidences, both from the writer's perspective and ex post facto research by others. The writer has also inculcated pathos and ethos in an attempt to get the audiences emotionally involved as well as legitimizes his work by comparing and citing research by reputable scientists. Briefly, the paper makes a claim that physically, the human brain may have or may be about to expend its capacity for evolutionary expansion, Fox argues that while the conventional assumption would be that the brain would keep growing larger, this may not be applicable to humans. He considerer’s rat and elephant brains to show through juxtaposition of the colossal disparities, that the rat is essentially brighter than the jumbo. He posits that the most intelligent animals are those that squeeze out as much as possible from their brains and through this, humans are unequivocally dominant. Physical growth of the human brain, he argues, is unlikely to improve its performance because, while the bigger brain may be more powerful, the extra power is likely to be dedicated to in-house running of the brain and not increasing intelligence. This is justified by the fact that the elephant’s or cows brains are bigger than ours are, but they are limited in their intelligence because most of the brain mass is dedicated to operating the brain itself (Fox 40). The writer dominantly applies a logical systematic strategy in which he presents his claim, and considers, while at the same time rationally disapproving, possible initial nonprofessional assumptions and responses to the claim. He then delves into technical examinations and includes graphical depictions backed by scientific data, ultimately he examines the different scenarios that would result in evolution, he suggests the thickening of neurons, but contends that it would to be compensated by making the brain slower by increasing axon length. He explores several other alternatives and in each case proves they are likely to impractical, he summarizes his argument by stating that the brain cannot expand, but the fact that expansion is likely to be counterproductive. After exploring the available options, he leads the reader to a conclusion by suggesting the brain may not really need to grow anymore since through technology humans are able to utilize artificial intelligence such as writing and computing. Therefore, the issue of growth may already have been solved indirectly, since while the human brain may not expand very much, technology, which we use to boost our processing capacity, is expanding exponentially every day. The application of Ethos in this article transcends the writer’