Inquiry 2: A Rhetorical Analysis of a Scientific Article
Introduction
I picked out my article for the second inquiry, not expecting to learn the specific lessons that came out of it. i, for some reason, had other expectations. I chose an article entitled, "Can Pro-Anorexia Websites Help Heal Some Eating Disorders?" I did so after reading through the article and wanting to tear down the argument in it. I was excited about ripping apart the supposed evidence and leaving the article effective-less, that is, until I realized that a rhetorical analysis is not biased. I was disappointed that I could not argue against Maia Szalavitz, the writer, in my rhetorical analysis. But then, as I analyzed all of her rhetorical techniques and all of the different perspectives that she brought into her writing, I realized something different. Speaking out about something can help you grow, but so can understanding. You cannot let personal experience cause you to become close-minded. Otherwise, you will never benefit and grow from it.
A Rhetorical Analysis of a Scientific Article
When reading an article on a scientific and educational website, many people forget about the possibility that any article can be subject to bias and may even offer the writer a platform for an argument. Few actually take the time to read into scientific research, not realizing that when they do so, they may very easily read arguments as facts. In an article entitled, “Can Pro-Anorexia Websites Help Heal Some Eating Disorders?” Maia Szalavitz presents an argument in a very educational, scientific, and credible setting: the health section on Time magazine’s website. Time magazine is trusted and known to report the results of scientific research. Having this setting, she establishes an extremely formal relationship with her audience and immediately builds a strong foundation in the ethos of her argument. Throughout the article, Szalavitz presents this argument using each of the three Aristotelian appeals. The setting that the article is put in establishes ethos, the scientific nature of the article allows for logos, and the sensitive topic creates pathos; yet, upon reflection, the argument may not be as effective as it seems.
Maia Szalavitz is a journalist for Time magazine and focuses on topics related to neuroscience. She has co-authored two books with Dr. Bruce D. Perry and has written her own book: “Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids”. She has also written for many magazines and newspapers including the New York Times, Elle, Scientific American Mind, the Washington Post, and Psychology Today (Time Healthland). With this resume, Maia Szalavitz has built her reputation and credibility already without beginning her article. The entirety of her experience is not fully exposed but it is briefly mentioned at the bottom of the article so that her audience knows she is a trusted author, and therefore, ethos is established.
With her setting and credentials in place, Szalavitz then appeals to her audience with pathos- shock. The use of shock has great value because it immediately attracts readers, even those who are not necessarily interested in the article. The way in which shock is added to appeal to readers is in the title itself; a question is posed that immediately gives the central claim. “Can pro-anorexia websites help heal some eating disorders?” There is tremendous irony in the title. Upon reading it, the first idea that comes to mind is, ‘how can such a negative part of the Internet produce the positive effects that some widely used treatments cannot even produce?’ To use such a frank title can be extremely dangerous because it can turn off many readers, especially with such sensitive subject matter; but ironically, the frankness of the title may build even more credibility for the author’s argument. All too often, emotion can bias and sway an argument to the point where it loses its professionalism. With her lack of emotion, Szalavitz even appeals to ethos because she might gain even more credibility with her readers as it seems like it is not so much an argument as it is scientific research.
Once her reputation is founded and shock is instilled, Szalavitz then proceeds to put forth her central argument: “pro-ana” websites may actually assist anorexics in their recovery by providing a socially safe and understanding environment. The term “pro-ana websites”refers to pages and blogs that offer tips and inspiration for anorexics to continue in their eating disorder. Throughout the article, Szalavitz does not approve or disapprove of the use of such websites. Her purpose in writing the article is simply to have the audience consider pro-ana webpages as a possible recovery tool, since many would most likely never give such an idea any thought. This point, along with the way today’s generations have seen a large increase in eating disorders, gives Szalavitz a fundamental kairos foundation. While even today, eating disorders are not an extremely prevalent topic, just a decade or two ago, the writer’s entire argument would have been completely disregarded because eating problems occurred in an even lesser amount. Just in the last few generations has research seen a sharp rise in the occurrence of eating disorders, which would correlate with a rise in “pro-ana” websites. One of the most recent additions to these websites is the idea of “thinspiration”- the use of pictures and weight loss tips to inspire individuals to become thinner. The recent-ness of this idea of “thinspiration” and “pro-ana” has given Szalavitz a platform on which to educate individuals and bring up a newer topic, presenting a new (and, therefore, more likely to be heard) argument.
The style used in putting forth this argument fits perfectly for the setting and audience. Most of the individuals that read Time Magazine are educated and looking to learn new ideas and concepts. This audience is more likely to be open to unusual arguments and also more likely to have the ability to influence opinions, relative to those that are uneducated. Therefore, the educated, scientific, and formal approach to writing this article would greatly appeal to the intended audience. Another portion of her audience that Szalavitz appeals to is women. She does so through pathos: by repeatedly bringing up the family. She speaks about how the family is affected by eating disorders and how the family reacts to eating disorders. Beyond this, Szalavitz appeals to women by mentioning that pro-ana communities provide a setting of females that “understand one another’s demons”. Women, as a general stereotype, are known by society to be extremely emotional and wanting of someone to understand and listen to them. When reading that other women with an eating disorder just want to be understood, female readers will immediately pick up on the emotion behind the claim and become empathetic. There is even a picture of a young woman at the beginning of the article staring with a solemn expression at a webpage. This picture could be used in many ways to confirm the writer’s appeals to pathos-specifically the isolation an individual feels in seeing the seemingly brilliant and active lives of others while an eating disorder is keeping them isolated and restrained.
Szalavitz adds to this pathos appeal through her word choice. Two separate times in the article, she describes anorexia as “stigmatized”, meaning that it is considered by society to be a disgrace. People in general, but women especially, can understand to some degree the feeling of disgrace. They may not know exactly what a struggle with anorexia is like but they can at least sympathize with the emotions that anorexics deal with. Women, specifically, can also sympathize with a need for “nonjudgemental support” and “a means of self-expression”. Both of these phrases are used in describing pro-ana blogs. Not only is this argument appealing to pathos, but it is also appealing to logos.
It seems only logical that an individual would need someone to confide in without judgement, which for many anorexics, can be found on pro-ana forums. In an ironic way, pro-ana webpages do offer a safe environment, or one that seems safe to an anorexic. They even compare this “safe” place to the wet houses for alcoholics and needle exchanges for drug addicts, which research“does not find that these seemingly ‘prodrug’ places prevent recovery.” Another appeal to logic about the safety of these websites is that there are now disclaimers on the home page and “the content [on the blogs] isn’t unique.” Alongside this, there is a study mentioned that showed that while those who were not surfing the Internet about their eating disorder did recover faster than those using pro-ana websites, those who already were surfing the Internet were no different than those looking at pro-ana pages. The author even brings up that there are already few effective treatments for anorexia. In this light, it would make sense to try out new resources and options for recovery.
This is where the logic used to back up the argument becomes borderline ineffective. While it would seem wise to begin trying new methods of treatment, the fact that anorexia is a life or death illness cannot be forgotten. The author even mentions in her article that “anorexia is the most deadly of all psychiatric disorders”. According to the National Eating Disorders Association, “for females between fifteen to twenty-four years old who suffer from anorexia nervosa, the mortality rate associated with the illness is twelve times higher than the death rate of all other causes of death.” Or, put in more comprehendible terms, twenty percent, or one-fifth, of anorexics will die from their illness (Bakeman, p. 403). It seems very logical that new ways of treatment that are more effective should be researched and tested; but it does not seem logical to play with such a deadly disorder, the deadliest of all mental disorders.
Ironically, as with the previous appeal to logos, all of the logic put forth in the article is made ineffective by the article, itself. The author writes about the disclaimers made on pro-ana websites to try to make them safer, but the disclaimers, as stated in the article, are for “warning off children or people recovering from eating disorders”. It does not make sense, then, that a website warning recovering anorexics of “triggering” information is safe for them; “triggering” meaning that those in recovery are tempted to relapse or revert back to old behaviors. The author also brings up the fact that pro-ana sites are not made to “reduce harm, nor are they run by professionals, which leaves open the very real possibility that they can worsen users’disorders.” The study that the author mentions about the pro-ana bloggers even further refutes the argument by adding that most of the bloggers had suffered from an eating disorder for about seven years, an extensive period of time. It then does not seem very logical that the blogging that has imprisoned anorexics in their illness for multiple years would actually benefit those trying to recover.
While the appeals to logos that the author uses are not necessarily effective, the appeals to pathos and ethos seem to have greater effect and allow for a balance between the three appeals. Everyone can relate to the need for social acceptance, making the appeal to pathos very understandable. This would appeal to really any individual, not just the educated and women. The appeal to ethos is very useful depending on the reader. For those simply looking to deepen their knowledge in the research on eating disorders, or even those who simply had their interest sparked by the title, the appeal works quite well because the article is written scientifically and professionally. For those who have experienced anorexia or looking to find a connection between the author and subject matter, the appeal may not work as well. The author does have an extensive and impressive resume, but there is one thing missing: did she ever experience an eating disorder? It is said that one learns best through their mistakes. If such a statement is true, one would have to experience an eating disorder in order to come to a full understanding of it. While it would be too personal to affirm that the author has some sort of experience with eating disorders, a large piece of her ethos will remain missing. There is, then, a disagreement between the ethos that makes the argument effective and the ethos that makes the argument ineffective- it is too professional of a setting to bring to light personal experience yet that leaves a large hole in her ethos.
While the entire argument is not extremely effective, the author did have a phenomenal social and cultural setting to bring to light this argument. Research has shown that the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries have fostered an environment for eating disorders. Thinness used to be associated with poverty, while a “fleshy” appearance was associated with wealth and prosperity. Now, negative attitudes about being overweight and obese are dominant and even become instilled at as early an age as elementary school. What’s worse is that this is not just a problem for the United States, “as Western images of feminine beauty have spread to the rest of the world, so too have associated illnesses” (Bakeman, p. 403).
So what exactly are these problems that the United States is spreading across the world? In America alone, ten million females and one million males are struggling with an eating disorder like anorexia or bulimia. Twenty-five million individuals are struggling with binge eating disorder. Eighty percent of women are unhappy with their physical appearance. Of those who have anorexia, only one third receive appropriate care. Forty-two percent of first through third graders want to be thinner and eighty-one percent of ten year olds have a fear of being fat. Thirty-five percent of normal dieters become pathological dieters and of those, twenty to twenty-five percent end up with some level of an eating disorder (National Eating Disorders Association). This culture has given the author a perfect platform for her argument. As the author argues: with the problem of eating disorders becoming more severe, adequate methods of recovery need to be found.
This, then, creates another dilemma. It poses a critical question about how ethical the author’s argument is. It would be extremely beneficial to find a cure for eating disorders; but is there a “one size fits all” cure? If not, are the risks being taken in research worth it? Is it safe to play with a mental disorder that kills at least one fifth of its sufferers? If no research is done, how will a cure ever be found? How do you weigh a cure that might very well be non-existent with a delicate and fragile life on the brink of self-destruction? This is the ethical question that determines whether or not Maia Szalavitz’s argument is valid, if it is scientific, if it should even be considered; and this question might very well be impossible to answer.
Bibliography
Szalavitz, Maia. "Can Pro-Anorexia Websites Help Heal Some Eating Disorders? | Healthland | TIME.com." Time. Time, 24 Aug. 2012. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://healthland.time.com/2012/08/24/can-pro-anorexia-websites-help-heal-some-eating-disorders/?iid=hl-article-editpicks>.
"Maia Szalavitz | Healthland | TIME.com." (biography). Time. Time, n.d. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://healthland.time.com/author/maiasz/>.
National Eating Disorders Association. "Statistics: Eating Disorders and Their Precursors." Www.sc.edu. University of South Carolina, 2005. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://www.sc.edu/healthycarolina/pdf/facstaffstu/eatingdisorders/EatingDisorderStatistics.pdf>.
Bakeman, Karl, ed. Essentials of Sociology. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2011
Maia Szalavitz is a journalist for Time magazine and focuses on topics related to neuroscience. She has co-authored two books with Dr. Bruce D. Perry and has written her own book: “Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids”. She has also written for many magazines and newspapers including the New York Times, Elle, Scientific American Mind, the Washington Post, and Psychology Today (Time Healthland). With this resume, Maia Szalavitz has built her reputation and credibility already without beginning her article. The entirety of her experience is not fully exposed but it is briefly mentioned at the bottom of the article so that her audience knows she is a trusted author, and therefore, ethos is established.
With her setting and credentials in place, Szalavitz then appeals to her audience with pathos- shock. The use of shock has great value because it immediately attracts readers, even those who are not necessarily interested in the article. The way in which shock is added to appeal to readers is in the title itself; a question is posed that immediately gives the central claim. “Can pro-anorexia websites help heal some eating disorders?” There is tremendous irony in the title. Upon reading it, the first idea that comes to mind is, ‘how can such a negative part of the Internet produce the positive effects that some widely used treatments cannot even produce?’ To use such a frank title can be extremely dangerous because it can turn off many readers, especially with such sensitive subject matter; but ironically, the frankness of the title may build even more credibility for the author’s argument. All too often, emotion can bias and sway an argument to the point where it loses its professionalism. With her lack of emotion, Szalavitz even appeals to ethos because she might gain even more credibility with her readers as it seems like it is not so much an argument as it is scientific research.
Once her reputation is founded and shock is instilled, Szalavitz then proceeds to put forth her central argument: “pro-ana” websites may actually assist anorexics in their recovery by providing a socially safe and understanding environment. The term “pro-ana websites”refers to pages and blogs that offer tips and inspiration for anorexics to continue in their eating disorder. Throughout the article, Szalavitz does not approve or disapprove of the use of such websites. Her purpose in writing the article is simply to have the audience consider pro-ana webpages as a possible recovery tool, since many would most likely never give such an idea any thought. This point, along with the way today’s generations have seen a large increase in eating disorders, gives Szalavitz a fundamental kairos foundation. While even today, eating disorders are not an extremely prevalent topic, just a decade or two ago, the writer’s entire argument would have been completely disregarded because eating problems occurred in an even lesser amount. Just in the last few generations has research seen a sharp rise in the occurrence of eating disorders, which would correlate with a rise in “pro-ana” websites. One of the most recent additions to these websites is the idea of “thinspiration”- the use of pictures and weight loss tips to inspire individuals to become thinner. The recent-ness of this idea of “thinspiration” and “pro-ana” has given Szalavitz a platform on which to educate individuals and bring up a newer topic, presenting a new (and, therefore, more likely to be heard) argument.
The style used in putting forth this argument fits perfectly for the setting and audience. Most of the individuals that read Time Magazine are educated and looking to learn new ideas and concepts. This audience is more likely to be open to unusual arguments and also more likely to have the ability to influence opinions, relative to those that are uneducated. Therefore, the educated, scientific, and formal approach to writing this article would greatly appeal to the intended audience. Another portion of her audience that Szalavitz appeals to is women. She does so through pathos: by repeatedly bringing up the family. She speaks about how the family is affected by eating disorders and how the family reacts to eating disorders. Beyond this, Szalavitz appeals to women by mentioning that pro-ana communities provide a setting of females that “understand one another’s demons”. Women, as a general stereotype, are known by society to be extremely emotional and wanting of someone to understand and listen to them. When reading that other women with an eating disorder just want to be understood, female readers will immediately pick up on the emotion behind the claim and become empathetic. There is even a picture of a young woman at the beginning of the article staring with a solemn expression at a webpage. This picture could be used in many ways to confirm the writer’s appeals to pathos-specifically the isolation an individual feels in seeing the seemingly brilliant and active lives of others while an eating disorder is keeping them isolated and restrained.
Szalavitz adds to this pathos appeal through her word choice. Two separate times in the article, she describes anorexia as “stigmatized”, meaning that it is considered by society to be a disgrace. People in general, but women especially, can understand to some degree the feeling of disgrace. They may not know exactly what a struggle with anorexia is like but they can at least sympathize with the emotions that anorexics deal with. Women, specifically, can also sympathize with a need for “nonjudgemental support” and “a means of self-expression”. Both of these phrases are used in describing pro-ana blogs. Not only is this argument appealing to pathos, but it is also appealing to logos.
It seems only logical that an individual would need someone to confide in without judgement, which for many anorexics, can be found on pro-ana forums. In an ironic way, pro-ana webpages do offer a safe environment, or one that seems safe to an anorexic. They even compare this “safe” place to the wet houses for alcoholics and needle exchanges for drug addicts, which research“does not find that these seemingly ‘prodrug’ places prevent recovery.” Another appeal to logic about the safety of these websites is that there are now disclaimers on the home page and “the content [on the blogs] isn’t unique.” Alongside this, there is a study mentioned that showed that while those who were not surfing the Internet about their eating disorder did recover faster than those using pro-ana websites, those who already were surfing the Internet were no different than those looking at pro-ana pages. The author even brings up that there are already few effective treatments for anorexia. In this light, it would make sense to try out new resources and options for recovery.
This is where the logic used to back up the argument becomes borderline ineffective. While it would seem wise to begin trying new methods of treatment, the fact that anorexia is a life or death illness cannot be forgotten. The author even mentions in her article that “anorexia is the most deadly of all psychiatric disorders”. According to the National Eating Disorders Association, “for females between fifteen to twenty-four years old who suffer from anorexia nervosa, the mortality rate associated with the illness is twelve times higher than the death rate of all other causes of death.” Or, put in more comprehendible terms, twenty percent, or one-fifth, of anorexics will die from their illness (Bakeman, p. 403). It seems very logical that new ways of treatment that are more effective should be researched and tested; but it does not seem logical to play with such a deadly disorder, the deadliest of all mental disorders.
Ironically, as with the previous appeal to logos, all of the logic put forth in the article is made ineffective by the article, itself. The author writes about the disclaimers made on pro-ana websites to try to make them safer, but the disclaimers, as stated in the article, are for “warning off children or people recovering from eating disorders”. It does not make sense, then, that a website warning recovering anorexics of “triggering” information is safe for them; “triggering” meaning that those in recovery are tempted to relapse or revert back to old behaviors. The author also brings up the fact that pro-ana sites are not made to “reduce harm, nor are they run by professionals, which leaves open the very real possibility that they can worsen users’disorders.” The study that the author mentions about the pro-ana bloggers even further refutes the argument by adding that most of the bloggers had suffered from an eating disorder for about seven years, an extensive period of time. It then does not seem very logical that the blogging that has imprisoned anorexics in their illness for multiple years would actually benefit those trying to recover.
While the appeals to logos that the author uses are not necessarily effective, the appeals to pathos and ethos seem to have greater effect and allow for a balance between the three appeals. Everyone can relate to the need for social acceptance, making the appeal to pathos very understandable. This would appeal to really any individual, not just the educated and women. The appeal to ethos is very useful depending on the reader. For those simply looking to deepen their knowledge in the research on eating disorders, or even those who simply had their interest sparked by the title, the appeal works quite well because the article is written scientifically and professionally. For those who have experienced anorexia or looking to find a connection between the author and subject matter, the appeal may not work as well. The author does have an extensive and impressive resume, but there is one thing missing: did she ever experience an eating disorder? It is said that one learns best through their mistakes. If such a statement is true, one would have to experience an eating disorder in order to come to a full understanding of it. While it would be too personal to affirm that the author has some sort of experience with eating disorders, a large piece of her ethos will remain missing. There is, then, a disagreement between the ethos that makes the argument effective and the ethos that makes the argument ineffective- it is too professional of a setting to bring to light personal experience yet that leaves a large hole in her ethos.
While the entire argument is not extremely effective, the author did have a phenomenal social and cultural setting to bring to light this argument. Research has shown that the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries have fostered an environment for eating disorders. Thinness used to be associated with poverty, while a “fleshy” appearance was associated with wealth and prosperity. Now, negative attitudes about being overweight and obese are dominant and even become instilled at as early an age as elementary school. What’s worse is that this is not just a problem for the United States, “as Western images of feminine beauty have spread to the rest of the world, so too have associated illnesses” (Bakeman, p. 403).
So what exactly are these problems that the United States is spreading across the world? In America alone, ten million females and one million males are struggling with an eating disorder like anorexia or bulimia. Twenty-five million individuals are struggling with binge eating disorder. Eighty percent of women are unhappy with their physical appearance. Of those who have anorexia, only one third receive appropriate care. Forty-two percent of first through third graders want to be thinner and eighty-one percent of ten year olds have a fear of being fat. Thirty-five percent of normal dieters become pathological dieters and of those, twenty to twenty-five percent end up with some level of an eating disorder (National Eating Disorders Association). This culture has given the author a perfect platform for her argument. As the author argues: with the problem of eating disorders becoming more severe, adequate methods of recovery need to be found.
This, then, creates another dilemma. It poses a critical question about how ethical the author’s argument is. It would be extremely beneficial to find a cure for eating disorders; but is there a “one size fits all” cure? If not, are the risks being taken in research worth it? Is it safe to play with a mental disorder that kills at least one fifth of its sufferers? If no research is done, how will a cure ever be found? How do you weigh a cure that might very well be non-existent with a delicate and fragile life on the brink of self-destruction? This is the ethical question that determines whether or not Maia Szalavitz’s argument is valid, if it is scientific, if it should even be considered; and this question might very well be impossible to answer.
Bibliography
Szalavitz, Maia. "Can Pro-Anorexia Websites Help Heal Some Eating Disorders? | Healthland | TIME.com." Time. Time, 24 Aug. 2012. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://healthland.time.com/2012/08/24/can-pro-anorexia-websites-help-heal-some-eating-disorders/?iid=hl-article-editpicks>.
"Maia Szalavitz | Healthland | TIME.com." (biography). Time. Time, n.d. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://healthland.time.com/author/maiasz/>.
National Eating Disorders Association. "Statistics: Eating Disorders and Their Precursors." Www.sc.edu. University of South Carolina, 2005. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. < http://www.sc.edu/healthycarolina/pdf/facstaffstu/eatingdisorders/EatingDisorderStatistics.pdf>.
Bakeman, Karl, ed. Essentials of Sociology. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2011