In the fast paced world of today’s generation, there is no time to stop and question the validity of the hundreds of thousands of claims thrown at us seemingly every second. With the inability to question, comes the general acceptance of incorrect and invalid “facts” leading to misunderstanding, misinformation as well as mistreatment and abuse of these acceptances. Out of all the bombardments, the most common acceptance of incorrect information tends to reside in the scientific field. In an effort to discover why, as well as how this occurs, several authors have taken it upon themselves to research, write and promote awareness. Of these authors, Karl Sagan and William Weed are two of the most notable and renowned. Together they have written several publications aimed to disprove and debunk common pseudoscientific and generically invalid claims. In order to complete this difficult and overwhelming task, both authors developed and employed a method using several analytical strategies and rhetorical tactics to most effectively articulate their arguments. Perhaps one of the most clear and effective methods was implemented by none other than William Weed in his revealing article “106 Science Claims and a Truckful of Baloney”. The article tackles a seemingly impossible one hundred and six claims that Weed had encountered during his daily activities. Throughout the article, Weed employed a variety of rhetorical and analytical methods aimed to capture the reader’s attention, but also to divide his arguments into sections making it easier for the reader to process.
Weed’s most clear cut and easily discernable approach to debunking common claims was organization. It is because of the sheer volume in which the average person experiences claims, Weed decided to include 106 separate and single claims he experienced on an average day. With such an enormous amount, not only is it hard to disprove them, but nearly impossible to have the intended audience take them in. Facing such adversity, Weed decided to use an effective business strategy known as “time-blocking” and introduce it into his article. Time blocking is the idea of splitting apart the hours in a day and devotes it to a specific objective, allowing the blocker to fully focus on that portion, sufficiently increasing its effectiveness. Weed used this method to record his experiences into time-blocked sections, for example from when he first awoke at 6 A.M. until 7:15 A.M. In this short duration, without even leaving his home, Weed was subject to 13 claims from several different sources promising drastic changes in body type or composition. “3+ full inches in length”, “huge breasts overnight” and “look 20 years younger”, these are just a few of the claims and promises Weed was promised. Intelligently, after every time-blocked section, Weed included a section he entitles, “The Fine Print”, in which he states the main premise of the claim, followed by a less than three word judgment. But he doesn’t stop there, that would be too easy, instead he provides a detailed and simplistic explanation as to how and why it is incorrect, further debunking and exposing the lies and absurd claims once encountered, one at a time. Through this method, the daunting and overwhelming task of encountering 106 claims became easy, and quite enjoyable. It seems Weed’s strategy was that of strategy in eating an elephant during one sitting, one bite at a time.
Another effective and entertaining way Weed kept his audience hooked was his repeated use of sarcasm and sardonicism. By being sarcastic and sardonic, Weed provided a naturally dull process a unique flavor. Including this flavor not only provides a sense of personality and tone to the article, but also makes the article relatable as well as a pleasurable to read, instead of feeling as if it is a chore. Sarcasm and sardonicism is evident throughout the entire paper, it can be seen through witty retorts to claims, “This pill further claims to increase emotional stability by 67 percent. Such pseudoscientific precision increases the absurdity of the claim by at least 68 percent.” Or even in his one word synopses of whether or not a claim is true, as seen in his 21st debunking “Extinct: Hogwash.” Essentially stating the claim is excrement from a male cow, in academic language. Perhaps the largest example of sarcasm and sardonicism that exists within the article lies within the name of the segment of “The Fine Print”. The name itself is a play on “the fine print” generally provided from the companies and parties making such claims that when read, self-debunk the claim. Weed was able to take this existing idea of listing the truth in 2-pt font and create a subspace to provide readers with his own research and conclusions. Without the use of these two literary techniques, the article would become drab, losing its readers and thus its effectiveness and purpose.
Although some strategies provide the reader with a source of entertainment and differentiation from the norm, the use of ethos and logos throughout his research on claims is what provides the reliability of the article. Ethos is one’s credibility and the weight their words carry, if one has poor ethos, then their words do not mean much. If Weed himself simply went through his claims and determined whether or not they were true, it would be natural to question whether or not he was making another invalid claim, thus continuing the perpetuation of misinformation. However, that is not the case. Weed came to his judgments based off of factual evidence and research, often provided by well accredited and vetted sources including but not limited to, the FDA, The Times, and most impressively The Journal of the American Medical Association. With ethos unconsciously factoring whether or not something can be believed, Weed inserted a few snide comments to bring down the ethos of others. He does this not to bolster his own arguments, but to demonstrate to the reader that well know public figures should not have a strong ethos in academic settings without proving their merit. This attack on ethos is most apparent when Weed begins to describe a radio show host, as a replacement for a drug addicted star, “hear the angry voice of Roger Hedgecock, the man sitting in for Rush Limbaugh, who is in rehab for drug addiction.” Similarly, Weeds use of logos is evident throughout the article. Logos is the use a logic by the writer in an effort to appeal to and relate to the readers own logic. If the writer is not effective and proficient in his use of logos, then his own logical arguments will fall on deaf ears and daft minds, once again proving useless. The logic used by Weed is that of a simple thinking, but it is often pushed aside for convenience. It is that of common sense, the ability to notice details and apply basic level critical thinking to find reason, or lack thereof, within a claim. This is evident throughout “The Fine Print”, where before even delving into research for certain claims, he asks the reader to stop and realize a simple fact “No pill can enlarge breasts overnight” and “Drugs can’t extend penis length (except temporarily)”.
The manner in which Weed articulates his arguments and exposures to the claims is that of a narrative. A Narrative strategy is a very effective means of not only setting context for the articles, but as an appeal to the readers pathos. Let’s begin with the most obvious advantage in using a narrative, the setting. By being able to tell a personal story of Weed’s experiences, he was able to become the artist of the background, allowing him to direct and change the scenario with relative ease. The more effective advantage posed through a narrative, lies within the appeal to pathos. Pathos is the emotions and thoughts of the reader. If Weed was able to connect to how the reader felt, how they connected with the experiences Weed encountered, then they would be more likely to not only understand his logic and ideas, but they would also have a stronger belief in his ethos and the ability to realize when they themselves are being presented or exposed to a claim.
When you combine all of the techniques and strategies used by Weed throughout his article, you begin to realize the dedication and hard work that went into creating such a piece. With the number of literary and rhetorical devices, Weed was able to take an insurmountably large and difficult task and complete it with relative ease and grace. Without the time-blocking, the appeals to ethos and logos, use of sarcasm and sardonicism, along with numerous other devices; the article was able to translate the message and serve as it was intended to, exposing the truth.
WRT 102.22: Science & Society 