What's Wrong With Divorce?

Gary Hatch said that "arguments from logos require claims and reasons as their basic structure" (Writing and Rhetoric 71). Karl Zinsmeister uses both good and bad logos in his article Divorce's Toll On Children. His two largest fallacies of logos are seen in the first several paragraphs.

In the beginning of the article there seems to be unlimited facts about how detrimental divorce is to children. Megan's analysis discussed how facts like these appeal to the readers emotions. She says they are "blunt and overwhelming." The facts include a claim that since 1972, one million children have suffered from their parents divorcing each year. He also says that about half of the children today go through a "marital rupture." Only one in ten children that have gone through divorce see there other parent at least once a week, and only one in five keep a close relationship with both parents. These statistics do indeed stir the emotions like Megan said, but they stir the emotions of those who believe everything they read on the internet. There is not one citation or any references to which studies came up with all these brilliant numbers. Even though they are most likely true, Zinsmeister is only appealing to the ignorant and those who don't know any better than to believe everything they read on the internet.

Megan also points out that a key tactic used by Zinmeister is fear. Fear does stir the emotions of the readers as Megan says, but in some cases it makes for poor logos. Zinmeister uses facts and words that scare the reader and make them think negatively. Language like this ruins logos by forcing the reader to associate negativity with the author and the article.

Another fallacy of logos is referred to by Gary Hatch as "stacking the deck" (Writing and Rhetoric 79). It is when an argument gives no acknowledgment to the other side of the issue. No where in the article are there any reasons why divorce might be good or necessary in some situations. Every argument, every fact, and every evidence is describing the detrimental effects of divorce.

Now with all this said I certainly do not condone divorce. Zinsmeister makes many great arguments later on that he backs up fully. He uses studies from reliable sources such as the University of Michigan, Gallup Inc., and The National Survey of Children. Using these studies he effectively argues that divorce in a child's life leads to a significant change in a child's views on love and commitment for the rest of there lives. These arguments are relevant and acceptable, and avoid logical fallacies.

(This article was also analyzed by Megan Corkran)