Irony

     Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is possibly classified as one of the most ironic pieces of literature of all times, being that his essay as a whole is even ironic. Irony is defined as "the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect" (apple dictionary). A prime example of irony in this passage is "There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas, too frequent among us, sacrificing the poor innocent babes, I doubt, more to avoid the expense than the shame which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhumane breast" (355). This is an example of irony in the passage because as Swift is proposing to sell babies to the upper class for food, and yet, he is saying doing this will prevent abortions, the "horrid practice" of women murdering their babies. Whether is be for food or abortion, the babies are still dying, am I not right? He states this proposal as another great advantage to his scheme, yet aborting or selling can be argued to retain the same meaning. 

Rottenberg, Annette T., and Donna Haisty Winchell. "Chapter 9: Avoiding Flawed      Logic." Elements of argument: a text and reader. 1985. Reprint. New York: St.      Martin's Press, 2010. 354-361. Print.

 

I was once told that a good argument involves the attack of the argument itself. The second one attacks the opponent on a personal basis is the very moment the argument is lost. This fallacy is known as Ad Hominem. To demonstrate this way of fallacy, this video should do justice. With that, I would like to present an example in political stature in which Barack Obama dismisses Sarah Palin's nuclear claim by attacking her instead of the ideas and argument she presents at hand. If you could, just recognize the fact that instead of responding to the nuclear administration, he responds "Last I checked, Sarah Palin's not much of an expert on nuclear issues." There are many ways way of going about an educated comeback, however, he decided to go with the attack of Palin herself. Looking back on the picture as a whole, this makes sense, and at first it makes one want to side with Obama, after then realizing he has no real argument, it is all just a fallacy. The main purpose behind this attack is, in my opinion a comical way of dealing with things. Among looking at the Obama-Palin debates, there are many "comical" reliefs presented on a number of occasions. The fact that he can say what he said and get away with it, proves that this kind of attack is allowed in politics; and if one were to think about it, this is one way Politicians manipulate the masses and their opponents.