Analysis of JFK’s speech to The Houston Ministerial Association in 1960.
Detailed explanation of the paper attached. PLEASE READ IT
- Paraphrase JFK’s thesis (central claim)
2.Identify 3 values FROM ROKEACH’S VALUE LIST that he appealed to in the speech. - Provide 3 events that JFK use to identify with his audience
- Summarize how JFK’s speech used ethos, pathos, and logos to change the belief and attitude of those with anti-catholic prejudices.
Sample Solution
Vittola, right off the bat, talks about one of the noble motivations of war, in particular, is when damage is caused yet he causes notice the damage doesn’t prompt conflict, it relies upon the degree or proportionality, one more condition to jus promotion bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, notwithstanding, contends the possibility of “worthwhile motivation” in view of “Sway” which alludes to the assurance of political and regional freedoms, alongside basic liberties. In contemporary view, this view is more convoluted to reply, given the ascent of globalization. Also, it is challenging to gauge proportionality, especially in war, in light of the fact that not just that there is an epistemic issue in working out, yet again the present world has created (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Moreover, Vittola contends war is fundamental, not just for cautious purposes, ‘since it is legitimate to oppose force with force,’ yet additionally to battle against the low, a hostile conflict, countries which are not rebuffed for acting unjustifiably towards its own kin or have treacherously taken land from the home country (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to “show its foes a thing or two,” yet principally to accomplish the point of war. This approves Aristotle’s contention: ‘there should be battle for harmony (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). In any case, Frowe contends “self-protection” has a majority of portrayals, found in Part 1, demonstrating the way that self-preservation can’t necessarily legitimize one’s activities. Much more tricky, is the situation of self-protection in war, where two clashing perspectives are laid out: The Collectivists, a totally different hypothesis and the Individualists, the continuation of the homegrown hypothesis of self-preservation (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). All the more significantly, Frowe disproves Vittola’s view on retaliation on the grounds that right off the bat it enables the punisher’s position, yet in addition the present world forestalls this activity between nations through lawful bodies like the UN, since we have modernized into a somewhat tranquil society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). In particular, Frowe further discredits Vittola through his case that ‘right aim can’t be blamed so as to take up arms in light of expected wrong,’ recommending we can’t simply hurt another on the grounds that they have accomplished something unfair. Different elements should be thought of, for instance, Proportionality. Thirdly, Vittola contends that war ought to be stayed away from (Begby et al (2006b), Page 33>
