Why it's persuasive:
The argument presented by Hardin is certainly persuasive. He unpacks his lifeboat metaphor through strict logic, paints his view on food banks through statistics and data, and incites a sense of urgency to keep the audience thinking about what he has presented. The amount of statistics and data given in the essay is sufficient for the reader to get a good idea of the problem, and the examples provided are sufficient to get his major point across, that the planet’s resources are limited and cannot be evenly distributed. Any attempt to evenly distribute resources may lead to a “Tragedy of the Commons”.
Use of evidence:
Hardin uses evidence convincingly and relevantly to argue that aid programs hurt both the giver and the receiver. When developed nations give away their stockpiled food to poorer nations, poorer nations get into the habit of meeting their food demand through the food bank while their own population keeps growing and their resources keep decreasing. The richer countries continuously dedicate more of their resources to sustain the growth of poorer countries, and risk being unable to maintain their own population. A better practice would be for the richer countries to behave as lifeboats for poor individuals as Hardin suggests. Richer countries should prioritize their own needs and grow and sustain their own population. This incentives poorer individuals from other countries to create their own resources and become self-sustainable. By successfully incorporating all three elements of the logos, pathos and ethos in his essay, Hardin presents a strong case as to why foreign aid is a bad idea.
How it could have been more effective:
Hardin could have used visual aids such as charts, graph, or even comics to give his predictions a physical representation and provide the reader with an object that shows the seriousness of the situation.
The argument presented by Hardin is certainly persuasive. He unpacks his lifeboat metaphor through strict logic, paints his view on food banks through statistics and data, and incites a sense of urgency to keep the audience thinking about what he has presented. The amount of statistics and data given in the essay is sufficient for the reader to get a good idea of the problem, and the examples provided are sufficient to get his major point across, that the planet’s resources are limited and cannot be evenly distributed. Any attempt to evenly distribute resources may lead to a “Tragedy of the Commons”.
Use of evidence:
Hardin uses evidence convincingly and relevantly to argue that aid programs hurt both the giver and the receiver. When developed nations give away their stockpiled food to poorer nations, poorer nations get into the habit of meeting their food demand through the food bank while their own population keeps growing and their resources keep decreasing. The richer countries continuously dedicate more of their resources to sustain the growth of poorer countries, and risk being unable to maintain their own population. A better practice would be for the richer countries to behave as lifeboats for poor individuals as Hardin suggests. Richer countries should prioritize their own needs and grow and sustain their own population. This incentives poorer individuals from other countries to create their own resources and become self-sustainable. By successfully incorporating all three elements of the logos, pathos and ethos in his essay, Hardin presents a strong case as to why foreign aid is a bad idea.
How it could have been more effective:
Hardin could have used visual aids such as charts, graph, or even comics to give his predictions a physical representation and provide the reader with an object that shows the seriousness of the situation.