Robert Paarlberg's article 'Attention Whole Food
Shoppers' brings up an important argument that has
recently been talked about a lot in today's culture, which is
whether or not to eat organically. He brings up many topics
in his essay that talk about why we shouldn't go back to
wholesome farming, the cost effectiveness of mass
producing foods, and how much time organic farming takes
as well as the standards for it. He also uses different literary
techniques and rhetorical reasoning to help support his
argument throughout the essay.

Paarlberg uses inductive reasoning for his argument
because it is more effective for the topic that he is
discussing, as opposed to using deductive reasoning. He is
using small details and points to lead up to the whole point
of the essay, and with the argument he is arguing it is better
to present it in this way. This type of argument is great for
giving examples of something in order to get individuals to
accept a broader premise and an example of this can be
found on page 151 of his essay: 'African farmers still use
almost no fertilizer; only 4 percent of cropland has been
improved with irrigation; and most of the continent's
cropped area is not planted with seeds improved through
scientific plant breeding, so cereal yields are only a fraction
of what they could be' (Paarlberg 151). This quote is
discussing the importance of using scientific breeding to help
produce more cost effective crops for the food yield it will
produce for the people of Africa.

Paarlberg is also clearly defining different classes within
his argument by organizing the structure of his essay into
sub-categories. They include 'Original Sins' which talks about
the Green Revolution efforts in India and Asia and 'Seeding
the Future' which talks about the importance of genetically
enhanced crops. By using sub-categories, he is able to be
more organized throughout his essay, and also argue and
talk about more points in his essay that essentially all tie
together and come back at the end to make his point.

He is using rhetorical and somewhat scientific
reasoning for his argument. He is using rhetorical reasoning
because he draws on premises that appear to be widely
accepted, and in reality things are much messier than they
appear. He also uses scientific reasoning because he pulls
from other experts that have written about the same topics
that he is writing about. There is not really a more dominant
type of reasoning resonating throughout the essay, but he
changes it throughout. Many of the examples of scientific
reasoning uses facts and figures, which makes the readers
have a sense of security that the author knows an extensive
amount about what he is talking about. 'Yet even in Latin
America, the prevalence of hunger declined more than 50
percent between 1980 and 2005' (149). 'The development
and introduction of high-yielding wheat and rice seeds into
poor countries, led by American scientist Norman Borlaug
and others in the 1960s and '70s, paid huge dividends'
(Paarlberg 148). The two quotes above are just a few of the
sentences that exhibit scientific reasoning and rhetorical
reasoning to help back up his different arguments.

The author is a professor of Political Science at
Wellesley College, an associate at Harvard University's
Weatherhead Center for international Affairs, and author of
Food Politics: What Everyone Needs to know. This essay
Attention Whole Food Shoppers was for the May/June 2010
edition of Foreign Policy magazine. He uses his background
as a basis of creating his situated ethos with the readers and
to make his argument about sustainment and talking about
the topics that he does in this essay seem more logical and
thought out.

He creates a strong invented ethos because he knows
the type of audience that is reading his essay, and he speaks
to them about the issues that are concerning to foreign
policy when it comes to food, the problems that come with
organic foods, and explaining the truth and pointing out the
flaws of the current situation for each country that seems to
be having issues with food sustainment. He also uses
rhetorical reasoning to take an established widely accepted
view and try to change it to help build up his invented ethos
within the essay and he also backs up his rhetorical
reasoning with scientific reasoning using figures and data
from other professionals in the field and putting them in to
his essay to help build up his credibility as well.

Paarlberg utilizes invented and situated ethos in the
manner that he does because he wants to convince his
audience that his argument is something worth listening to.
He is a well-respected person when it comes to food, the
truths about food initiatives around the world to end world
hunger, and the truths about organic foods and why we
shouldn't go back to 'whole nature' farming. 'There are
other common objections to doing what is necessary to solve
the real hunger crisis. Most revolve around caveats that
purists critics raise regarding food systems in the United
States and Western Europe' (149). This quote from the essay
is a great example of how he uses his invented ethos to
convince an audience to listen to what he says.

The author responds to the audience's emotions and
concerns by addressing and writing about a topic that is
close to a lot of Americans, and then contradicts them with
what he believes to be right. Again, he uses rhetorical
reasoning to help accomplish this task. The essay seems to
be very one sided and doesn't seem to really address the
other side of the argument that he is writing about.

The author does use enargeia to emphasize his point.
There is an enargeia because he cares about the topic, and
provides supporting evidence for it. Paarlberg writes the
article under the assumption that most people who eats
whole and organic food feels like that is the most healthiest
and best route to take when it comes to eating better. He
also believes that the audience seems to think that
sustaining and creating certified organic farms is not too
hard to be able to accomplish. The author addresses these
views within his essay, and then points out scientific facts
and viewpoints from other professionals in the field that
study and talk about the same topics that he does.

