Johanna was in the midst of preparing her speech. She’d done the research and found a number of great sources for her speech. The specific purpose of her speech was to persuade a group of wildlife experts to step up their help for saving the water channel between the islands of Maui and Lanai, an area where humpback whales migrate during the winter to give birth. Johanna had a very strong first point and a strong third point, but she just couldn’t shake the fact that her middle point really was underdeveloped and not as strong as the other two. In fact, the middle point was originally going to be her last point, but when her research went bust she ultimately downgraded the point and sandwiched it in between the other two. Now that she looked at her second point, she realized that the sources weren’t credible and the point should probably be dropped. In the back of Johanna’s head, she heard that small voice reminding her of the fact that most audiences don’t remember the middle of the speech, so it really won’t matter anyway.
1. Is it unethical to use the main point that you know is underdeveloped?
2. Should a speaker ever purposefully put less credible information in the middle of a speech, knowing that people are less likely to remember that information?
3. If you were Johanna, what would you do?
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
Ethical Considerations in Speech Preparation
Introduction
Preparing a speech entails a responsibility to uphold ethical standards, ensuring that the information presented is accurate, credible, and well-developed. In the case of Johanna, her dilemma regarding an underdeveloped middle point and less credible information raises ethical concerns. This essay will argue that it is unethical to use a main point that is knowingly underdeveloped and to purposefully include less credible information in a speech. Additionally, we will discuss what Johanna should do in this situation.
1. Ethical Implications of Using an Underdeveloped Main Point
Using an underdeveloped main point in a speech raises ethical concerns for several reasons:
Misleading the Audience: A speaker has an ethical responsibility to provide accurate and well-supported information to their audience. Utilizing an underdeveloped main point misleads the audience by presenting an argument that lacks depth and substantive evidence. This undermines the integrity of the speech and can potentially manipulate or misinform the listeners.
Diminishing Credibility: Presenting an underdeveloped main point undermines the credibility of the speaker. It suggests a lack of thorough research and preparation, and can lead the audience to question the speaker’s expertise or reliability. Ethical public speaking requires maintaining credibility and trust with the audience.
In light of these ethical implications, it is clear that using an underdeveloped main point is unethical.
2. Ethical Implications of Purposefully Including Less Credible Information
Purposefully including less credible information in a speech, particularly in the middle where audience recall may be lower, raises ethical concerns as well:
Misrepresentation of Facts: Presenting information that lacks credibility undermines the integrity of the speech and disregards the need for accuracy. Public speakers have an ethical obligation to present well-researched and reliable information to their audience.
Manipulation of Perception: By placing less credible information in the middle of a speech, a speaker is attempting to manipulate the audience’s perception and memory. This manipulation undermines the fairness and transparency expected in ethical communication.
Ethical public speaking requires a commitment to truthfulness, accuracy, and respect for the audience’s ability to discern reliable information. Purposefully including less credible information violates these principles.
3. What Johanna Should Do
If I were Johanna, faced with an underdeveloped middle point and less credible information, I would take the following steps:
Evaluate: Carefully assess the underdeveloped middle point to determine if it can be further strengthened through additional research or analysis. If it cannot be sufficiently improved, consider removing it from the speech altogether.
Replace or Rearrange: If the underdeveloped middle point is removed, it may be necessary to rearrange the remaining points to maintain a logical structure. Alternatively, consider replacing it with a stronger and well-supported argument that aligns with the overall purpose of persuading wildlife experts to protect the water channel between Maui and Lanai.
Ensure Credibility: Remove any less credible information from the speech and replace it with reliable sources. Ethical public speaking necessitates providing accurate and trustworthy information to the audience.
By taking these steps, Johanna can ensure that her speech aligns with ethical standards, providing a well-developed argument supported by credible sources.
Conclusion
Ethics play a vital role in speech preparation, requiring speakers to uphold principles such as accuracy, credibility, and transparency. Using an underdeveloped main point and purposefully including less credible information in a speech violate these principles. It is unethical to mislead or manipulate an audience through underdeveloped arguments or unreliable information. If faced with such a situation, speakers should evaluate the strength of their points, remove underdeveloped or unreliable content, and ensure that their speech reflects accuracy and credibility. By adhering to ethical standards, speakers can maintain their integrity and engage their audience in an informed and responsible manner.
