In the article “The Secret to Deeper
Happiness Is Simpler Than You Might Think” by Ginny Graves (2017), Graves states
that deep and sustainable happiness comes from within, and she provides various
methods to attain happiness. On the other hand, the article “Happiness Is Other
People” by Ruth Whippman (2017) refutes the idea that happiness comes from
within and argues that happiness should come from human interaction. While
Whippman provides critical and in-depth analysis in her argument, Graves presents
a more persuasive and impactful case because she includes substantial relevant
evidence to support her claims, as well as providing a more objective and
balance point-of-view which provides her readers with a broader perspective.

 

 

Graves’s article is evidently more
persuasive than Whippman when she provided reputable evidence from different
experts to support each of her claims. For instance, Graves supported her claim
on taking slow steps to pursue happiness (para 4) by quoting Robert Lustig, who
is a professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, to
show her readers a scientific fact that constant seeking of pleasure makes it
harder to feel happy. Graves enhances the credibility of the evidence when she
continues to quote author Chade-Meng Tan’s statement to validate the point. On
the other hand, Whippman uses irrelevant and insufficient evidence to back up
her claim, which is evident when she used the survey from The Bureau of Labor
Statistics to show that Americans spend less time socializing (para 9). There
is a questionable cause in this case as Whippman failed to establish the causal
link between self-reflection and the lack of socializing (para 7). In the
absence of substantial relevant evidence to fit her presumption, Whippman’s
claim could be perceived as less credible. In
comparison, Graves’s use of logical appeal through the incorporation of credible
evidence makes her article more persuasive.

 

Graves is relatively weak in
her evaluation with less analysis in each of her claims as she is more focused
on integrating evidence. Nevertheless,
Graves provides a more objective and balance
point-of-view with her straightforward explanatory style using quotes. For
instance, Graves uses a research study to make a point similar to Whippman, stating
there is a need to maintain connections with others (para 2). After presenting an
alternative view, Graves then proceeded on to highlight the importance of
self-reflection. Graves shows a more balanced point-of-view.
On the other hand, Whippman is biased against solitary happiness pursuits. While being bias, her article is insightful and informative
when she shares her personal experience and anecdotes (para 1-4). She
provides a broad analysis on each of her one-sided arguments relating to
societal problems, ranging from American culture, spiritual and religious
practice, and time spent on socializing (para 5-8),
this also means less objectivity in her article. In combination with the
use of emotional feelings, it is indisputable that her article appeals to its
reader’s social conscience by illustrating the societal problems caused by solitary
happiness pursuit. However, substantial proof of the
argument is not offered. Furthermore, Whippman uses appealing to emotion in
place of objectivity and balance point-of-view, and the argument’s premises
remain invalid. In comparison, Graves uses a neutral style that can
persuade readers of its claim’s validity by the virtue of the ethos of
objectivity.

 

Graves’s article is coherent as she provides
a logical flow in her writing. This can be seen clearly with a smooth
transition between each paragraph, and she provides three methods to pursue
happiness, which flows from one suggestion to another, which
broaden reader’s perspective. Although Graves uses less formal language,
the language used is more neutral. On the other hand, Whippman fails to provide
logical flow in her article. Her readers may expect the article to provide
insights on the ways to pursue happiness through interaction with others, but
her article mostly refutes solitary happiness pursuit with limited suggestions
on how to pursue happiness. Whippman also stated that lack of social connection
carries higher premature death risk (para 15), which deviates from the topic. Furthermore,
Whippman writing poses problems when she uses harsh language with exaggerations
such as ‘shockingly dangerous’ (para 15). Whippman is assertive and made a bold
statement that academic happiness studies are full of anomalies (para 12).