how does the arthour use logical appeals to develop his claim Monuments honoring Christopher Columbus are being defaced and destroyed. This

Question

year's Columbus Day celebrations will spark strong debate over the explorer's legacy,
but by looking at Columbus in the big picture of history, one can see today's
anti-Columbian fury is either misguided or part of a blind political agenda to demonize
early European activity in the New World.
[2] First, let's consider the matter of European disease transmission, principally
smallpox, which is estimated to have killed 70 to 80 percent of Native Americans. While
those numbers are staggering, the deaths happened over many decades. Holding
Columbus responsible is beyond preposterous. Further, calculating an actual number of
deaths is impossible because estimates of pre-Columbus populations vary enormously.
In Hispaniola, for example, the range runs from 250,000 to 3 million.
[3] It's also worth remembering all other epidemics. The Black Death, originating in
Central Asia, killed 40 percent or more of the European people — some 50 million souls
— between 1346 and 1353. This is a negative consequence of the interaction and
advancement of civilizations.

[4] In the case of Columbus and later Spanish settlement in the Americas, let's
remember, the exchange of disease worked both ways. Most historians believe the
Great Pox epidemic that killed 5 million in Renaissance Europe came from the New
World.
[5] Next, consider the civilizations of the New World. They cannot be romanticized
because they have left behind great monuments. The earliest societies, such as the
Mayans, were as brutal in exploiting subject peoples as any other civilizations.
Diseases Aren't One Way
6] Tourists love to visit the magnificent pyramids of Teotihuacan and the Mayan sites
close to resorts. So beautiful! So inspiring! So conveniently located! Not so beautiful if
you consider the human sacrifice that regularly occurred there.
[7] The later Aztec and Incan civilizations were no more humane. War, slavery and
human sacrifice were common and pre-dated 1492.
[8] How could Francisco Pizarro conquer the great Inca Empire with fewer than 200
men? How did Hernando Cortes overwhelm the powerful Aztecs? Answer: They found
willing allies in subjugated, enslaved or rebellious native populations.
[9] European civilization has evolved, but 20th century wars, atrocities, genocide and
terrorism show humanity is still prone to the same savage impulses as Assyrians and
Aztecs.
10] Columbus was a product of his time. He was also a great explorer, an intrepid
adventurer, a man of fervent faith and a defiant leader who blazed a path to the modern
world. His admirable traits allowed him to rise above his human imperfections.
[11] He holds a special place in the minds of Italian-Americans and Hispanic-Americans.
These groups celebrate Columbus Day with parades and statues.
[12] Christopher Columbus also enjoys iconic status in the wider American mind. Parks,
playgrounds, streets, squares and schools pay tribute to him. Columbus was much
admired by our founders. The District of Columbia carries his name.
[13] No question, we must examine the accomplishments of Columbus. Doing so in the
proper context shows there's no justification in destroying, defacing or removing his
monuments — or in minimizing his legacy

Answer 1

In this passage, the author employs logical appeals (logos) to develop the claim that the anti-Columbian sentiment and the defacement of monuments honoring Christopher Columbus are unwarranted. Here’s how the author uses logical reasoning throughout the text:

1. Statistical Evidence and Historical Context: The author first addresses the argument surrounding the devastating impact of European diseases on Native American populations, particularly smallpox. By providing estimates (70 to 80 percent death rates), the author acknowledges the severity of the situation. However, the author then reinforces their claim by pointing out that the deaths occurred over several decades and emphasizes the difficulty in quantifying these deaths due to varying historical population estimates. This logical analysis attempts to mitigate the blame placed on Columbus by highlighting the complexity of historical events and the challenges in assigning responsibility.

2. Comparative Historical Context: The author draws parallels between the impact of diseases in Europe and the Americas. By mentioning the Black Death, which caused significant mortality in European populations, the author suggests that disease transmission is a broader historical trend and not solely attributable to Columbus or European explorers. This comparison aims to contextualize the consequences of Columbus's voyages within the larger scope of human history, challenging the notion that Columbus should be uniquely vilified.

3. Counterarguments Regarding Indigenous Civilizations: The author presents a logical critique of the romanticized view of pre-Columbian civilizations. By stating that earlier societies, such as the Mayans and Aztecs, practiced brutal forms of exploitation and human sacrifice, the author argues against a one-dimensional view of history that primarily vilifies European actions. This appeal to a more balanced historical narrative seeks to lead the audience to question the justified condemnation of Columbus when similar practices existed among indigenous peoples.

4. Historical Consequences of Exploration: The author mentions how the conquest of the Incan and Aztec empires was aided by local populations dissenting against their rulers. This logical reasoning illustrates that the interactions between Europeans and Native Americans were complex, involving alliances and conflicts that complicate a simple narrative of European aggression.

5. Evolution of Civilization: The text suggests that human savagery is not limited to any one group or time period. By arguing that 20th-century atrocities demonstrate enduring "savage impulses," the author implies that all civilizations share a flawed history. This broader examination of human nature serves as a logical rationale for understanding Columbus not merely as a villain but as a figure emerging from a flawed human context.

6. Cultural Significance and Legacy: The author highlights Columbus's impact on American history and culture by pointing to statues, celebrations, and the naming of places after him. This appeal serves to reinforce the argument that the removal or defacement of Columbus monuments overlooks the historical significance and the ongoing appreciation for his contributions by various communities.

7. Call for Judgment in Context: The author concludes by arguing that a well-rounded examination of Columbus’s accomplishments is essential to understanding his legacy. By advocating for appropriate contextual analysis, the author makes a logical case against the idea that the defacement or removal of Columbus monuments is justified.

In summary, through statistical analysis, historical comparisons, counterarguments, and appeals to cultural significance, the author employs logical reasoning to construct a nuanced argument defending Columbus and critiquing the contemporary backlash against his legacy.