Carranza 1

Teresa Carranza

March 21, 2017

Writing 2

WP2

Breaking addictions can be very difficult. Although not proven, studies conducted have found

a relationship in the release of serotonin and addiction. It is possible that the serotonin released

by the brain has an influence in addiction, and it is thought that serotonin can effect mood, social

behavior, appetite, sleep, memory, desires and functions. The effects of serotonin in the body

leads to repetitive behavior, and by suppressing the release of serotonin in addicts, it can help

trump addiction. Although both disciplines us conventions like ethos, logos, and tone as forms of

rhetoric, but by placing a work in a discipline it creates limitations.

Limitations through ethos can be seen by the way authors establish their credibility.

Before the reader can get to the articles, the authors have already started to establish their

credibility by stating the publisher, American Chemical Society. By showing the publisher the

audience unknowingly creates a bias and become more susceptible to believing the information

that will be presented. In the chemistry article Serotonin Receptors, the limitations set are that

the author has to be non-biased with the information it uses to establish ethos. The article states,

serotonin is one of the class of monoamine neurotransmitters, which are neurotransmitters that

target the psychostimulant activity of the monoamine system. In other words, they are drugs like

caffeine, nicotine and amphetamines that heighten a persons motor skills. By using chemistry as

a discipline the evidence used as supporting evidence has to be factual or statistical. The
 Carranza 2

limitation set by using chemistry as a discipline is that the supporting evidence that creates

credibility has to come from a place of authority.

Likewise, in the neuroscience article Therapeutic Potential of 5-HT Receptor Agonists

for Addictive Disorders, the authors establishment of ethos is also limited, as seen in the first

line, The neurotransmitter 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT; serotonin) has long been associated

with the control of a variety of motivated behaviors, including feeding, which means that

serotonin is known to affect hunger. The supporting evidence used by this discourse community

is meant to be factual, so writers have be able to back up there information with other research

studies that have concluded similar findings. After reading the quote an assumption can be made

that being addicted to food is not that different from being addicted to drugs. Addiction comes in

many different forms and by the use of different examples and explanations through facts the

authors are able to build their authority. Because ethos is established through the facts and the

authority of other research ethos and logos run back to back.

Logos is used to give supporting factual evidence such as statistics and research studies

limiting it to rely on similar information used by ethos. Once the author has established their

authority then they are able to move to the next step and back up their claims with proof,

however, because ethos is relying on the same information in this case, more more evidence is

used. Although using a specific discourse community causes limitations, by providing

supporting evidence from different case studies it is hard to dispute that they are wrong. When

comparing both articles the reader is able to see way serotonin affects the brain vs how it affects

the body. The first article, Serotonin Receptors, provided examples of different studies as its

form of logos. In the article it states that when found in the brain, serotonin acts as a compound

that constricts blood vessels known as a neurotransmitter, and when working as a

 Carranza 3

neurotransmitter, serotonin plays the role of conductor and regulates the intensity of nerve cells

by shooting neurons between them. The article also says, the discovery of serotonin being a

neurotransmitter was a break through, and that it was quickly realized that the tryptamine

fragment embedded within the structure of LSD also was the scaffold for serotonin, meaning

that one of the big ingredients found in LSD (or lysergic acid dimethylamine is a hallucinogen

that inhibits the movement of serotonin in the brain causing hallucinations) is meant to mimic the

effects of serotonin on the brain, implying that serotonin influences the brain. In this article the

reader was able to see how serotonin works on the brain whereas the other focuses more on how

it affects the body.

Logos in the second article is able to provide a different point of view. By using neuroscience

as its discourse community it is able to discuss the influence on both physical and emotional

situations, like serotonin being considered a stimulus. Serotonin is a hormone that is mostly

found in the body, although part of the process takes place in the brain. Contributing to the idea

that it doesn't only have to be a physical reaction but can also an emotional one too, making

addiction more likely to happen. In the second article scientists conducted a control experiment

on drug addicted rats. They split the rats into two different groups, Group A was fed serotonin

blocker pills while Group B was given placebos. The results showed that when fed the rats in

Group A were less likely to relapse than the rats in Group B. This study is a perfect example on

how serotonin indeed has an influence on becoming addicted. When the rats were given

serotonin blocker pills, the feel good feeling associated with the addiction disappeared, even

though the substance the rats were addicted to was still being administered. So by suppressing

the release of serotonin in addicts they will be less likely to relapse.

 Carranza 4

The tone associated with articles categorized within both discourse communities tends to be

that of an informative one, while also being targeted to an audience of biology professionals. The

limitations of both pieces create the image that the writers did their own experiment, which they

did, and then started to share their findings with peers. Because they were writing to peers both

authors used a lot of words like neurotransmitters, 4-hydroxytryptamine and extracellular

in their writing and left them without an explanation, neurotransmitters are found in the brain and

help send messages to the body, 4-hydroxytryptamine is the scientific way of saying serotonin

and extracellular just means that the reaction happens. Because the tone is that of informative, in

the third person, there isnt much bias found through the opinion. Throughout the peace the

authors do not use lines such as In my opinion. or I believe which means that personal

biases were left out.

When comparing both journals we are able to see the way using discourse communities can

create limitations. When readers see an academic journal based off chemistry or neuroscience

they automatically form barriers in their mind about what information can and should be found

in each to make them affective. Academic journals are always going to be meant to present a

study that has been extensively researched by the author, and then to inform the audience on

what the findings were. Although both the chemistry and neuroscience article were bounded by

limitations, they were both effectively able to express how serotonin works, while one focus on

its effects on body and the other focused on its effects on the mind. Even though it seemed that

the limitations found in the piece create negative boundaries, the reality it quite the opposite, by

establishing limitations authors are able to focus on information and present it in a specific way

that ultimately comes of the strongest.