Analysing the Rhetoric in "How Bad Can I Be?"
- I'm just doing what comes naturally: Here, the Once-ler is making an Appeal to Inherent Nature, by saying that if his actions are inherent to him, they must be acceptable.
- I'm just following my destiny: He's making a claim that he can't act differently, since his actions are predestined.
- There's a principle in nature [...] called survival of the fittest [...] This is how it goes: the animal [...] that doesn't [fight] winds up someone else's lunch: This is an Appeal to Nature— he claims that if wild animals have to fight in order to win, then fighting in order to win is acceptable due to being "natural".
- There's a principle in business, which everybody knows is sound. It says the people with the money make this ever-loving world go round: This is an appeal to tradition. He's saying that since wealthy people have always been in charge of everything, he is justified in exploiting his wealth as it's always been done.
- I'm just building the economy: This is an example of "the ends justify the means". He's implying that his actions may be bad in the short term, but they lead somewhere good (a better economy), therefore, according to his logic, they're justifiable.
- Just look at me petting this puppy and A portion of proceeds goes to charity: Here, he's appealing to his good character. He's saying that if he's good in some respects, he must be good in other respects too. He is also lying (since he isn't petting the Bar-ba-loot but rather playing with its mouth, and the charity was a Fake Charity) but even if he were telling the truth, it would be fallacious)
- All the customers are buying and the money's multiplying: This is another "ends justify the means" moment. He's saying that his actions must be good, because they're landing him money.
- The PR people are lying and the lawyers are denying: By this point, he's going off the deep end, so his excuses are starting to make less sense. He's simply describing the situation, which, unbeknownst to him, doesn't suggest that he isn't bad at all. If the PR people who work for the Once-ler are lying about his effects on the environment, that likely indicates that his lawyers are defending him against legitimate accusations, indicating that he is indeed being bad.
- Who cares if a few trees are dying? This is all so gratifying!: At this point, the Once-ler isn't even putting any effort into his excuses. He asks a rhetorical question, and then simply exclaims about how he enjoys his work, and neither rhetorical questions nor exclamations have any truth value.
