Spencer's Analysis of "Mother Eve"

Spencer Diehl

November 9, 2011

Honors Writing 150

“Mother Eve”

If there is one event in the history of mankind that has influenced the role of women in society more than any other, it is the story of Eve. Beverly Campbell, the director of international affairs for the LDS church, attempts to effectively address this controversy which has plagued the social status of women for centuries. By using an efficient organization scheme and using an appeal to ethos by extensively referencing church leaders and scholars, Campbell effectively presents a logical argument that her LDS audience can trust due to its foundation in credible sources.

In the beginning of her paper, Campbell is quick to define the negative image that people have of Eve. Using several examples from her own life and quotations from notable publications, Campbell clearly established the feelings the world has for Eve. For example, Campbell recalls an encounter she had with a couple of BYU students who stated that,” [Eve] really blew it, and we’re all paying the price.” By identifying the perception that most have of Eve and her influence on mankind, Campbell effectively addresses her counterargument - a tactic which serves not only to strengthen her own argument, but to make it more meaningful to her audience.

Then, in order to present her argument in an orderly and logical way, Campbell focuses on addressing fifteen misconceptions she has identified that people have of Eve. She uses this approach in order to fully encompass the topic and provide both breadth and depth to her argument. Also, Campbell attempts to address all the fallacies associated with Eve in order to provide a complete understanding of the Mother of Mankind. In Campbell’s own words, “We all know that even the smallest error in the foundation of a building can eventually bring it down. The errors in the understanding of the garden story are not small, and until corrected, ignorance of their presence will continue to be manifest in grossly enlarged consequences to our social fabric.” And Campbell successfully addresses all errors of understanding by dividing her argument into fifteen points.

Within each of these fifteen points, Campbell uses several sources to appeal to the reader’s sense of ethos. The bulk of these sources come from the words of modern day prophets and apostles who have spoken on the matter. In particular, Campbell quotes Elder Bruce R. McConkie several times. McConkie, an apostle and church scholar, provides many valuable clarifications to the scriptures that Campbell makes effective use of. For example, when Campbell is arguing that Eve was an active participant in the Plan of Salvation, she makes use of a quote by McConkie which states that:
“Christ and Mary, Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, and a host of mighty men and equally glorious women comprised that group of ‘the noble and great ones.’ To whom the Lord Jesus said: ‘We will go down, for there is space there, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell.’”
By quoting leaders of the church, Campbell presents an argument that forces her LDS readers to either accept her reasoning or to contradict the Lord’s servants – a brutal yet effective technique.

Another source that Campbell uses to appeal to the readers sense of ethos is modern day scripture that are available to her LDS audience. Campbell uses sources such as the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants to provide clarification and understanding. However, the Pearl of Great Price, which gives an account of the creation story, is by far used the most extensively by Campbell. For example, Campbell points out in The Book of Moses that “[God] created he them and blessed them, and called their name Adam.” She uses this clarifying doctrine to point out that both Adam and Eve are often referred together as “Adam” in scriptural accounts. It is cases like this that Campbell uses throughout her paper to more fully convince her audience.

In addition, Campbell appeals to ethos throughout her paper by citing credible historians, scholars, and non-traditional texts. Celebrated scholars such as Hugh Nibley are quoted to add that extra bit of understanding. The Secret Book of John is quoted to provide additional information that most LDS peoples haven’t heard of. And even a fourth century Catholic bishop’s writings are used to prove Campbell’s point. Campbell successfully blends these sources in a way that provides new and interesting insights from credible sources that support her argument.

In addition, Campbell relies heavily throughout her paper on the original Hebrew meaning of many words in our English scriptures. By showing what many words in the scriptures originally meant in Hebrew, the scripture’s original meaning is brought forth and great clarification is provided. For example, our English text states that Eve was beguiled by Satan to partake of the fruit of the tree of good and evil. However, if we use the meaning in Hebrew of the verb beguile (though there is no exact translation), we are brought to understand that “Eve was motivated by a complex set of inner drives, anchored not only in her physical but also in her intellectual and spiritual nature.”
Clarifications such as this dramatically change the text’s meaning, and Campbell uses this to her advantage within her paper.

It is these exceptional uses of credible sources and an effective organizational
pattern that makes Campbell’s argument in its appeal to ethos successful in convincing its LDS audience. This argument effectively counters the fallacies surrounding the story of mother Eve – a story that has influenced greatly the role and position of women in society throughout history.