1

Carlee Davidson

Dr. Haslam

English 1010

09 January 2021

“Mindfulness Would Be Good For You. If It Weren’t So Selfish.” Rhetorical Analysis

The article “Mindfulness Would Be Good For You. If It Weren’t So Selfish,” was written

by Thomas Joiner in 2017. It was published on the Washington Post, which is a left-wing

newspaper. It addresses the recent trend of mindfulness and how it does more harm than good.

True mindfulness is good, but the trendy version is selfish. It’s not as beneficial as one may

think. The mindfulness of today is not authentic, no matter how the media portrays it. Joiner

begins his article by addressing that true, authentic mindfulness has benefits and that he’s tried it

for himself. He talks about the media pollution of mindfulness and that it’s not at all what it once

was. He goes on to cite several studies and claims that support his ideas. Joiner talks about a

study where they compared three different things to help combat pain: mindfulness, hypnosis,

and simply coping. Mindfulness performed the very worst, with only a marginal amount

reporting the slightest improvement with their chronic pain. Joiner’s main argument is that

trendy mindfulness (or today’s obsession with so-called self care) is toxic and it shouldn’t be as

praised as it is. His intended audience is anyone who practices trendy mindfulness or is

considering it. In this essay, I will explain how Thomas Joiner uses logos (through citing

studies), pathos (through his usage of strong words with strong connotations), and ethos

(primarily through the credibility of others cited in his article) in his article “Mindfulness Would
 2

Be Good For You. If It Weren’t So Selfish,” to persuade his readers and those who engage in

trendy mindfulness that it isn’t as good as it may seem on the surface.

Joiner appeals to logos for the majority of his article. This is accomplished by his almost

overwhelming selection of studies he uses to back up his stance. He cites several studies

involving today’s mindfulness to show how useless it actually is. He states, “Unfortunately, their

[Mark Williams and his colleagues’] impressive 2014 study, which included a large and

representative sample of adults, was not particularly supportive of a mindfulness-related

approach. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy-with meditation and without-failed to

outperform treatment as usual (with previously prescribed antidepressant medication) in

preventing recurrence of major depressive disorder. More specifically, about half of those in the

study experienced a recurrence of depression…” This study shows that mindfulness isn’t a

cure-all, as most people today would believe it to be. No matter how hard one believes, simply

being mindful will not cure debilitating mental illnesses such as depression. He cites another

study with parenting. The parents they chose for the study were mothers who were currently in

treatment for drug addiction and didn’t have a predisposition to parenting. This group of mothers

focused on things like “attention and non judgemental acceptance, along with meditation and

activities such as ‘the creation of a glitter jar to settle the mind.’” However, they were also

enrolled in a 12-week addiction treatment program. There was no control group for the study.

Nothing showing the usefulness and importance of mindfulness was shown. The study failed

because there was no control and there were too many variables. Joiner points out that no study

has proven mindfulness to be effective or beneficial.

 3

Joiner uses pathos very well, especially through his word choice. He states, “What we

might call authentic mindfulness, I found, is a noble and potentially useful idea. But true

mindfulness is being usurped by an imposter, and the imposter is loud and strutting enough that it

has replaced the original in many people’s understanding of what mindfulness is. This ersatz

version provides a vehicle for solipsism and an excuse for self-indulgence. It trumpets its own

glories, promising health and spiritual purity with trendiness thrown in for the bargain. And yet it

misunderstands human nature, while containing none of the nobility, humility, or utility of the

true original. Even the best-designed, most robust research on mindfulness has been overhyped.”

Joiner uses some very powerful words. His use of alliteration when he said “nobility, humility, or

utility” was especially powerful. It made the passage memorable. The utilization of words such

as imposter, strutting, self-indulgence, excuse, and overhyped really illustrate the author’s deep

hatred for trendy mindfulness. His strong words all have negative connotations, and that can be

easily felt and understood by the reader. They lead the reader to realize that maybe mindfulness

isn’t as good as they think it is. In a way, it vilifies mindfulness, and that’s what Joiner is trying

to do. It’s a very effective strategy utilized by Joiner to ensure that his readers agree with him.

Joiner goes on to say, “But mindfulness has become pernicious, diluted and distorted by the

prevailing narcissism of our time...all the while, they are tediously, nonjudgmentally, and in the

most extreme cases monstrously focused on themselves. That is troublesome for mental health

practice and for our larger culture.” He acknowledges that authentic mindfulness can be good

for one’s health, but it has become lost in today’s noisy world. The media polluted it, which is

what usually happens. These words all have feelings associated with them, and they’re all
 4

negative feelings. Through his words, Joiner is trying to convince his readers that mindfulness

has become distorted in an unhealthy way.

Much of the ethos used by Joiner is not his own. He uses the credibility of other people

who have influence. He cites people who are well-known and trusted. He cites a man by the

name of David Foster Wallace, who studied mindfulness and practiced it. Wallace also taught

mindfulness. An interesting fact to note is that David Foster Wallace just so happened to suffer

from depression. He eventually went off his depression medications, and mindfulness alone was

not enough to keep his depression at bay. He ended up committing suicide due to severe

depression. Joiner uses the experience of David Foster Wallace to show that mindfulness,

especially the fake mindfulness of today, is not a cure-all, or even a cure at all. Wallace’s

experience relates to a study done by Williams. Williams’s study concluded that mindfulness

can’t treat pain. Wallace was suffering from mental pain, and it became so debilitating that he

took his own life. Wallace living out Williams’s experiment helps back Williams up. He became

a real-world example. Joiner discusses a study done by Mark Williams, who is a British

psychologist. He conducted the pain study discussed earlier in the essay. A psychologist studies

the brain, and mindfulness is about the brain. Surely, a psychologist would be an excellent

authority on mindfulness and its effects. Joiner uses a study done by Williams to increase the

credibility of his article and make readers believe what he has to say.

Joiner is very effective in persuading his readers that the mindfulness of today is selfish

and yields no reward. He uses logos by citing several studies and making logical claims against

the argument that mindfulness is good. He uses pathos through his word choice, especially by

choosing strong words with strong connotations to influence how his readers feel. He uses ethos
 5

through studies done by people like David Foster Wallace and Mark Williams to build up

credibility. Overall, Joiner does an excellent job persuading his readers that trendy mindfulness is

not as good as it claims to be.

Works Cited

Joiner, Thomas. “Perspective | Mindfulness Would Be Good for You. If It Weren’t so Selfish.”

Washington Post, 25 Aug. 2017,

www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/mindfulness-would-be-good-for-you-if-it-werent-all-j

ust-hype/2017/08/24/b97d0220-76e2-11e7-9eac-d56bd5568db8_story.html?utm_term=.2

72d39cb3c3b. Accessed 30 Oct. 2020.