Rhetoric: Pathos and Ethos Explained

• Rhetoric constitutes the art of persuasion
• Uses many devices to persuade an audience
• Aristotle identified pathos, ethos, and logos as rhetorical appeals, with Kairos often included as well

Pathos: Emotional Appeals

• Pathos stirs emotions to involve the audience in an argument
• Involvement leads to opportunities for persuasion and action
• Achieved through words, pictures, or physical gestures
• Effective emotional appeals are logically convincing
• Emotional appeals influence behavior or seek immediate action
• Persuasive effect fades more quickly than other appeals
• Emotions can hinder clear and critical thinking
• Pathos should clarify how a position relates to values and beliefs
• Avoiding manipulation, confusion, or inflating issues beyond evidence support
• Manipulative pathos alienates the audience
• Should complement, not replace, reason and evidence
• Author must establish credibility (ethos), supply reasons, and evidence (logos)

Ethos: Ethics and Credibility

• Convinces an audience via the writer's authority
• Credibility arises from pre-established recognition or being established in the writing itself
• Competence is the author's perceived expertise
• Enhancement is achieved through solid research, organization, and logical arguments
• Trustworthiness is the audience's perception of accuracy and credibility
• Achieved through balanced content, avoiding coercion, source citation, and communication ethics

Logos: Logic

• Arguments consist of true or false statements
• The conclusion is the argument's point of view
• Other statements offer evidence or support as premises
• Critical thinking necessitates evidence or support
• Supporting statements are called premises
• The supported statement is called the conclusion

Deductive and Inductive Arguments

• Deductive arguments present conclusions that necessarily follow premises
• Inductive arguments present conclusions that likely follow premises
• Additional ways authors employ logos present credible information, supporting material, and source citations
• Research indicates that explicit arguments and warrants enhance persuasiveness
• Verifiable, specific, and unbiased support strengthens logos
• Effective speakers address and refute counterarguments, showing the audience why one position is superior.

Combining Ethos, Pathos, and Logos

• Rhetorical appeals usually coexist
• Analysis of appeals separately is important
• Writers should understand connections between them

Kairos

• Rhetoric occurs in a specific time, context, and/or place
• The impact of messaging is affected by the time it is given and how it is received
• To understand the rhetorical situation examine the audience and the author's setting

Key Takeaways

• Pathos: Engage audience feelings while remaining balanced with logic for persuasion
• Ethos: Authority by credibility and expert sources
• Logos: Inductive and deductive rational evidence
• Kairos: Timing & Context for relevance and appropriate message

Devices beyond Ethos, Pathos, Logos & Kairos

• Authorial Persona (Authority): The role/voice the author assumes to make themselves appear to be an authority.
• Characterization: Describing the qualities of a character.
• Figurative Language: Metaphors and similes.
• Imagery: Strong visual impressions created through words.
• Provocation: The way in which a writer tries to shock or intentionally antagonize the reader.
• Symbol: Represents or stands for or is thought to typify something else
• Tone: Manner of expression in speech or writing

Logical Fallacies

• A breakdown in reasoning
• Can occur when there is an error in the “facts” presented
• Bias in the information that is used to persuade the audience
• Stereotyping of populations.

Ad hominem

• Remarks against the person's character rather than the person's argument.

Ad populum/Bandwagon

• Information to get the reader on board with the majority's viewpoint

False authority

• A writer quotes an authority not credible for the situation

Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum ad ignorantiam)

• When an arguer has no conclusive or supporting evidence

Appeal to tradition

• Lead readers to believe that an argument is valid by basing it only on tradition

Appeal to pity

• This plays on the reader's emotions
• Using an excuse to sway their audience to believe what they want them to believe

Begging the question

• A writer is trying to persuade the reader into believing their argument without giving supportive evidence

Cherry Picking/Card Stacking

• Trying to persuade the reader into believing their argument by only providing data that supports their stance

Equivocation

• Uses words that have a double (or ambiguous) meaning

False dichotomy; Black-and-white; Either/or

• Presents one or two viewpoints as the only alternatives

Guilt by Association

• Claims something is true/false because it is similar to or associated with a clearly false idea/person.

Hasty/Sweeping Generalization

• An inaccurate assumption based on an inadequate amount of evidence.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

• Concludes that one event caused another just because one occurred before the other

Red Herring

• Used to get the reader off track of the main issue

Slippery Slope

• One idea will ultimately lead to many more ideas that will result in a final outcome

Straw Man

• Misrepresents an argument by an opponent

Weak/False Analogy

• When someone compares two ideas or two situations that do not relate to one another