Rhetorical Persuasion – Appeals to Logos, Pathos and Ethos

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Logos
Pathos
Ethos
Images
Conclusion
Bibliography
Footnotes

Introduction

It is the matter of crucial importance for just about anyone who seeks to attain a social prominence, to understand how to properly utilize rhetorical devices, while addressing the audience, because it is namely one’s ability to persuade listeners or readers to adopt its point of view on the subject of discussion, which more then anything else qualifies such an individual for position of leadership. In his book “A New History of Classical Rhetoric”, George Kennedy provides us with the insight on the art of persuasion as not only some abstract concept, but also as a very practical instrument of gaining a variety of absolutely concrete benefits: “Ultimately, what we call “rhetoric” can be traced back to the natural instinct to survive and to control our environment and influence the actions of others in what seems the best interest of ourselves… This can be done by direct action—force, threats, bribes, for example—or it can be done by the use of “signs,” of which the most important are words in speech or writing” (Kennedy 1994, 3). Therefore, it is not by a pure accident that, as practice shows, skilled orators always seem to be the ones who address life’s challenges in most effective manner – apparently, these people’s ability to psychologically manipulate with others provides them with a crucial advantage, while existing as a part of society. In this paper, we will aim at analyzing three most important elements of rhetorical persuasion – namely, appeals to Logos, Pathos and Ethos, as well as providing readers with a better understanding of how these rhetorical devices should be utilized, in order to maximize a persuasive effect upon the audience.

Logos

The rhetorical concept of Logos is best defined as the process of orator appealing to audience’s sense of rationale. In his work “Rhetoric”, Aristotle provides us with the insight on the very nature of appeal to Logos as persuasive technique: ”Persuasion is affected through the speech itself when we have proved a truth or apparent truth by means of the persuasive arguments suitable to the case in question” (Aristotle 1954, 25). It is being traditionally assumed that people will not be persuaded to adopt speaker’s point of view on the subject of discussion, unless he succeeds in presenting them with substantiated proofs as to validity of his point of view. For example, when it comes to convincing listeners that illegal immigrants should not be granted amnesty, orator must make sure that, during the course of his speech, he provides listeners with a statistical data that exposes such immigrants as being more likely to commit crimes. Alternatively, when speaker wants to convince listeners in otherwise, he will need to present audience with a statistical data that is being concerned with these immigrants’ hard-working qualities, for example.¹

Moreover, it is also very important for the speaker to make sure that his line of logical argumentation is not only being relevant to the overall point he is trying to make, but also corresponds to audience’s psychological anxieties. In his book “Philosophy and the Passions: Toward a History of Human Nature”, Michael Meyer states: “Passion is what is beneath logos. Logos can capture passion only by respecting the problematological difference which gives all meaning to the process of taking charge of the problem for ourselves, and which passion expresses in a range of irreducible ways’’ (Meyer 2000, 235). A very good example of skilful utilization of appeal to logos can be found in Mark Weber’s article “A Look at the Powerful Jewish Lobby in America”, where author supports his anti-Semitic stance by providing readers with statistical data as to disproportionate representation of Jews in America’s mass Medias and country’s governmental institutions: “Jews are only two percent of the nation’s population yet comprise eleven percent of what this study defines as the nation’s elite. However, Jews constitute more than 25 percent of the elite journalists and publishers, more than 17 percent of the leaders of important voluntary and public interest organizations, and more than 15 percent of the top ranking civil servants” (Weber 2003). Thus, without having attacked Jews in any direct manner, Weber had succeeded in prompting readers to think of “chosen people” with suspicion.

Despite the fact that the strength of one’s logical argumentation should theoretically account for this argumentation’s overall effectiveness, a rhetorical appeal to Logos appears to be the least capable of winning audiences, as compared to appeals to Ethos and Pathos. And the reason for this is simple – as practice shows, it is only when considerations of reason, contained in oration or in written article, correspond to audience’s subconscious expectations that they are likely to increase argumentative piece’s rhetorical value. Moreover, it has been noticed that the larger is the audience, the lesser are the chances for speaker to be able to win it by the mean of appealing to audience members’ sense of rationale. In his book “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind”, Gustave Le Bon states: “A chain of logical argumentation is totally incomprehensible to crowds, and for this reason it is permissible to say that they do not reason or that they reason falsely and are not to be influenced by reasoning” (Le Bon 1896, 12). For example, the reason why Barak Obama was able to persuade the majority of Americans to vote for him as a President, is not because he positioned himself as an expert in the field of economics and politics, but because he plays rather well in the game of basketball.²

Pathos

The appeal to Pathos is probably the most effective of all three rhetorical devices, because it is namely the manipulation with people’s emotions, which is more then any other method capable of prompting them to act in one way or another. In the same book from which we have already quoted, Aristotle reveals the technical subtleties of how appeal to Pathos actually work: “Persuasion may come through the hearers, when the speech stirs their emotions. Our judgments when we are pleased and friendly are not the same as when we are pained and hostile” (Aristotle 1954, 25). For example, the chances are rather slim that one might be willing to donate money to “hungry children of Africa” as the result of having been exposed to statistical data, concerned with the rate of these children’s undernourishment and mortality. However, once we present the same individual with the actual images of African children dying of starvation, he will be much more likely to decide to open up its wallet for the “good cause”.³ This is exactly the reason why appeal to Pathos has been traditionally favored by politicians, as the rhetorical instrument of rallying public support.

In his book “Tropes of Politics: Science, Theory, Rhetoric, Action”, John Nelson is making a good point when he states: “Pathos should prove exceptionally significant for political action and argument in our times. As the study and practice of settings for speech-in-action, pathos can encompass the structures and dynamics of publics. As the analysis of public commitments, furthermore, pathos can include the sources and issues of political mobilization, socialization, obligation, and revolution” (Nelson 1998, 144). One of the main features of appeal to pathos, as the way of argumentation, is the sheer intensity of its actual content.

As we are all aware of, there can no neutral but simultaneously strong emotions. Therefore, when it comes to persuading audiences by subjecting them to Pathos, an orator must assure the intensity of listeners’ emotional response to the line of utilized argumentation. And, there is only one way to do this – prompting listeners to view a discussed subject matter through the lenses of either unconditional admiration or unconditional hatred.

One of very good examples of how it is being done is Paul Belien’s interview with former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, during the course of which the interviewee had succeeded in adding a strong emotional appeal to his opinion that slowly but surely EU is being turned into the equivalent of Soviet Union: “If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organization will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity?” (Belien 2006). It is needless to say, of course, that no sober-minded people can have a positive opinion of KGB, except for those who worked for this organization. Thus, by comparing Europol to KGB, Bukovsky had established a strong connotation between Europol’s activities and the notion of lawlessness and corruption.

Another example – in his article “Political Correctness: The Scourge of Our Times”, Agustin Blazquez does not simply criticize the promoters of political correctness, but he encourages readers to think of them as being nothing but petty criminals, which in its turn, emotionally strengthens article’s main thesis: “In schools and workplaces we see that “diversity” has degenerated into reverse discrimination, where often the less qualified are admitted and the incompetent cannot be fired. We have seen characters like Rev. Jesse Jackson shamelessly blackmailing and threatening to boycott entire corporations if they don’t hire those selected by him or simply make “donations” to his organizations” (Blazquez 2002). Given strongly negative connotation of the notion “blackmail”, author’s utilization of an appeal to pathos, in this particular article, can be described as being rather effective, because after having read it, people are very likely to begin experiencing anger towards those who forcibly push political correctness down citizens’ throats. ⁴

Ethos

The appeal to Ethos is often being referred to as the “voice from authority” element of rhetorical persuasion. That is, while building up a line of argumentation, speaker strives to convince the audience that his opinions correspond to the notion of common sense and also to socio-political beliefs, shared by majority of people. In his book “Persuasion: Greek Rhetoric in Action”, Ian Worthington says: “One effect of ethos, as well as inducing a degree of trust, is also to produce a feeling of goodwill in the audience towards the speaker, so that the projection of the appropriate character achieves more subtly the effect sought by explicit appeals for a favorable hearing” (Worthington 1994, 35). This particular method of rhetorical persuasion is more subtle then the ones discussed earlier, because by resorting to it, speaker forces an impression upon the audience that there is no personal affiliation between him and the idea he tries to popularize. In its turn, this causes people exposed to argumentative Ethos to assume that they simply have no choice but to adopt speaker’s point of view as their own.

One of the classical examples of appeal to Ethos in action is when author or speaker includes “everybody know this” line into its argumentation, as the ultimate mean of substantiating this argumentation’s validity. For example, in his article “Safety Myths: What Everybody Knows Is Simply Wrong”, John F. Rekus establishes a feeling of trust with the readers, by stating facts that are known to most of people, in order to make readers more psychologically susceptible to article’s main idea that these facts are nothing but myths: “Everybody knows that a 2-hour fire wall will hold up for 2 hours in a fire. Everybody knows that flammable liquid cans must have a flame arrester. Everybody knows that the atmosphere in a confined space can change in the blink of an eye. Everybody knows that respirator wearers can’t have beards. These and other myths have been repeated so often that many people think they’re true” (Rekus 1999). The closer analysis of an appeal to Ethos reveals its essence being logically fallacious (the fallacy of assumption); however, this does not undermine the utter effectiveness of this rhetorical device; as such that exploits weaknesses of human psychology.

As practice shows, the majority of people rely in their judgments about surrounding reality on opinions of those they perceive as “experts”.⁵ Therefore, it is the matter of foremost importance for speakers who strive to win the audience by exposing it to Ethos, to pose as an “authority figures” or to at least radiate the aura of successfulness and professionalism, regardless of whether they are professionally successful in reality of nor. In their book “Influencing through Argument”, Robert Huber and Alfred Snider articulate essentially the same idea: “Some of the persuasiveness of the speaker arises from the position she holds. The manager of a corporation, the chairperson of a college department, or the person who has attained a high position in any area of endeavor carries greater authority and therefore has greater personal persuasiveness. The president of a bank speaks with greater authority than a bank clerk. The persuasive power of any person increases as he grows older and attains higher and higher positions in his chosen profession” (Huber & Snider 2006, 196). Thus, the two most important keys to effective deployment of appeal to Ethos, while addressing the audience, can be defined as follows: the high degree of speaker’s self-confidence and his or her acute sense of audience’s psychological weaknesses, such as its susceptibility to the voice of personal or collective authority.

Images

What has been said earlier about technicalities of appeal to Logos, Pathos and Ethos fully applies to visual images as well. The following three images substantiate the validity of such our suggestion:

1) Appeal to Pathos

The designers of this advertisement exploit men-smokers’ emotional insecurity as to their physical appearance, which is being sublimated into their subconscious longing to be perceived as particularly manly individuals.

2) Appeal to Logos

The designers of this advertisement emphasize the high quality of company’s services by appealing to potential customers’ sense of rationale (certified, tested, and respected).

3) Appeal to Ethos

This advertisement implies the high quality of meat as being not just a self-evident category for humans, but also for space aliens.

Conclusion

Before we conclude this paper, we will need to state that one cannot possibly hope to become an effective orator by simply knowing what accounts for technical aspects of rhetorical argumentation. It is only those who can improvise with utilization of appeals to Pathos, Logos and Ethos in a manner most suitable for every particular audience that can be referred to as “orators by God’s grace”.

And there is only one way for an individual to achieve such a rhetorical excellence – to practice its argumentative skills on a continuous basis.

Bibliography

Aristotle. 1954. Rhetoric. (W. R. Roberts, Trans.). NY: Modern Library.
Belien, Paul. 2006. Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship. Brussels Journal.
Blazquez, Agustin. 2002. Political Correctness: The Scourge of Our Times. Newsmax.Com.
Huber, Robert & Snider, Alfred. 2006. Influencing Through Argument. NY: International Debate Education Association.
Kennedy, George. 1994. A New History of Classical Rhetoric.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Le Bon, G. 1896. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. University of Virginia Library. Web.
Meyer, Michael. 2000. Philosophy and the Passions: Toward a History of Human Nature. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Nelson, John. 1998. Tropes of Politics: Science, Theory, Rhetoric, Action Rhetoric of the Human Sciences. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Rekus, John. 1999. Safety Myths: What Everybody Knows Is Simply Wrong. EHS Today. Web.
Weber, Mark. 2003. A Look at the Powerful Jewish Lobby in America. Rense.Com. Web.
Worthington, Ian. 1994. Persuasion: Greek Rhetoric in Action. London: Taylor & Francis Routledge.

Footnotes

Irony
Hyperbole
Sarcasm
Methaphor
Sarcasm

Click Here To Order Now!