Although it may seem like a formal term,  “rhetoric” simply refers to the art and science of persuasion. There are four common rhetorical devices–sometimes called “appeals”–that a rhetorician may use in any given situation: Ethos, Pathos, Logos, and Kairos. Understanding these devices will not only make you a stronger researcher (since you will be able to detect good persuasive argumentation) but will also make you a stronger writer as well.

Ethos

When it comes to convincing an audience, trust is essential. No matter how well-researched or persuasive a speaker’s argument may be, the audience will not be convinced if they do not trust the speaker. In rhetoric, we use the term ethos to describe the ways that a speaker demonstrates their trustworthiness.

When it comes to ethos, there are a few important facts to keep in mind. First, ethos is a Greek term. Although it sounds similar to the term “ethics,” they are not the same concept. Second, although some traditional measures of credibility (which we discuss in detail in Chapter 3) also contribute to ethos, ethos is much more complex than credibility alone.

You can think of ethos as the ways that an author demonstrates that you can trust them. There are several common elements to look for:

1. Knowledge of the subject
2. Reading the room/responding appropriately
3. Goodwill
4. Community
5. Knowledge of the Subject

Knowledge of the subject is the closest we get to credibility. A speaker can demonstrate knowledge of a subject in many ways, including:

• Relevant degrees or job titles
• Demonstrated expertise or experience
•  Use of credible evidence and sources

For example, if you are researching environmentally friendly pest control options, you may find a relevant article written by someone with a master’s degree in Biochemistry, and another article written by someone who owns a pest control company. Both of these authors have degrees or job titles that are relevant to the topic and which, therefore, increase how much you might trust their input. However, you may also find an article that is written by someone without a relevant degree or job but who has other indicators that they know what they are talking about. For example, perhaps you find an article written by a person whose main hobby of fifteen years has been gardening, and who are active members of a national horticulture association. Although they might not have the degrees or titles, they seem to have relevant experience that may make their input seem more trustworthy. Finally, as with credibility, a speaker who wants to gain the trust of their audience will likely also include relevant evidence and sources to help demonstrate that their claims are well-researched.

Reading the Room and Responding Appropriately

In public discourse and rhetoric, an appropriate response to the topic and situation at hand is another way that speakers demonstrate their trustworthiness. An appropriate response indicates the speaker’s ability to adequately assess and comprehend the seriousness of a situation (i.e., “reading the room”). An inappropriate response, therefore, reflects poor judgment on the part of the speaker and makes them seem less trustworthy.

For example, let’s say that two candidates with equal experience apply for the same job. One applicant submits materials that are written with formal language, have good formatting, and follow the prompts of the job application. The other candidate submits materials that have informal language (like swear words), inconsistent formatting, and which do not follow the prompts of the application. The audience (the application reviewers) will likely question the second candidate’s judgment since they did not adequately assess the formality of the application process. The candidate’s inappropriate response to the situation has negatively affected their audience’s trust in them.

Here are some other markers to look for when measuring a speaker’s ability to respond appropriately to a situation:

Goodwill

Another way a speaker might try to gain the audience’s trust is by indicating that they have the audience’s best interests at heart. A classic example is the expression “‘I just want what’s best for you.” The idea being that since the speaker prioritizes the audience’s health and wellbeing, the audience should trust the speaker and listen to their advice/buy their product/vote for them/etc.

Indications of goodwill are popular rhetorical moves in much brand advertising and political speech. You can find them at any point that the speaker seems to be implying that the audience will benefit from listening to the speaker’s argument.

Community

For better or for worse, people tend to trust other people who come from the same community. This sort of trust can come from a shared background or experiences, similar values, or the comfort of relatability.

In many cases, speakers will intentionally show that they share similarities with or membership in the intended audience’s community as a way to try to build trust with that community. This can take several forms:

1. Directly referring to commonalities with first-person plural pronouns or shared identifiers: “as a fellow parent, I too believe that…” or, “we agree that…”
2. Including a picture of themselves with the publication
3. When appropriate, using relevant language or slang (ex: a professor using modern slang to show they understand the values and interests of their students)

Pathos

Another tool a speaker or author may use to convince their audience is pathos. Pathos appeals involve an attempt to elicit a feeling or emotional response in the audience. Although sometimes the idea of making a decision based on feelings can get a bad reputation, how we feel can have a huge and important impact on what we believe and do. A few points to remember about the use of feelings in a persuasive setting:

• Feeling something is super motivating.
• Emotional response is not a better or worse reason to make decisions than belief in the reasoning (logos) or trust in the originator (ethos).
• A good argument approaches the audiences as they are–human beings! Thinking, breathing, feeling beings who can be persuaded based on multiple factors.

It’s important to emphasize that pathos is not strictly about emotion. We wouldn’t necessarily call loyalty, for example, an emotion, but it is a feeling that can be evoked and that can help persuade a person to buy a certain brand or take a certain side in a debate.

Usually, pathos appeals will take one of two forms: either the author will try to make the audience feel a certain way about the topic, or the author will try to make the audience feel a certain way about themselves. While we will talk about manipulation in rhetoric toward the end of this chapter, it is important to note that a pathos appeal is not necessarily manipulative if it changes the way the audience feels.

Toward the Topic

Often, originators will give an audience a reason to feel something toward the topic in order to convince or persuade them to take action. Anger, Fear, Pity, Frustration, Astonishment, Curiosity, Empathy, etc. are all very useful emotions for a persuasive argument. If the reader, for example, becomes afraid of what will happen if they don’t take action, they will be more motivated to agree with the author.

 Toward Themselves

A reader who is made to feel something about themselves due to their stance on a topic or their values might try to take action to continue to or stop feeling that way. Satisfaction, Pride, Loyalty, Guilt, and “Warm Fuzzies” are all very useful emotions for a persuasive argument . If the originator, for example, explains that the person who donates to their cause is a “hero” or “good citizen,” they are trying to make the audience feel something about themselves to motivate them to action.

Logos

Logos appeals use reasoning and evidence to convince the audience to believe a certain conclusion.

Since logos appeals make use of facts, reasoning, and other evidence to draw a conclusion, it may seem like any use of data in a text is automatically a logos appeal. However, this is not always the case. As an author, you wouldn’t just give your audience evidence and let them draw their own conclusions. A logos appeal, therefore, is made up of both the evidence and the conclusion that the author is asking you to believe, and often there is an additional hidden assumption that connects the two together.

It is also easy to believe that appeals to reason must rely on data or numbers and are, therefore, the “strongest” appeals out of the three. However, numbers are only one of a great many kinds of evidence that logos appeals can make use of. Here are some common types of evidence for a logos appeal:

• Data and Statistics
• Cultural Aphorisms/Idioms – common sayings that are generally accepted to be true. Ex: “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”
• Anecdotes and Examples – personal narratives or stories
• Predictions/Conjecture

As you can see, it is entirely possible for an argument based on reasoning to use stories, common phrases, or even educated guesses as their “evidence.” When evaluating a logos appeal, make sure that the evidence the author is providing actually holds up and represents a sound foundation for their conclusions.

Conclusions are an indispensable component of a logos appeal. After providing evidence, a good rhetorician will also supply the conclusion they want their audience to draw based on that evidence. Sometimes, however, the connection between the evidence and the conclusion is poorly thought out or downright questionable. In those cases, we encounter what’s known as a logical fallacy–what happens when logic and reasoning go awry.

Logical Fallacies

Persuasion at its core is not necessarily manipulative. It is providing the audience with reasons to change their mind based on interpersonal trust, feelings, and belief in the conclusions drawn. These are all valid approaches to persuade someone.

That said, if handled improperly, persuasion can certainly become manipulative. Logical fallacies are often the result of manipulative or poorly orchestrated rhetoric. Below are some common logical fallacies to look out for both in the sources you read and in the arguments you write.

Kairos

Kairos is often described as the timeliness of an argument. You might consider timeliness in the following colloquialisms: Too soon?, Too little, too late? As these popular sayings show, when and how quickly someone responds to a situation can also impact how audiences may receive their message. Waiting for a strategic moment to respond is an important component of a rhetorical situation. Here are two examples:

In both cases, the writer’s grasp of kairos has the potential to either add to or take away from their argument, depending on the writer’s understanding of the timeliness of the argument itself.

Listen to the Audio  Chapter