What
the crap am I writing about?
For those of you writing for or
against abortion, I’m going to give a brief summary of what I learned at the
beginning of AP English when I was in the eleventh grade. That has been a
while, probably 8 years ago.
Our first assignment was to read and
annotate Aristotle’s rhetoric. He divided argumentation or persuasion into
three categories: ethos, pathos and logos. My explanations oversimplify it a
bit, but I hope this helps.
Logos – This is the appeal
to logic. This is where in an argument you use facts and logic to support your
case.
Pathos – This is how you
appeal to the emotional sensibilities of your audience. You do NOT tell your
audience how they should feel. This is where you use narrative to spark
feelings and imagination in your argument.
Ethos – This is where you
establish your credibility on the subject. What makes you an expert on the
subject? What is your ethical credibility to the subject? You also need to to establish the credibility of any sources you cite.
A brief
example of how this works?
I have bipolar disorder, and one of my
assignments for my Medical Anthropology class was to pick a topic that I found
important. My subject was the social stigmas attached to mental illness. I
wrote a paper on it, and presented my findings to the class via PowerPoint
presentation.
I did not simply follow my paper for
my presentation as many students did; I established ethos first before I began
the body of my term paper, in which I appealed to both logos and pathos!
I started my presentation with a narrative
(appeal to pathos), with an anecdote intended to establish my ethos once it
played through in the course of the presentation! The anecdote was not finished
until the end, and it was meant to leave the audience thinking, which it did.
The rest of my presentation was
primarily factual (appeal to logos).
This was the string that really tied
my presentation together. It wasn’t until the end that I fully established my “ethos”
in the presentation by revealing that I had bipolar disorder and was being
treated for it! This helped to fully establish my “ethos” in this situation,
because I revealed that I had been living on in the face of the stigmatization
I was criticizing.
Why am
I targeting abortion debates?
Why did I pick the abortion argument
for my debate to criticize? It’s extremely polarizing and the civility is
nearly nonexistent in dialogue. On both sides when I see people debating this,
I see the inappropriate use of all three of Aristotle’s pieces of rhetoric.
Your appeal to logos is more important
than your appeal to pathos. Your appeal to ethos here is going to be in
demonstrating that you know what you’re talking about, that you’re
well-researched or well-educated on the subject – or that you’re a professional
in the field. Basically, your logos should help you establish your ethos here.
Try to use language that is correct
from a logical standpoint. Insisting on using the word “baby” versus “zygote”,
“blastocyst”, “embryo” or “fetus” is pointless if you’re arguing about medicine
and developmental biology, where these terms are far more correct than the term
“baby.” It’s a potentially inappropriate
appeal to pathos that can easily detract from the entire point of the argument
in a way that can completely undermine you, if you don’t know your audience.
Whatever side you’re on, also avoid
name-calling and labeling (moron, idiot, baby killer, bible thumper, pro-abort,
anti-choice, godless, atheist, fundy, anti-woman, bad Christian, etc). Avoid
appeals to God and the Bible unless you’re discussing the Bible and Christian
Tradition(s) on whether or not abortion is permissible.
Remain civil. Check your facts
beforehand, and check the facts of the person arguing against your view. If
someone gives an incorrect fact or quotes improperly (such as out of context),
do call them out on it for the sake of honesty. Be charitable while you do
this. If they continue to cite facts incorrectly or give quotes out of context,
continue to call them out for dishonesty.
No comments:
Post a Comment