As I learn more about writing arguments, the rhetorical triangle becomes the focus of my attention. It is a good starting point for any paper, email or conversation. Whether I knew it or not, this triangle comes into play each and every time I write a personal email, business related correspondence or any papers for school. Although they might not be as lengthy or as detailed compared to a well written argument, any good, thought out conversation uses the triangle of logos, ethos and pathos as the building blocks of a well built house, so to speak.
I consider logos as the foundation of the conversation, email, paper, etc. If I don’t have a good reason (foundation), then it is not possible to move on to the next building block of my house. Logos is made up of good logic and structure, and defines the issue (what kind of foundation) my house will have. After the foundation, I can begin to attach the framework for completion. Within the framework is ethos and pathos. Again, to have one without the other is to have an incomplete house, which means it will not withstand the harsh elements of weather (attacks/rebuttals of skeptics).
When building the frame work, ethos is to be considered as necessary as the mortar is which holds the bricks, or the nails that bind the wood to the foundation. If you don’t have ethos, how can you expect the pathos to stay in place? Ethos focuses on how credible I am as a writer and what impact this has on the recipient of my writing. If my ethical appeal does not have a good impact, then it cannot hold up the framework for my house.
Pathos is the final piece of framework which is put into place. It engages whomever reads my correspondence emotionally, maybe imaginatively so that the appeal (looks) of my house have become pleasing to the eye, then, as attention is drawn to my well-built house, hopefully it entices my audience to want to come in and visit and to listen to what I have to say. If they like what they see (metaphorically), maybe I have persuaded them to my way of thinking, and my ideas. They might not want to stay permanently in my house, but at least they were open to the possibility. As communication goes, the well-built house has served its purpose and made a nice place for people to come visit.
Is It Raining
ReplyDeleteNice analogy Sherry on the rhetorical triangle. I like how you used the reference to a house when it came to building and structuring a good argument. I also thought the book Writing Arguments: Rhetoric with Readings gave a great metaphoric analogy, using the reference to stage lighting and how different parts of the triangle shed varying angles of light on a particular subject (Ramage, Bean and Johnson). But, sticking to your home construction analogy I would have to say that I have built some beautiful homes that consisted of dirt floors and would crumble over time. I also feel at times like that guy in the floodsmart.gov commercial that is constantly getting rained on and failed to purchase flood insurance.
I could not agree with you more on the basis that the logos are the foundation of any good argument. In fact, without the logos, you do not even have an argument. For me, the Ethos and Pathos is something that I build upon my logos. If this is done correctly, even a novice writer can make a reasonably persuasive argument. I always enjoy your blogs and the well-grounded approach you take towards your writings.
Works Citied
Ramage, John, John Bean and June Johnson. Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric With Reading. New York: Longman, 2010.