Rhetorical Analysis Notes

Rhetorical Situation

  • Writing situations involve a purpose, a particular audience, a stand or position, a genre, and a medium. These elements guide what we choose to say and how we say it. Often it is not a single design but a synthesis of these factors to consider.
  • When analyzing rhetoric, we must first define rhetoric itself: the art of persuasion, the study of the art of persuasion, or an individual act of persuasion. Rhetoric studies how writers and speakers use words to influence an audience.
  • A rhetorical analysis is an essay that breaks a work of nonfiction into parts and explains how those parts work together to produce a particular effect (to persuade, entertain, or inform).
  • In a rhetorical analysis, you explore the rhetorician’s goal, the tools and techniques used, and the effectiveness of those techniques. You are not arguing whether you agree with the argument; you are evaluating how the argument is made and whether the approach is successful for convincing the intended audience.

The Rhetor and the Audience; The Observer

  • Two key parties: the rhetor (the persuader) and the audience (the target of the persuasion).
  • Our role in analysis is that of an observer or silent third party: we are not the ones being persuaded, we are assessing whether the audience would be persuaded by the rhetor.
  • Mistake to avoid: do not participate in the persuasion or become emotionally involved in the interaction; maintain detachment as an analyst.
  • Audience awareness: you may have a specific audience in mind or a general idea of the audience; tailor analysis to how the audience is likely to respond.

Aristotle’s Three Elements of Persuasion (Ethos, Pathos, Logos)

  • Ethos: credibility or trustworthiness of the rhetor as perceived by the audience.
  • Pathos: appeal to the audience’s emotions to persuade.
  • Logos: use of logical arguments and evidence that the audience perceives as rational.
  • Aristotle describes three moods or “species” of persuasion that can be present in a single speech or text: some elements reside in the character of the speaker (ethos), some in the way the listener is disposed (pathos), and some in the argument itself (logos).
  • The three elements are interconnected: ethos corresponds to the speaker’s character/credibility; pathos to emotional engagement; logos to logical demonstration.
  • In academic writing, ethos and logos often receive more emphasis than pathos; heavy reliance on pathos alone is unlikely to persuade a scholarly audience.

Ethos: Credibility and Character

  • Extrinsic ethos: credibility based on the rhetor’s character, expertise, education, and experience.
  • Intrinsic ethos: credibility generated by how the rhetor writes or speaks—the presentation, language, tone, and alignment with audience expectations.
  • Examples:
    • Extrinsic ethos example: A professional basketball player (e.g., Michael Jordan) talking about basketball; the audience already assumes expertise due to real-world experience.
    • Extrinsic ethos weaker: A baseball player speaking about basketball would be less credible on that topic.
    • Intrinsic ethos example: A college English professor presenting confidently with correct sports terminology, engaging the audience, and projecting authority, thereby increasing intrinsic ethos.
    • Audience-context shifts: Ethos can vary with the audience (e.g., preschool kids, laypersons, or fellow professionals). A speaker’s credibility can rise or fall depending on audience expectations.
  • Signs of strong vs weak ethos:
    • If the speaker communicates confidently and appropriately for the audience, intrinsic ethos strengthens.
    • If the speaker demonstrates competence and understanding, ethos improves; mispronunciations, hesitations, or misused terminology can weaken ethos.
  • Using others as sources:
    • When a rhetor cites an expert to support an argument, that is often considered logos (testimony/authority) rather than the speaker’s own ethos. If the speaker is recognized as an expert on the topic, that enhances extrinsic ethos.
  • Important distinction:
    • Pathos and logos can augment ethos, and vice versa; credibility can influence how receptively audiences respond to emotional or logical appeals.

Examples: Ethos in Action

  • Extrinsic ethos examples:
    • A professional basketball player addressing basketball-related topics: audience expects knowledge, credibility is high before speaking.
    • A college English professor discussing basketball: audience may view the professor as less credible on sports unless demonstrated by confident, accurate usage and relevant familiarity.
  • Intrinsic ethos examples:
    • A speaker who stumbles or uses incorrect terminology may undermine their intrinsic ethos, even if they possess substantial subject knowledge.
    • A confident, well-structured talk using audience-appropriate language can raise intrinsic ethos.
  • The mentor/speaker’s manner affects ethos: tone, voice projection, eye contact, and language choices contribute to perceived credibility.

Pathos: Emotional Appeal

  • Pathos is not meant to demean the term as “pathetic”; rather, it involves creating a sense of shared identity or emotional resonance with the audience.
  • Techniques to evoke emotion:
    • Evoking a sense of identity: aligning the speaker with the audience’s values or experiences (e.g., politicians opening with “my fellow Americans”).
    • Appealing to a spectrum of emotions: love, pity, sorrow, affection, anger, fear, greed, lust, hatred, etc.
  • Hurricane relief fundraising example:
    • A rhetor can appeal to love and pity by illustrating the suffering of hurricane victims, or to fear and anger by highlighting consequences of inaction.
    • The strength of pathos depends on the audience and the situation; it can be strong or weak.
  • Important note:
    • The emotions targeted are those of the audience, not the rhetor. The observer looks for whether an emotional appeal is being used effectively, not whether the speaker personally feels the emotion.
  • Mistakes to avoid:
    • Overreliance on emotion without credible support or logical reasoning can undermine persuasiveness in academic contexts.

Logos: Logical Appeal and Common Fallacies

  • Logos definition: logic-based persuasion using reasonable claims and supporting evidence, arguments, and reasoning.
  • Note: A statement can be about the structure of argument (logos) even if the argument is not persuasive or logically sound to any given observer.
  • Foundational idea: Logos relates to reasoning and the principles of valid inference and demonstration.
  • It is a broad field; we highlight a few logical fallacies and structures to recognize in rhetorical analyses:
    • Cause or consequence: claims that one thing causes another (e.g., "Global warming is caused by greenhouse gases"; "economic crisis was caused by deregulation").
    • Analogy: claim about qualities of one thing by comparing it to another (e.g., "The ozone layer is like the outer layer of skin").
    • Testimony and authority: citing the opinion of someone other than the rhetor (e.g., "Four out of five dentists surveyed would recommend sugarless gum"); important to distinguish whether it is used as a logos-based appeal (testimony/authority) or as evidence to support the rhetor’s own expertise (ethos).
    • Definition: claims about the meaning or nature of something, or redefining a term with a new definition.
    • Syllogism: deductive argument with a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion (general to specific).
    • Example structure:
      • Major premise: NuclearPowerPlants generate ext{dangerous nucléaire waste}
      • Minor premise: ext{The new plant is a nuclear power plant}
      • Conclusion: ext{Therefore, the new plant will be dangerous}
    • Inductive reasoning / Generalization with examples: a general statement supported by specific instances (e.g., Obama’s argument about using military resources with Darfur as a concrete example).
  • Important cautions about fallacies:
    • A fallacy can be structurally present even if the argument seems convincing; the observer assesses whether the audience would find the reasoning plausible.
    • Politicians often use inductive generalizations backed by examples, which should be scrutinized for logical relevance and sufficiency.
  • Strategies involving all three appeals:
    • Often a single claim blends ethos, pathos, and logos; seldom is a statement a pure, single-appeal argument (e.g., a doctor’s warning to a patient uses credibility (ethos), fear of death (pathos), and cause/consequence reasoning (logos)).
  • Practical approach in rhetorical analysis:
    • You are evaluating how a piece uses logos (and the other appeals) to convince the audience, not judging truth value or your personal agreement.

Case Examples and Integrated Analysis

  • Example from a hypothetical doctor-patient scenario:
    • Claim: If you don’t stop smoking, you’re going to die.
    • Ethos: extrinsic ethos of the doctor (expert authority).
    • Pathos: fear of death, concern for health.
    • Logos: cause/consequence reasoning (smoking leads to death).
  • Takeaway: In many real-world arguments, the three appeals work together; a well-rounded argument often relies on a mix of ethos, pathos, and logos.

Practical Guidelines for a Rhetorical Analysis

  • Remember your role: you analyze the interaction between the rhetor and the audience as an observer, not as a persuader or participant.
  • Your task is to evaluate how the rhetor makes their argument and whether that approach would be believable to the intended audience.
  • When analyzing a piece, consider:
    • What is the rhetor’s goal? What audience is targeted?
    • Which appeals are used (ethos, pathos, logos) and how effectively?
    • Are logical arguments well-structured (with clear premises and conclusions)? Are there fallacies?
    • How does the presenter’s credibility and presentation style affect persuasion?
    • How do emotional appeals interact with logical reasoning and credibility?
  • You may discuss how the three appeals are combined in a given text, but you do not insist that all three be present in every claim.

Assignment Context (From Transcript)

  • Midterms are due in the week of midterms, by midnight on October ext{ }5.
  • The assignment is a rhetorical analysis of Tony Medina’s "I Am Alfonso Jones" focusing on a theme of your choice and examining rhetorical strategies, especially ethos and logos, to determine how effectively they enlighten, inspire, or persuade readers.
  • Group activity: students will be split into 3 groups for collaborative work.

Connections to Foundational Principles and Real-World Relevance

  • Rhetoric as the study of how language influences audiences aligns with foundational communication theory and critical thinking.
  • The three appeals reflect enduring questions about credibility, emotion, and evidence in persuasion, with ethical implications for how arguments shape public discourse.
  • Understanding these concepts helps in evaluating political speeches, essays, advertisements, journalism, and everyday communication.

Key Terms Glossary (brief)

  • Rhetoric: the art of persuasion; the study of how persuasion is achieved; an individual act of persuasion.
  • Rhetorical analysis: breaking a nonfiction work into parts to understand how the parts create a specific effect.
  • Rhetor: the person or entity attempting to persuade (the speaker or writer).
  • Audience: the target of the persuasion.
  • Ethos: perceived credibility or ethical character of the rhetor.
  • Pathos: emotional appeal to the audience’s feelings.
  • Logos: logical appeal through reasoned arguments and evidence.
  • Extrinsic ethos: credibility based on the rhetor’s external attributes (character, expertise, experience).
  • Intrinsic ethos: credibility built through how the rhetor presents themselves (style, tone, language).
  • Fallacy: a pattern of reasoning that weakens an argument or leads to invalid conclusions.
  • Syllogism: deductive argument with major premise, minor premise, and conclusion.
  • Inductive generalization: reasoning that moves from specific examples to a general conclusion.
  • Testimony/authority: citing others’ opinions or expertise to support an argument (logos) or (less widely) to bolster ethos.
  • No fly zone, geopolitics, and other examples in the transcript serve to illustrate how rhetoric operates in political and public contexts.