This gave credence to the rhetor's ethos appeal because this was a method that they all can agree upon. All of them try to live by God's Word, so using it makes the argument seem more persuasive. The audience all had a nagging feeling that what Jenny did was wrong, but when the rhetor affirmed their nagging sensation, they refuted. The audience believed that Jenny sacrificed self for the greater good and would want someone to do the same thing for them. Whereas, the rhetor took the position of arguing that Jenny was wrong in her actions and was being deceitful. However, as the rhetor started to explain her idea to the audience they were slowly easing into her idea, part of the audience was being persuaded to the other side. Then the rhetor decided to introduce the ethos approach which resulted in one of the members of the audience became completely convinced, while the other member remained skeptical teetering either way. Finally, when the rhetor finished with the logos approach by giving them something to think about; what they would do logically in Jenny's shoes. When the audience thought about it from a logical point of view, they were indefinitely convinced enough to think why they were so bias to the one side. The consequences that followed were excruciating for both parties. A member in the audience wanted to pause in their thinking so that they could gather “ammunition” for their argument. This resulted in an all out biblical battle. Each side was spluttering out bible facts, scriptures and detailed conclusions. At the end of this long, drawn out argumentative battle, everyone still came back to the conclusion of the 10 inescapable
This gave credence to the rhetor's ethos appeal because this was a method that they all can agree upon. All of them try to live by God's Word, so using it makes the argument seem more persuasive. The audience all had a nagging feeling that what Jenny did was wrong, but when the rhetor affirmed their nagging sensation, they refuted. The audience believed that Jenny sacrificed self for the greater good and would want someone to do the same thing for them. Whereas, the rhetor took the position of arguing that Jenny was wrong in her actions and was being deceitful. However, as the rhetor started to explain her idea to the audience they were slowly easing into her idea, part of the audience was being persuaded to the other side. Then the rhetor decided to introduce the ethos approach which resulted in one of the members of the audience became completely convinced, while the other member remained skeptical teetering either way. Finally, when the rhetor finished with the logos approach by giving them something to think about; what they would do logically in Jenny's shoes. When the audience thought about it from a logical point of view, they were indefinitely convinced enough to think why they were so bias to the one side. The consequences that followed were excruciating for both parties. A member in the audience wanted to pause in their thinking so that they could gather “ammunition” for their argument. This resulted in an all out biblical battle. Each side was spluttering out bible facts, scriptures and detailed conclusions. At the end of this long, drawn out argumentative battle, everyone still came back to the conclusion of the 10 inescapable