Speech Ethos Pathos Logos

Rhetorical Analysis Rhetorical analysis can show how effective the text is and what elements the author used to show his/her credibility and engage the audience’s emotions and make them decide logically. We want to apply rhetorical analysis to two speeches, “wrath of Grapes Boycott Speech” by Cesar Chavez and “Speech at the Kyoto Climate Change Conference” by Al Gore. In this process we are investigating ethos, pathos and logos in these two speeches, so we compare them. In “Speech at the Kyoto Climate Change Conference”, Al Gore argues that world leaders need to set emissions limits to provide healthy planet and bring peace to nation. In “Wrath of Grapes Boycott Speech”, Chavez argues that people have to boycott grapes to support farmers and prevent the use of dangerous pesticides. By comparing these two speeches we can decide which one is more effective and which writer can meet his goals better. I believe that Al Gore is more successful in ethos and logos, but in pathos, Chavez is better.
Al Gore, Ethos …show more content…
Also, he mentions that he is here on behalf of president of America and American people, so it gives him authority. The other thing that he says is about the place where the conference happens. This important old building can give him credibility too. Al Gore then recalls the Rio Conference to show the relation between this speech and that conference to show how credible this speech is. He then refers to scientists’ researches about global warming to show that he knows the experts’ ideas about this issue. Using the experts’ idea is a way to show the author’s credibility. He talks about Montreal’s meeting to show his authority. Also, he uses W.H Murray’s (859) to show that he knows about different parts of the issue. In this part, Al Gore is very successful and uses ethos in the best way to effect on his