Rhetoric: The Art of Persuasion First described in his book Ars Rhetorica in 4th Century BC Greece, Aristotle defines rhetoric as “the art of identifying and using the best available means in a given situation to ethically persuade an audience” (Aristotle). Rhetoric, in the simplest terms, is creating an argument to convince someone of something. Originally outlined by Aristotle, and still used today, the three forms of persuasion that make up the rhetorical triangle are ethos, logos, and pathos. Ethos relies on character and credentials; for ethos to persuade, the audience must believe the author is credible. Logos, based on proof, or belief of proof, demands facts, statistics, and logical arguments. Pathos, on the other hand, plays to the
…show more content…
While the narrative itself relies solely on pathos, the use of ethos was highly effective from the moment it was introduced. Simply seeing the name George Orwell, an author I deeply respect, immediately made me excited to read, and later analyze the piece. Although I believe the essay would have had the same impact on me even if I had not known who wrote it, having his name attached likely made it more persuasive, or at the very least, more likely to be read at the time it was written. Some of the implications, particularly on the morality of British Imperialism, would have been controversial among those benefitting most from it, and probably not as well received from a lesser known …show more content…
One Expert Says They Do. While he does exercise some use of pathos, particularly in his choice of words to describe trees, Wohlleben largely relies on logos, offering a host of facts about the trees he studied working as a forester. Having never considered the feelings of trees, I found his logical arguments most convincing. Backing up his statement that “trees warn each other of danger” he relates an incident where scientists noticed acacias on the African savannah began secreting toxic substances in their leaves as an attempt to ward off hungry giraffes. Additionally, he claims they “gave off a warning gas (specifically, ethylene) that signaled to neighbouring trees of the same species that a crisis was at hand” (Wohlleben). While I am not entirely convinced that trees do, in fact, have feelings, Wohlleben’s use of rhetoric, specifically logos, was enough to convince me of the
While the narrative itself relies solely on pathos, the use of ethos was highly effective from the moment it was introduced. Simply seeing the name George Orwell, an author I deeply respect, immediately made me excited to read, and later analyze the piece. Although I believe the essay would have had the same impact on me even if I had not known who wrote it, having his name attached likely made it more persuasive, or at the very least, more likely to be read at the time it was written. Some of the implications, particularly on the morality of British Imperialism, would have been controversial among those benefitting most from it, and probably not as well received from a lesser known …show more content…
One Expert Says They Do. While he does exercise some use of pathos, particularly in his choice of words to describe trees, Wohlleben largely relies on logos, offering a host of facts about the trees he studied working as a forester. Having never considered the feelings of trees, I found his logical arguments most convincing. Backing up his statement that “trees warn each other of danger” he relates an incident where scientists noticed acacias on the African savannah began secreting toxic substances in their leaves as an attempt to ward off hungry giraffes. Additionally, he claims they “gave off a warning gas (specifically, ethylene) that signaled to neighbouring trees of the same species that a crisis was at hand” (Wohlleben). While I am not entirely convinced that trees do, in fact, have feelings, Wohlleben’s use of rhetoric, specifically logos, was enough to convince me of the