| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

The Rhetorical Triangle

This version was saved 12 years, 3 months ago View current version     Page history
Saved by David King
on December 21, 2011 at 11:59:19 am
 

The Rhetorical Triangle

Making your writing credible, appealing, and logical

 

Does your heart sink a little when you are asked to prepare a written document or present information to an audience? If so, you’re not alone! Many people struggle with putting their ideas and thoughts on paper and delivering a message. It’s a skill that needs to be learned and practiced. 

 

Yet with the increase of email and working with people in remote places, delivering clear and persuasive communication is becoming more and more important. The trend is away from direct, one-on-one communication because people do not have to be face-to-face any more when they work together.

 

Perhaps the biggest problem with this is that when you write, you often don’t get a second chance to make your point in a different way. You get one shot, and if you lose your reader, it is difficult to get them back. This is why you need to pick and choose your words carefully, and present your points in a style, manner and sequence that best suits the message you are sending.

 

The Rhetorical Triangle is a useful way of formulating your thoughts and presenting your position. And here we look at how you can use it to improve your writing.

 

Understanding the Tool: Rhetoric

Rhetoric is the ancient art of using language to persuade. When it is used well, your audience easily understands what is being said, without noticing the style of presentation.  By taking the time to understand how rhetorical arguments are structured and presented, you can vastly improve your own writing, and make your points clearly, efficiently and effectively.  (an overview of the term “rhetoric” is explained pretty well in aYouTube video found at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dmzu6-XC1SM)

 

The term “rhetoric” in modern language has been used to refer to arguments that are designed to obscure the truth. The word has therefore taken on a negative connotation (“All that politician does is spew rhetoric.”) This is not the sense that we're using here when we talk about the Rhetorical Triangle.

 

Applying the principles of rhetoric helps you structure an argument so the truth becomes immediately apparent to your audience. With the Rhetorical Triangle approach, we focus on the three things that have the greatest impact on an argument:

• The writer;

• The audience; and

• The context.

 

These three elements form the points of the Rhetorical Triangle:

 

According to this approach, these three factors are what determine the persuasiveness of your argument. Your writing – and any other forms of communication – needs to take all three into consideration.

 

The Writer

Whether consciously or sub-consciously, your audience wants to know what your motives are for your communication. If you don’t make it clear why you are presenting information, some will assume you are not being totally candid or are hiding something. Members of your audience may ask themselves:

• Are you providing information?

• Are you trying to educate?

• Are you making a call for action?

• Are you attempting to persuade others to change a perspective or firmly held belief?

• Are you presenting ideas for problem solving or analysis? Or

• Are you just trying to entertain?  

 

The way in which the identity of the writer (or speaker) affects the argument is known as ethos. The audience wants to know who they are dealing with. So make sure you clarify:

• Who you are;

• Why you are competent to speak on the issue; and

• Where your authority comes from.

 

Your audience will be trying to figure out what your motives are and what you believe, value, and are assuming. This information helps them determine your credibility and decide whether you are being sincere.

 

The Audience

When you communicate, in writing or verbally, you need to understand your audience. Knowing who you're speaking to helps you avoid using technical terms when speaking to lay people, or “dumbing down” the content if your message is intended for professionals. Things to consider here include:

• What are the audience’s expectations?

• How will they use the information you provide?

• What is the audience hoping to take away after reading/listening?

• Why are you communicating to this audience in the first place?

 

This part of the triangle is concerned with appealing to the emotions of the audience, which is known as pathos. The audience needs to be moved by what you are saying. Ask yourself:

• What emotion do you want to evoke? Fear, trust, loyalty...?

• Do you have shared values you want to draw on?

• How do your audience’s beliefs fit with your message?  

 

Connecting with your audience through pathos is a strong means of gaining support.

 

The Context

Finally, your audience analyzes the content and circumstances of your communication.

• What events preceded the communication?

• What types of arguments are used?

• Are they logical and well thought out?

• How are they delivered?

• Where is the document or speech delivered?

• Is this communication necessary?  

 

Here the emphasis is on logic and reason, or logos (pronounced log-oss). Your audience needs to be able to follow what you are saying for it to be believable. Ask yourself:

• Have I presented a logical, well-constructed argument?

• How do I support my claims?

• What evidence do I have?

• What are the counterarguments?  

 

To be fully effective and persuasive, your communication must appeal to all three of the elements of the Rhetorical Triangle. An argument that is purely based on emotion won’t last for very long. Likewise, if all you do is present facts and figures, you will lose your audience’s interest and they won’t be able to relate to what you are saying. Finally, you can be the most credible person going, but if you don’t make sense or your arguments aren’t logical, you won’t be considered credible for very long. (A brief video describing ethos, pathos, and logos, can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eDFKSqbjbI

 

Using the Rhetorical Triangle

When preparing a written document, speech or presentation you should first consider the three elements required for effective persuasion. If your communication is lacking in any of the three areas, then you'll decrease the overall impact your message will have on your audience. 

 

Step One: Fully consider the impact your credibility has on the message. Failing to do so risks leaving your audience unconvinced. Answer the audience’s question, “Is the source credible?”

• What is the purpose of your communication?

• A call for action?

• To provide information?

• To educate?

• To persuade or change a perspective?

• To present ideas?

• To entertain?

• Who are you as a person?

• Establish who you are and reveal your biases, beliefs, values and assumptions as appropriate.

• Explain where your expertise comes from

• Use expert testimony

• Show why you should be considered an authority.

 

Step Two: Fully consider your audience; otherwise they may feel disconnected and the message will be lost. Appeal to their emotions where this is appropriate and honest. And answer the audience’s question, “Is this person trying to manipulate me?”

• Who are the members of my audience?

• What are their expectations?

• Why are they reading/listening?

• How will they use this document?

• What do I want them to take away?

• How can I connect emotionally?

• What emotions do I want to evoke?

• Do I use anecdotes or personal stories?

 

Step Three: Fully consider the context of your message. And make sure you deliver it with a solid appeal to reason. Answer the audience’s question, “Is the presentation logical?”

• How will I present the information?

• What type of reasoning will I use?

• How will I support my position? With statistics? Observations?…

• What tone will I use, formal or informal?

• How will I deliver the communication?

• What events are surrounding this communication?

• What background information do I need to supply?

• What do I need to present to make sure my points are clear?

• Are there counterarguments I should bring up and then dismiss?

• Does the method or location of my communication fit with its message?

 

Key Points

Making persuasive arguments is not easy. By applying the principles of rhetoric to your initial planning, you can significantly increase the success of your communication.

 

Your audience wants to know that you are credible, they want to know that you understand them, and they want the argument to be logical. These are the three cornerstones of the Rhetorical Triangle, and they must all be addressed in order for your argument to be effective.

 

Make sure you keep your message balanced between them. That way you will ensure your message will be clearly understood and received with the correct intention. When you seek to understand how your message will be perceived in this way, you're in the perfect position to address the audience’s concerns before they even have a chance to surface.

 

The three points on the Rhetorical Triangle relate directly to the three classic appeals you should consider when communicating.

• Ethos – Building trust by establishing your credibility and authority (Writer)

• Pathos – Appealing to emotion by connecting with your audience through their values and interests (Audience)

• Logos – Appeal to intelligence with well-constructed and clearly argued ideas (Context).

 

The goal of argumentative writing is to persuade your audience that your ideas are valid, or more valid than someone else's. The Greek philosopher Aristotle divided the means of persuasion, appeals, into three categories--Ethos, Pathos, Logos.

 

Ethos (Credibility), or ethical appeal, means convincing by the character of the author. We tend to believe people whom we respect. One of the central problems of argumentation is to project an impression to the reader that you are someone worth listening to, in other words making yourself as author into an authority on the subject of the paper, as well as someone who is likable and worthy of respect.

 

Pathos (Emotional) means persuading by appealing to the reader's emotions. We can look at texts ranging from classic essays to contemporary advertisements to see how pathos, emotional appeals, are used to persuade. Language choice affects the audience's emotional response, and emotional appeal can effectively be used to enhance an argument.

 

Logos (Logical) means persuading by the use of reasoning. This will be the most important technique we will study, and Aristotle's favorite. We'll look at deductive and inductive reasoning, and discuss what makes an effective, persuasive reason to back up your claims. Giving reasons is the heart of argumentation, and cannot be emphasized enough. We'll study the types of support you can use to substantiate your thesis, and look at some of the common logical fallacies, in order to avoid them in your writing.

---------------------------

 

The following essay "The Appeals: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos" was written by Professor Jeanne Fahnestock of the University of Maryland, College Park, and is a very insightful explanation of the three appeals.  

 

According to Aristotle, our perception of a speaker or writer's character influences how believable or convincing we find what that person has to say. This projected character is called the speaker or writer's ethos. We are naturally more likely to be persuaded by a person who, we think, has personal warmth, consideration of others, a good mind and solid learning. Often we know something of the character of speakers and writers ahead of time. They come with a reputation or extrinsic ethos. People whose education, experience, and previous performances qualify them to speak on a certain issue earn the special extrinsic ethos of the authority. But whether or not we know anything about the speaker or writer ahead of time, the actual text we hear or read, the way it is written or spoken and what it says, always conveys and impression of the author's character. This impression created by the text itself is the intrinsic ethos.

 

Institutions, public roles and publications also project an ethos or credibility. We assume, for example, that The New York Times is a more credible source than the Weekly World News or the National Inquirer. And we usually assume that a person selected for a position of responsibility or honor is more credible than someone without official sanction. These expectations about credibility and ethos are occasionally disappointed.

 

The persuasive appeal of pathos is an appeal to an audience's sense of identity, their self-interest, their emotions. Many rhetoricians over the centuries have considered pathos the strongest of the appeals, though this view of persuasion is rarely mentioned without a lament about the power of emotion to sway the mind.

 

Appeals to our sense of identity and self interest exploit common biases; we naturally bend in the direction of what is advantageous to us, what serves our interests or the interests of any group we believe ourselves a part of. Even when advantage is not an issue, writers who belong to groups we identify with, or create groups we can belong to, often seem more compelling. We also naturally find more persuasive the speaker or writer who flatters us (especially indirectly) instead of insulting us. Thus skillful writers create a positive image in their words of the audience they are addressing, an image their actual readers can identify with. Who does not want to be the “sensible, caring person” the arguer describes? Especially powerful are devices that create an identity between the writer and reader so that the speaker almost seems to be the audience addressing itself.

 

The emotions also strongly assist, perhaps sometimes determine, persuasion. If, for example, a writer wants a reader to evaluate something negatively, she or he may try to arouse the reader's anger. Or to produce action to someone's benefit (e.q. to persuade us to make a charitable donation), an arguer may work on our pity.

 

Direct appeals to the reader to feel an emotion (e.q. “You should be crying now”) are rarely effective. Instead, creating an emotion with words usually requires recreating the scene or event that would in “real” circumstances arouse the emotion. Thus descriptions of painful or pleasant things work on the emotions. Or the arguer can work on the natural “trigger” of the emotion. If, for example, we usually feel anger at someone who, we believe, has received benefits without deserving them, then the arguer who wants to make us angry with someone will make a case that person was rewarded unfairly.

 

Finally, we come to the “argument” itself, the explicit reasons the arguer provides to support a position. There are many ways to describe the support provided in an argument, but a sample way to begin is to consider all the premises the author seems to supply. These can be scattered throughout the argument and expressed indirectly, so identifying premises is a judgment call in itself.

 

Next ask which of the premises are presented as objects of agreement that the arguer considers as given, elements of the argument taken for granted. Objects of agreement are basically either facts or values. Of course, the facts may not be facts and readers may not agree with the values assumed. Some of the premises will be supported further, but basically every argument has got to come down to certain objects of agreement that it presents as shared between arguer and audience.

 

You can also classify premises into the following categories. 1. Are they arguments based on definition? In other words, does the arguer make claims about the nature of things, about what terms mean, what features things have? 2. Does the arguer make analogies or comparisons? Does he or she cite parallel cases? 3. Are there appeals to cause and consequences? Arguing from consequence is especially common when policy issues are debated. 4. Does the arguer rely on testimony or authority by citing the received opinions of experts? Or does the author create some kind of authoritative reference group, citing public opinion on what most people think as support for his or her position?

 

Download this handout

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.