The key to any argument being fair, accurate, and principled is to keep the balance of logos, pathos, and ethos. I think most people would agree that we would want an argument presented to us to be all of these things. However, pathetic language is everywhere in today’s society, sometimes seeming like it outweighs logos and ethos. But is it used too much? Does it overstep and cross the line? In certain aspects, such as politics, I think definitely. In others however, such as TV shows, I think it is just fine.
Most politicians for example, exploit pathos to grab their audience. Instead of presenting their information with a balance of logic, ethics, and emotion, they focus heavily on the anticipating the emotional reactions of their audience. For example, they may show pictures of a baby girl and tell you a personal story and then ask you, “How could you kill her?” to advance their views on abortion. This goes straight to the emotions of the audience and completely forgets about logos and ethos. People may jump on board with the politician, without giving it much additional thought. To me, this seems like a cheap way out for the politician if they are getting the response they want. They are using pathos too outweigh ethos completely. There are no ethics behind an argument like this.
In other aspects of the media, such as television shows, I think that the over use of pathos is fine. For me, I am more likely to watch a show that gets me emotionally invested. Even if a show is about a topic I am not particularly interested in, I may watch it because the pathetic appeals grab me. For example, one show, “Extreme Makeover- Home Edition” definitely plays on emotional appeals. The show is about helping a family in need by building them a brand new house. The show really plays up the emotional story behind the family and gets the viewers invested. I think this is necessary. If the show just focused on building a house, it would lose many viewers who are not interested in how to build a house. However, when the emotional stories are played up, you can find yourself invested in them and want to watch the show. I think that there is no harm in this, but it is just using pathos effectively to get a larger audience, without crossing the line.
Overall, I think there is a slight unbalance between logos, ethos, and pathos in public discourse. However, the unbalance in politics is far greater and often crosses the line because it forgets about logos and ethos completely. On the other hand, in most television shows, the balance is slight and it is okay in my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think I agree 100% with your analysis of pathos (and the overuse of pathos) in public discourse, especially in politics. Politicians, political advertisements, and interest groups in general are masterminds at appealing to our emotions to gain our support. Not only are their arguments and advertisements without a proper balance between ethos, pathos, and logos, but they know that we too have this imbalance.
ReplyDeleteWe can use any politician's tactics as an example. Think of John McCain's infamous "Joe the Plumber" story, about the guy who lost his job and can't sleep at night because he worries about how he has to pay his bills, feed his kids, etc. It's an emotional feeling that McCain provokes with the story, however does this story make him the better politician? Does the fact that he can make us feel sad and empathetic towards Joe the Plumber make John McCain's qualifications and policies better?
No, of course not. So then why do we fall victim to these tactics? Why can't we balance our own logos, stop weighing on pathos, and make the right judgments?
Public discourse has certainly been weighted heavily on pathos and emotions, but to a certain extent it is our fault as a society and audience. The politicians use their respective strategies because they work best on us.