Comparing And Contrasting Ethos, Logos, And Pathos

Comparing and Contrasting the Use of Ethos, Logos and Pathos in Two Articles

The concepts of ethos, pathos, and logos are fundamental elements used in persuasive writing and rhetoric. These rhetorical devices serve to influence audiences by establishing credibility, appealing to emotions, and presenting logical arguments respectively. Understanding how different authors utilize these strategies can reveal their intended impact on readers, particularly within the context of political communication and international relations. This essay explores the application of ethos, pathos, and logos in two articles that analyze the United States' diplomatic relationships with China, focusing on how each author persuades their audience through these rhetorical means.

Ethos pertains to the credibility and authority of the author or the message being conveyed. It is crucial in establishing trustworthiness and convincing audiences that the arguments are well-founded. In the first article, titled "Decoding Trump’s China Trade Strategy," the author employs ethos by highlighting the economic ramifications of the US-China tensions. The discussion underscores the importance of economic stability, positioning the author as knowledgeable about international trade and economic policy. The emphasis on the economic consequences of diplomatic disagreements serves to bolster the author’s credibility, suggesting that an informed analysis supports the need for diplomatic resolution. By referencing the potential long-term impacts on both nations' economies, the author enhances their authority on the matter, making their argument more convincing to a readership concerned with economic prosperity.

Similarly, in the second article, "Targeting China, Trump Threatens Student Visas," ethos is established through the discussion of policy measures aimed at China that are framed as strategic and necessary. The author presents the American administration’s actions as calculated and in the best interest of national security, thus reinforcing the credibility of the analysis. The mention of specific policy decisions, such as tightening student visa regulations, illustrates the author's familiarity with government procedures and diplomatic strategies, further cementing their authority and convincing the reader of the legitimacy of the critique against these policies.

Logos, or logical appeal, involves the presentation of facts, statistics, and rational arguments to persuade. In the first article, the author employs logos by discussing the interconnectedness of the US and Chinese economies. The article logically builds on the premise that prolonged trade disputes could lead to mutual economic harm, supported by examples such as potential job losses and disruptions in trade routes. The argument proceeds through cause-and-effect reasoning, demonstrating that diplomatic engagement is essential to prevent economic downturns. These logical links strengthen the overall argument, convincing readers through rational analysis.

The second article also relies heavily on logos by detailing the economic consequences of restricting Chinese students and imposed visa regulations. The author cites data indicating that China is a major source of international students in the US, and that restrictions could significantly impact American educational institutions and exports. The reasoning is clear: targeted policies against Chinese nationals in education serve as indirect economic sanctions, which could have ripple effects on the US economy. The use of concrete data and logical progression enhances the persuasiveness of the argument, appealing to the audience’s rational judgment.

Pathos, or emotional appeal, aims to connect with the audience’s feelings and values. In the first article, pathos is subtly invoked through the depiction of the US as striving to maintain peace and economic stability for the benefit of its citizens. By emphasizing the potential suffering of American workers and the broader population if diplomatic ties were severed, the author appeals to national pride and concern for economic security. This emotional framing encourages readers to support diplomatic efforts and view conflict as detrimental to their well-being.

The second article uses pathos more explicitly by framing the immigration restrictions as protective measures for American citizens. It appeals to concerns about safety, national security, and economic stability, implying that these policies are motivated by a genuine desire to safeguard the country's interests. The portrayal of Trump as acting out of concern for the American people, rather than hostility toward China, stirs emotional support for his decision-making. This emotional appeal fosters a sense of patriotism and bolsters the argument that such policies are justified and necessary.

Comparison and Contrast of Rhetorical Strategies

Both articles demonstrate the strategic use of ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade their respective audiences. However, their emphasis on each element varies depending on their specific objectives and contextual factors. The first article prioritizes ethos and logos, emphasizing economic analysis and portraying the author as knowledgeable about international trade and finance. The focus is on logical consequences and credibility to convince readers of the importance of diplomatic resolution.

The second article leans more heavily on pathos and ethos, framing policies as protective and strategic while appealing to emotional concerns about security and patriotism. The emphasis on emotional appeal seeks to garner support for government actions that might otherwise appear controversial or aggressive. The logical arguments are still present but serve to reinforce emotional and credibility-based appeals rather than stand alone.

Furthermore, the methods of persuasion reflect the different angles of analysis. In the first article, a more analytical approach underscores the economic stakes and logical necessity of diplomacy. Conversely, the second article uses emotional framing to highlight the perceived threats and justify protective measures. Both strategies are effective within their contexts but illustrate contrasting ways authors utilize rhetorical devices for persuasion.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the use of ethos, logos, and pathos significantly influences the persuasiveness of the two articles examined. While both authors employ all three strategies to some degree, their emphasis varies according to their rhetorical goals. The first article relies primarily on establishing credibility and logical reasoning concerning economic impacts, persuading the audience about the importance of diplomatic efforts. The second leans more on emotional appeals and credibility, aiming to justify restrictive policies against China by invoking national security concerns. These contrasting approaches exemplify the versatility of rhetorical devices and how they are tailored to different persuasive contexts within political and international issues.

References

• Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. University of California Press.
• Cheng, J. (2021). Rhetoric and persuasion in international diplomacy. Journal of Political Communication, 38(2), 134-150.
• Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and practice. Pearson Education.
• Gitlin, T. (2018). The whole world is watching: Media coverage and public opinion on U.S.-China relations. International Journal of Communication, 12, 2445-2463.
• Hampton, S. L. (2017). Public persuasion and political communication. Routledge.
• McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 233-346). Random House.
• Perloff, R. M. (2017). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitude change. Routledge.
• Regan, T. (2019). International relations and strategic communication. Oxford University Press.
• Wilson, K. (2020). Persuasion and public opinion. Sage Publications.
• Zhao, S. (2022). Media rhetoric and diplomatic discourse. Media, War & Conflict, 15(3), 293-311.