3 Types Of Ethos Pathos Logos

Amnesty has been a debated issue in the United States for decades. Within the articles provided, one sets out to argue the position of pro-amnesty, while the subsequent article argues against amnesty. In analyzing how rhetoric is used in each article to convey their arguments, one must break down how the three types of rhetoric: ethos, logos, and pathos. Each are used to create a well-supported argument, or a poorly constructed argument. A strong argument will make use of each of these elements in one fashion or another. An argument should seek to establish ethos, or credibility. Allure the reader with pathos, or emotional connections. And, finally support the argument with logos, or logical reasoning. The Case for Amnesty article falls short
on ethos and logos. Furthermore, it overwhelmingly relies on pathos to create it argument. Little is done on the authors’ part to establish ethos. There is no citations for any of the of the statistics given and much of the argument seems to be based on assumption rather than fact.
The author tends to frequently quote politicians, instead of scholars, or experts. Political quotes show policy makers stance on the issue, but do not provide fact in which the argument should be based. Politicians almost always have a political agenda and may be willing to shy away from fact if it pleases their constituents. On the other hand, little information is given about the author in the article. The fact that the article comes from Time Magazine does establish some ethos for the argument, but no information is given about the author to establish if he is qualified or an expert on the subject. The article heavily relies on pathos. For example, the author gives a case of a 19–year-old girl who is struggling because of her illegal status. The author states, “Fernanda had dreams of going to college to study
nursing, and Beardstown badly needs bilingual nurses. But she's illegal, and after the deportation of her parents, she has to support the entire family” (Thornburgh, 7). Using the hardship of a young adult losing her parents and having to support her younger siblings draw on ones emotions, which helps build the argument of amnesty. The article consistently uses pathos to argue that the United States government should give illegals amnesty. Using too much of one element of rhetoric, such as pathos, raises suspicion that the argument cannot be supported with the other elements, ethos and logos. Overall, the article makes a convincing emotional argument, but does not support the argument with credible sources. In the article Alternatives to Amnesty: Proposals for Fair and Effective Immigration Reform the argument is concise and supported.
Ethos for the article is established at the beginning with the list of authors. The some of the authors have Ph.D.’s and others have experience working within the field of immigration. This helps create credibility of the argument, since all of the author’s credentials are given to the reader. Also the article is supported by multiple sources, which shows extensive research and gives a variety of perspectives. The argument is set up neatly; the authors place subtitles at the beginning of a section then proceed to explain them with a series of bullet points. Laying out the argument in this way allows the reader to easily understand the concepts that support the author’s argument. The argument makes use of all three types or rhetoric. For example the author states, “Additionally, illegal border crossings put lives and property at risk for the individuals crossing, for those enforcing the law, and for local communities. In some areas, crime, property damage, and the risk of death from austere environmental conditions or reckless acts are becoming endemic” (Carafano, Spalding, Rosenzweig, and Meese). The quote appeals to the reader’s emotions by discussing the risk of death and crime, which draws on the fears of the reader. In all the articles does a better job than the Pro-amnesty article, because it establishes ethos with credible authors and
sources. Also it establishes pathos by appealing to ones fears and creates empathy for those coming to America illegally. Finally, it establishes logos through the use of multiple statistics. By combining all the elements of rhetoric the article is able to create a successful argument. With the issue of amnesty still being debated within the United States, both articles offer interesting arguments to advocate and oppose amnesty. The Case for Amnesty article, however, falls short compared to the Alternatives to Amnesty article. The Alternatives to Amnesty article provides sources for information and is formatted well to showcase the points of the argument. On the other hand, the Case for Amnesty provides no sources for information and draws to heavily on pathos, while ignoring the other elements of rhetoric. Overall, the Alternatives to Amnesty article provides a stronger argument because it uses ethos, logos, and pathos to convince the reader that the United States government should find alternate means to amnesty.