Aristotle's Model of Persuasion: Is It Still Relevant Today - Essay Example

Aristotles Model of Persuasion: Is It Still Relevant Today? Aristotle is considered to be one of thefounders of modern western philosophy and is known for his many contributions to science and the liberal arts. Amongst his many writings is a famous work on Rhetoric which can also be considered the first important piece in the field of interpersonal communication. Even though more than two millennia have passes since the writing of the book, the suggestions and methods described by Aristotle are as valid today as they were when they were written. There are many reasons for that and they can be clarified with examples from our daily lives. Before such examples are given, it is important to take a brief look at the ideas presented by Aristotle. Aristotle used persuasion and rhetoric as means to try and change a person’s ideas, beliefs, disposition and actions through the means of ethos, pathos and logos (Carey, 1994). The meaning of these terms is given as follows: 1. Ethos: Establishing the fact that the speaker is an expert on the topic being discussed and that he/she is an ethical, credible person who would not guide the listener in a wrong direction. 2. Pathos: Creating the sense of empathy in the listeners by appealing to their emotions or their softer side. 3. Logos: The use of logic, science or pure reasoning to conclusively show how one position on a topic is better than the other. In all our modern communication, advertising, persuasive writing, public debate, newspaper editorials, and in any situation where a person is trying to convince someone else about anything, elements from the items mentioned above can be seen clearly (Barker, 2004). Sometimes a presenter will hammer only one of the aspects of persuasion or use a combination of all three depending on the needs of the matter or the target audience, but regardless of the method, Aristotle’s system works very well even today. Taking the example of Ethos, it can be seen that modern advertisers use this method extensively when they use celebrities for endorsing and recommending certain products (Hargie, 1997). For example, advertisements for makeup and beauty equipment might carry a ‘confession’ from one or more of the top film and television stars saying that this particular product is the ‘secret’ to their beauty. Strangely enough, we know that the product is not the secret to their grace and charm yet in a short span of thirty seconds, they manage to convince us that by using the product we will also look like them. This is because we immediately associate superiority with that celebrity and assume that they know what they are talking about. This could be the motivating factor behind certain musicians and performing artists for launching their own brands of clothing since the image of style and fashion has already been associated with them. For example, the designer brand launched by the rap artist, Sean “Puffy” Combs is simply banking on the fact that those who accept him as a style guru will also accept his clothes as being the epitome of fashion. Of course this is an assumption and it may not be entirely true. I certainly think that the ‘style’ suggested by Sean “Puffy” Combs is not for everyone but there are many who are convinced by his ethos. While this could be seen as a negative use of ethos, there are many positive and useful aspects of this method of persuasion. For example, when we go to see medical practitioners, we normally accept their advice without question because we know they have studied hard to get where they are. Moreover, we respect their experience, their decorum (uniforms, protocol, medical procedures etc.) and appreciate the respect given to them by society. Similarly, college professors and teachers do not need to establish their credentials when they come into class since the students already know that the words of the teacher are credible truths and they must be respected. In fact, establishing credibility is important for something even as mundane as buying a toothbrush or toothpaste since the sign that it has been endorsed by a well-known dental association establishes credibility. The same has to be done for papers written by scholars and students today since the credibility of sources is often a point of contention in many debates (Coogan, 1981). Once doubt is created about a source or the usefulness of a source, the argument presented may collapse even though it may be valid on its own weight. The second aspect of persuasion deals with pathos and the ability to create positive or negative emotions within an audience to motivate them about doing something. Emotional responses can also be useful in interpersonal communications to show sincerity and empathy (Hargie, et. al. 2004). There are many emotions than can be evoked to bring an audience to the side of the presenter and if not that, then the position of the opposition can be shown as evil or detrimental to the common cause. Pity is one emotion that is commonly evoked in appeals for help make by charitable organisations and those who seek sympathy associated with money. The cause is nearly always a good one and the methods employed are even better. Using pictures and images is always a good tool since it lets the audience see what the other person is going through. For instance, the Red Cross website (2006) is loaded with pathos. First, there is an image of child with sorrowful eyes being rescued by a person wearing the Red Cross insignia, there are scenes of Red Cross ambulances at a disaster location and the words used are a direct emotional appeal for donations. Let it be clear that I do not think this is an underhand tactic; in fact quite the opposite is true since I believe that the Red Cross is simply making effective use of the pathos element in Aristotle’s system of persuasion. The appeal, the message and the work done by the Red Cross are all positive, as is their use of pathos to support their argument. On the other hand, there have been situations in history where pathos was generated and used for completely negative applications. Consider the example of Nazi Germany where one man appealed to the emotions of a wounded nation and aroused hatred against a minority population. The horrors of World War II and the bloodshed of the holocaust owe a lot to Hitler’s ability to motivate people by creating prejudice, disinformation, fear and hatred. He did not create or motivate others to have pity on the condition of the Germans; rather, he took the argument in a negative direction with completely disastrous results for all of his countrymen and himself. The final element of Aristotles method of persuasion is logos, i.e. the use of logic and reasoning to show how one position is better than the other. The most common use of this method is seen in how politicians debate and try to reason with the public for getting support. For example, when Tony Blair wants to convince the British about integration with the European Union, he can cite all the economic advantages England would have from being better integrated with the European Union even though she would have to give up some part of her own sovereignty for those benefits. Additionally, he may also make the use of pathos by talking about the European ideal and unity with the nations who have been longstanding neighbours and allies of Britain. Surprisingly, some of them have been the deadliest enemies for England in historical terms, if we consider the examples of France, Spain and Germany. However, with the combined use of ethos (his position as prime minister), logos (economic and defence arguments) and pathos (unity and a better future) he has managed to convince many people to come to see the situation as suggested by him. I believe that no argument can be successful without the use of all three elements of persuasion since the public today is much more aware and smarter than they were in the times of Aristotle, a good argument will make appeals from all three elements of rhetorical persuasion or it might fall through with audiences who are sharp enough to pick apart the argument presented (Rapp, 2002). However, once a group of presenters has mastered the art of using the right balance of these three elements (depending on the audience) I think that there is nothing which can stop them from moving audiences to their viewpoint. Overall, the model presented by Aristotle is certainly a good one since we can see it being used even today. It has been used throughout history in service of good and evil, not because it is essentially good or evil but because the person using the method had certain intentions for its use. A scalpel can be used to perform an operation to heal someone or it can be used to kill a man, the item itself is useful and good, the use of the item can be good or bad depending on who is wielding the blade. Word Count: 1,607 Works Cited Barker, A. 2004, Improve Your Communication Skills, Kogan Page, London. Carey, C, 1994, "Rhetorical Means of Persuasion," in Worthington, I (ed.) Persuasion: Greek Rhetoric in Action, Routledge, London, pp. 26-45. Coogan, R. 1981, ‘The Triumph of Reason: Sidneys Defense and Aristotles Rhetoric’, Papers on Language & Literature, vol. 50 no. 3, pp. 255-271. Hargie, O. 1997, The Handbook of Communication Skills, Routledge, London. Hargie, O. et. al. 2004, Skilled Interpersonal Communication. 4th ed., Routledge, London. Rapp, C. 2002, ‘Aristotles Rhetoric’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, [Online] Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2002/entries/aristotle-rhetoric/ Red Cross. 2006. ‘Donate Now!’, The American National Red Cross, [Online] Available at: http://www.redcross.org/donate/donate.html Read More