ARCS, Chapter 6

This chapter discussed ethos, or ethical proof. This is such a difficult thing for the average rhetorician to accomplish, as our culture is not only trained to embrace some kind of "humility," but we are inclined to distrust certain authority figures to a point where the ethos may work against us.

Where ethos is most common is in our work cited pages. While also exemplifying logos, work cited pages display credibility as an author--proving to the audience that I know exactly what I am talking about, and that I have researched the topic sufficiently enough to write about it.

An individual influences ethos through voice, whether the rhetor chooses to maintain a formal distance, or to establish a personal relationship with the audience. To continue the doctor example I established before, this would be like a bedside manner--formal is fine, but the patient is more easily persuaded to trust a doctor that is friendly, warm, and personal.

Perhaps the greatest disqualification of credibility is punctuation and grammar. This is not to say that it is the most important aspect of an academic paper--in fact, some would argue that it is the least. However, when deciding whether to consider a paper as a viable source of information, poor grammar is something an individual is trained to look for as a red flag. If the author misuses a common expression, or uses an incorrect form, credibility plummets. If I opened this post with "I'd like to flush out an idea with you," a professional might pass it by, dismissing it for uneducated dribble.