2.3 Evaluating pathos
The Appeal to Pathos
Literally translated, pathos means “suffering” or “experience.” In rhetoric, it refers to the writer’s appeal to the audience’s emotions. A successful emotional appeal engages the audience’s feelings, values, and imaginations, making the argument more relatable and persuasive. If one fails to establish a strong emotional appeal, the argument may come across as dry or disconnected from the audience’s experiences.
For example, consider the previous example of a politician’s speech. If the speech only included statistical data and concrete plans without connecting emotionally to the audience, it might fail to resonate. Imagine if the speech also shared a touching story about an 80-year-old woman named Mary who, despite her challenges, remains hopeful about her Social Security benefits. This personal story would likely evoke empathy and concern, making the audience more receptive to the politician’s message.
Evaluating pathos is about understanding and interpreting the emotional layers of the text and their impact on the audience.
When evaluating a writer’s emotional appeal, ask the following questions:
- Does the writer evoke emotions that are relevant to the argument?
- Does the writer use personal stories, vivid language, or compelling imagery?
- Are the emotional appeals balanced with logical reasoning and credible evidence?
- Are the emotions appropriate for the intended audience and context?
- Does the emotional appeal enhance the overall persuasiveness of the argument?
By analyzing these elements, you can determine whether the emotional appeal is effectively employed to connect with the audience and support the argument.
Recognizing a Manipulative Appeal to Pathos
Recognizing a manipulative appeal to pathos involves detecting when the emotional appeal is being used unfairly or excessively to influence the audience. Here are some tips to help you identify such manipulative tactics:
- Emotional Overload: If the text is saturated with emotionally charged language to the point of being overwhelming, it might be a sign of manipulation. This can include excessive use of tragic stories, fearmongering, or dramatic imagery without substantial logical backing.
- Distraction from Logic: Be wary of emotional appeals that seem to divert attention away from the core argument or logical reasoning. If the author relies heavily on pathos to mask weak or flawed arguments, it’s a red flag.
- Appealing to Biases: Manipulative appeals often play on existing biases, prejudices, or stereotypes. This can involve targeting specific emotions like anger, fear, or hatred towards a group or individual to provoke a biased reaction.
- Exploiting Vulnerabilities: Authors may exploit the audience’s vulnerabilities, such as personal fears, insecurities, or past traumas. For example, using scare tactics to induce fear or anxiety to coerce agreement.
- Lack of Evidence: Manipulative pathos often lacks solid evidence or logical support. If the emotional appeal is not accompanied by credible facts, data, or rational arguments, it may be an attempt to manipulate emotions rather than persuade logically.
- Generalizations and Exaggerations: Watch for sweeping generalizations or exaggerated claims that are intended to evoke strong emotions. Such statements may be designed to provoke an emotional response without being entirely truthful or accurate.
- False Dilemmas: Presenting a situation as having only two extreme options can be manipulative. By framing the argument in a way that oversimplifies the choices and evokes an emotional reaction, the author may pressure the audience into choosing one side.
Example 2.3
Here’s a hypothetical example:
Text Excerpt: “If you care about your children’s future, you must support this policy. Otherwise, you’re condemning them to a life of poverty and despair.”
Evaluation:
- Emotional Overload: The language (condemning them to a life of poverty and despair) is highly dramatic and designed to induce fear and guilt.
- Distraction from Logic: The emotional appeal overshadows any logical reasoning or evidence that might support the policy.
- Exploiting Vulnerabilities: The author exploits parents’ fears and concerns for their children’s future.
- Lack of Evidence: There’s no factual support or data to justify the claims made.
By being mindful of these signs, you can better evaluate whether an appeal to pathos is genuine or manipulative.
Exercise 2.3: Analyzing Pathos
The debate about whether fast food advertisements, especially those targeting children, should be regulated more strictly is a contentious one, often discussed with strong emotional appeals. Supporters and critics on each side have compelling reasons, so we will examine four editorials that present opposing positions and critique the authors’ use of pathos in their arguments. Because the impact of advertisements on children is a critical issue, we should become aware of various perspectives regarding this topic.
This exercise is designed to be completed in pairs, in person, in live online breakout groups, or through another method allowing for discussion.
Each pair will select one of the two sets to analyze.
Each partner within the pair will identify and analyze the use of pathos within one of the two articles in their set.
Then each pair will discuss the perspective presented in their editorials and whether the authors used pathos effectively or not.
Each partner in the pair should prepare a simple one-sentence claim about their author’s use of pathos.
Each pair will report out on their individual claims and provide a reflection on the activity, noting what they learned and any insights they gained from the activity.
Take note: Your aim in this rhetorical exercise is not to figure out where you stand on this issue. Rather, your aim is to evaluate how effectively the writers establish an emotional appeal to support their positions, whether you agree with them or not. The goal of rhetorical analysis is to break down the effectiveness of a communicator’s or communication’s argument or point-of-view through the filter of emotional appeals and use of rhetorical language.
Editorial Set 1 – Fast Food Advertisements
- Editorial arguing against stricter regulation of fast food ads: Author is John Doe, a marketing expert. “Why Fast Food Ads Are Unfairly Blamed for Childhood Obesity.” Marketing Today, 15 May 2024.
- Editorial advocating for stricter regulation of fast food ads: Author is Jane Smith, a public health advocate. “Protecting Our Children: The Case for Stricter Fast Food Ad Regulations.” Health Matters, 20 June 2024.
Editorial Set 2 – Fast Food Advertisements and Children’s Health
- Editorial from a parental perspective arguing against stricter regulation: Author is Susan Brown, a mother and blogger. “Parents, Not Ads, Are Responsible for Children’s Health Choices.” Family First, 10 July 2024.
- Editorial advocating for stricter regulation of fast food ads directed at children: Author is Dr. Emily Green, a pediatrician. “The Hidden Dangers of Fast Food Advertising to Children.” Pediatric Insights, 5 August 2024.
Steps for Analysis:
- Before reading the article, take a minute to preview the text.
- Read through the article and pay attention to how the author uses emotional appeals. Annotate or mark these instances when you see them.
- After reviewing your annotations, evaluate the emotional impact of the article by answering the following questions:
- What emotions does the author aim to evoke in the audience?
- How does the author use anecdotes, personal stories, or vivid language to engage the audience emotionally?
- Are the emotional appeals relevant to the overall argument?
- Does the emotional appeal distract from the logical reasoning or enhance it?
- Is the emotional appeal appropriate for the intended audience?
