Pathos Ethos Logos

For the pass few day, in my English 155 class, we have been focusing on Aristotle's Appeal which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Ethos has to do with the credibility. Logos is the logical of the text while Pathos is the emotional appeal of it all. These three forms of rhetoric are what make an essay "grab" the reader's attention. It is what makes the cupcake of Delta Dave have all the ingredients that it needs in order to make a perfect, tasteful cupcake. However, what makes one less important than the other one? I belief that there is not one that is more important because you need all of them to have a "perfect essay" because in a way they are all tight in together. However, I do belief that depending on your essay one has a bigger effect than the other two.

After reading "Introduction: Framing the Controversy," in my course reader, I concluded that the most effected Aristotle Appeals for me is Pathos. Pathos is Greek for suffering or experience and it means the emotional or motivational appeals; vivid language, emotional language and numerous sensory details (www.u.arizona.edu). I believe it is the most important because if you relate to the writer and to the story he or she is presenting then you tend to feel more connected to the text and the writer.

I also feel that when the text has to do mostly with Pathos, I tend to pay more attention to it and understand it. I also have a lesser change of zooming out while I am reading. Take for example the story in our course reader about a rainy day. In here, they give us two sketches about the same rainy day. In the first one, it explains the rainy day with a more emotional appeal and it uses words that describe the situation with warmth and care making it Pathos. It makes you see the bright side in a rainy day. Unlike the second one that it has no emotion for you to relate with because it describes everything in a technical way that it makes you sometimes zoom out. I guess the way that it was put in makes all the difference for me.  In addition, I think that the first one is easy to read and understand while the second one you have to put all your focus and attention to it.

While all three are important in their own special way separately, they work better when you unite them. They each attracted each other in a way that they work together to bring one point out.  When you put them together, it has a better and bigger affect on the reader because you give them all the qualities to make the essay stand out. Each one supports each other because if the reader gets the idea that the writer is not a reliable source than the whole text falls apart. If you do not have an emotional appeal then you essay does not relate to the reader making the reader thought the ethos and logos. But Logos is also very important because you need to support your ideas and arguments and if you do not then your ethos fall apart.

Regardless, all of Aristotle claims are important but Pathos to me is number one. Pathos is what tights everything together for it and me is what I relate to the most.

The Making of a Mohawk Indian

In my humanity 105 class, we learned about creations myths and that there are many of them. Each of them has its own scenario of how humans came about. One myth that caught my eyes was the one from the tribe named Mohawk. It is from, A Native American Creation Tale, "How Man Was Created." In that tribe they believe that Sat-kon-se-ri-io, the Good Spirit, created the animals, plants, birds and other creatures first. However, after placing them on earth he saw that something was missing. Using pieces of clay that he found on the river, he made a little clay man that resembled himself. After he modeled it, he built a fire and waited until it baked. However, the bird's song made him fall asleep causing the little man to burn. They believe that that was how the first African American came about. Nevertheless, the Good Spirit was not satisfied with the little man so he decided to make another one. This time he was determined not to fall asleep but it did not happen. This time when he woke up the little man was half-baked, therefore making him the first white man. The Good Spirit was not satisfied yet so this time he decided to use red clay that he found and baked it. He took great care of it so we he removed it out of the fire it was just right. That little red man became the first Mohawk Indian.

After reading the Mohawk myth, I concluded that everyone uses his or her consciousness for everything even if we do not realize it. The Good Spirit used his consciousness when he realizes that his first man was burn, hence he made the second one, which was half-baked and finally made the third one, which in his eyes it was perfect. This shows that people see things differently from one another. This myth goes with what Adam Zeman said which was that consciousness is mind awareness and awake. I believe that the Good Spirit uses all of the three definitions. For the reason being that, the Good Spirit was aware that the little man was either burn or half burn, which made him make another one that was perfect. He also used mind because he knew how to shape the little man and he uses his knowledge to fix the first two in order to make his perfect Mohawk Indian. Lastly awake, he was unconscious when he fell asleep therefore; it cost his little man to be imperfect.

Consciousness also reflects on the experience that we have and on what we knows. The Good Spirit only knew about Mohawk Indian, which made him think that anything other than that was no good or imperfect. Unlike us that we know, that everyone comes in different color, sizes, and that does not make us less than what we are. Our consciousness could play little mind trick which could enable us to see things in a certain way. Even if it is the complete opposite, in what someone else sees. I believe that our consciousness is base on what our families (parent) thought us ever since we were little until now with our surrounding as well. I believe that is the foundation of our consciousness.

Conscious Experience

Today while reading my course reader I can across three intuitions of experience. The first intuition is that experience is rich and real. The second one is that every distinction drawn in experience will be reflected in a distinctive pattern of neural activity. The third and final intuition is that experience is an evolved capacity which governs our behavior.  In “The nature of consciousness” it says that each intuition works well by itself but that when you put them together you may come across some problems. These intuitions may work well separate because they have their own duty and they know what they are looking for but when you put them together you mix all of the sense which you get a different reaction.

 I think consciousness works like that too. Everyone sees things differently depending on what they experience in their life. People may go through the same thing, the same way but they may get a different outcome.

For example in the first season of “The Secret Life of An American Teenager,” Amy, the main character, had sex for the first time with an experience guy that she barely met. The consequence of their actions was that she got pregnant. But on the other hand Adrian has had sex many of times and she has not gotten pregnant or gotten an STD’s. So why it is that one got pregnant and the other didn’t? Who knows. Those two girls had the same experience and yet they had different outcomes. For that reason they see their experience different from each other. Amy sees sex as the down fall of her life because through that action she had to give up some dreams of her and sees that being irresponsible may cost you your teenage years as you know it. On the other hand Adrian sees sex as a way to have fun with guy and that in a relationship its okay to have sex if you are careful. These two girls see sex completely different from each other that is because they are not the same person and because they had different outcome to their experience with having sex. One had a good one that didn’t affect her life and the other one had a bad one that changes her life completely.  

Everyone has different ideas on what is right or wrong. Most criminals believe that when they commit a crime they are doing nothing wrong but in reality they are doing a wrongful act. Just like the death penalty, people believe that the death penalty is not wrong. They say that someone who kills deserves to die, basically an eye for an eye. But what makes it moral to kill someone that kills another human being? I believe it is an ongoing cycle because what makes you better than the other person who killed. You are doing the same thing as the criminal.

I guess every experience you have is the way you see thing because the family of the victim may want the criminal to die just like their loved one did. But a person who was not hit emotional with the tragedy may say why kill the person? Just make them pay.

Ones experience can change our perception of something whether it is good or bad but what we came it is what matter the most.