source : findanyanswer.com
How is ethos used in I Have a Dream Speech?
Ethos. In Martin Luther King Jr “I have a dream speech” he uses ethos to support his argument by connecting to african americans and americans in general for a change that is needed and shows himself as a reliable source.
Click to see full answer
Consequently, what is an example of ethos in the I Have a Dream Speech?
Ethos Example #1 uses Ethos in the beginning of his famous, I Have a Dream Speech, to achieve the audience to feel as they are fighting with many other famous Americans, such as the Founding Fathers and Abe Lincoln. Since, many Americans trust those famous men, they trust Martin Luther King, Jr., and they respect him.
Additionally, what rhetorical devices are used in I Have a Dream Speech? In “I Have a Dream”, Martin Luther King Jr. extensively uses repetitions, metaphors, and allusions. Other rhetorical devices that you should note are antithesis, direct address, and enumeration. Rhetorical devices are language tools used to make speakers’ arguments both appealing and memorable.
Besides, how did Martin Luther King Jr use ethos pathos and logos?
King uses valid argument throughout his piece using ethos, pathos and logos to support his reasoning and behavior. King uses ethos in his letter demonstrating how he is reasonable, knowledgeable and moral.
What are ethos pathos and logos?
Ethos or the ethical appeal, means to convince an audience of the author’s credibility or character. Pathos or the emotional appeal, means to persuade an audience by appealing to their emotions. Logos or the appeal to logic, means to convince an audience by use of logic or reason.
Rhetorical Analysis of I have a Dream Speech by Martin – ETHOS: King started his speech with the lines, "I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation."King's initial words are a call for unity and to take a united stand against discrimination.The speech I Have A Dream, given by Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1963 is considered among the most famous speeches in American history. One reason is the speech establishes ethos.Martin Luther King Jr in his speech "I Have a Dream" furthers his purpose of demonstrating himself as a leader to his community in regard to fighting against slavery and segregation by effectively employing pathos, logos and ethos. One way that King furthers his purpose is through his use of pathos.
How does the I Have a Dream speech show ethos? | Study.com – However, there are still strong uses of ethos within the actual text of the "I Have a Dream" speech. King establishes his credibility, or ethos, in giving this speech as early as his second sentence.ETHOS "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."Martin Luther King's skillful and articulate usage of rhetoric in his "I Have a Dream" address was a major turning point in American history and represented a house base for equal rights. He spoke out to face the issues of racism in our state. This address was a singular minute in the battle for equal rights of everyone.
Pathos In Martin Luther King's I Have A Dream – 895 Words – Ethos is a rhetorical strategy where the speaker relies on credibility and trust to solidify a position or argument. This approach increases the authority and believability of the speaker and…Impact of Pathos Martin Luther king uses logos through out his whole speech, "I have a Dream". uses Ethos in the beginning of his famous, I Have a Dream Speech, to achieve the audience to feel as they are fighting with many other famous Americans, such as the Founding Fathers and Abe Lincoln. Click to see full answer.I Have A Dream Speech: Few speeches in United States history are better known that Martin Luther King, Jr.'s I Have A Dream Speech. This is especially true of the closing paragraphs in which King
Rhetorical Analysis: I Have a Dream – .
Ethos, Pathos, Logos, and Kairos PowerPoint – Hi everyone! So today I am going to
go through this presentation on ethos.
pathos, logos, and
kairos. These are the basis of rhetoric and they are very important
concepts that are going to be critical to the rest of the course so
building a strong foundation for these concepts now
is really important. So, I hope that this presentation will help you all
have a good understanding of these aspects of argument. So,
ethos, pathos, and logos are the three major elements of discourse that
Aristotle identified in ancient greek philosophy, and he
considered them the three factors as being the most important determiners
of a successful argument, and kairos is a blanket statement about
the timeliness of the argument. We'll get into that in the presentation, but ethos,
pathos, and logos are your big three and kairos is just thrown in there for
fun. So let's continue. So, we will begin with ethos and ethos is
a measure of the authority of the speaker, creator, or designer of an
argument. The authority of this person can be
determined by their credentials, their merit, and if this merit and
credibility is socially accepted. So for credentials,
the person making an argument should be well-learned in their field. So,
for example, if you are attending a conference
on biology you expect the person or people who are speaking to be
biologists; you expect them to be people who are
either students, people who hold doctorate degrees, or
people who have had experience in their field.
If you were to see me presenting at a biology conference
you would know that I don't know what I'm talking about and therefore
the arguments that I'm making aren't reliable because I don't know much
about biology. I have good ethos when it comes to English 200,
but not when it comes to biology. That sounds scary. So when we consider credibility, we are
thinking about what is the education level of this
person, do they have experience in their field, are they a member of a national association related to that field,
and so on and so forth. Furthermore, we want to think about this
person's merit. Can we trust them? Do we respect
them? If people at the biology conference
plagiarized papers or if they are known to be liars
we're not going to accept their arguments as readily
because of their sketchy ethical background. We want to save the agreement in arguments for people
that we respect. So that brings us into the socially
accepted credibility, and like I said with credentials: do they have this
advanced degree– something that society has deemed as a
marker of expertise; have they worked in their field for an
extended period of time; or do they hold a strong position in
their field, are they someone that other experts go to; are they someone who
teaches people who want to become experts. These
are all important factors that go into a person's
ethos. So how can ethos be established in an
argument? One way that this can happen is through
the person's use of language– jargon, word choice, and tone are all very
important factors of this. So to use our biology conference as an
example, people who use terms that are familiar
to biologists are going to be better accepted in their arguments.
So phrases like ATP, classification, species,
all of those words that fit the field are going to be better
accepted. Me trying to come up with words that fit
that field is an indication that I don't have ethos
for that field. Next, the content of the argument as well.
You could tell pretty quickly that if I were at a biology conference
that I don't, like I said, have any ethos in the matter because my content would
be small, unfamiliar, and would demonstrate
zero understanding of relevant events facts, data, all that. One thing that I could do, though, is
assert my ethos through physical space. So the person
standing at the front of the room, if they're standing behind
a lectern or a podium, if they're holding the center of attention, that person
has the respect of the other people in the room
or the conference in our example. And this stance, posture, and gesture of this person– if they hold themselves with confidence
or not also add to this aspect. And now we'll move into logos. So logos
is about the quality of the argument itself. Is it logical? Is it reasonable? Is
it understandable? So, not to get too far into formal logic
because that's kind of my specialty, Is the argument valid and sound?
And do the claims lead to the conclusion? Does the argument
make sense in the world as it is? And does the evidence line up with the
conclusion that the argument is making? if they don't we don't have a logical
argument and we shouldn't listen to it So, because of that, the logic in the
argument must be clear. The steps that you take to arrive at
your conclusion should be followable if your audience can't understand how
you come to the conclusion if they can't understand why items
"A," "B," and "C" lead you to conclusion "D" they're not going to understand your
argument so it's important that pieces of evidence "A," "B," and "C" make sense,
are easily recognizable in your argument, and flow to conclusion "D." That being said, logos can
employ tactics to strengthen the argument. Data and statistics, expert opinion, and quotes. These are
elements that are very hard to dispute you can't dispute hard facts. Statistics and data– that's going to be
widely respected by people and add to the logos quality of your
argument. Logos does tend to be the most difficult
element of discourse and rhetoric for students to identify,
so it's very important that you review these two slides, maybe do some extra
research, or email me if you have any questions
because this does tend to be the difficult
aspect for students. So while data and statistics, expert
opinion, and quotes can strengthen logos, logos CAN exist
without these and i want to make that distinction clear.
Just because an argument doesn't have data or statistics does not mean that
logos is not present. Maybe logos isn't the most important
element of rhetoric in the argument, sure,
but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Okay and now to pathos. So, pathos
is the emotional response of the audience to the argument.
Are they impassioned? Do you produce sadness, rage, joy, fear, other emotions when you give your argument?
So pathos needs to be relevant to the audience.
If you're speaking to someone who likes to kick puppies for fun (this was
an example in one of my pre-law classes) if they like to kick puppies for fun and
you want to show them one of ASPCA videos that just makes people cry,
it might not work on them because if they enjoy kicking small puppies for fun, pathos is not the most effective
argument to use for them. So they're probably not going
to care about the song in the arms of an angel
that plays while you watch sad dogs outside chained to fences and
we're gonna move beyond that because I'm, I'm a sucker for pathos.
So how does one establish pathos in their argument?
If you're the ASPCA, just keep playing that song and you're doing great.
But other ways that you can do it when you write arguments
is to include personal anecdotes. If you want to talk about the dangers of
drinking and driving you could use a personal anecdote that
explains that when you were 15, your older brother got
into a drunk driving accident and died and induced the audience to feel
sadness in that and to agree with you that drinking and driving should be
punished more harshly or whatever your argument is.
The use of metaphors comparisons to bring attention to a point
is also an effective way to induce pathos.
And then the delivery of the argument itself
can inspire people. We see this a lot in
speeches for instance, Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.
You see the videos of people in Washington DC cheering for him you can
tell that that audience is feeling the pathos
of Martin Luther King Jr's speech. Pathos tends to be the easiest aspect of
rhetoric to identify. Partially, because it is the most
effective in most people so arguments that have these elements
that pull at your heart strings or make you
angry or sad those are easily recognizable and
therefore will probably be one of the easier ones that you run across
in our assignments. And then, finally, the like ugly step sibling of all of the other three is kairos.
It's not generally talked about much before
this course, so to give a brief overview of it, it's a relatively easy
concept to understand once you do. Kairos is a measure of timeliness,
hitting the right advocacy window of your argument.
Is this something that's topical? Is society interested in this?
For instance, if we were to argue that women should not be forced to
wear corsets in public well, we haven't been forced to wear
corsets in public for many, many, many years, so
even though it may be an issue to some people, it's not a widely accepted
societal issue right now so most people aren't going to pay any
heedence to your argument. So things that you can
do to make sure that you are producing a timely argument
is to look at the social context and social landscape.
Things like Black Lives Matter, feminist movements,
police brutality, those are all hot topics in the social
world right now so those are all extremely timely
arguments to make. And that is the end of our slideshow. Please email me if you have any questions and if you need to go over the slides again please do. As I said, logos tends to be the difficult one so
revisit those slides, look up some definitions online whatever you need to
do but yeah that's all for now awkward .
Part Two: Jay Bowerman Keynote Speech – OCF 37th Annual Meeting – .