The Appeal to Ethos

Literally translated, ethos means “character.”  In this case, it refers to the character of the writer or speaker, or more specifically, his/her credibility.  The writer needs to establish credibility so that the audience will trust him/her and thus be more willing to engage with the argument.  If a writer fails to establish a sufficient ethical appeal, then the audience will not take the writer’s argument seriously.

For example, if someone writes an article that gets published in an academic journal, in a reputable newspaper or magazine, or on a credible website, those places of publication already imply a certain level of credibility.  If the article is about a scientific issue, and the writer is a scientist or has certain academic or professional credentials that relate to the article’s subject, that also will lend credibility to the writer.  And finally, if that writer shows that she is knowledgeable about the subject by providing clear explanations of points and by presenting information in an honest and straightforward way, that also helps to establish a writer’s credibility.

When evaluating a writer’s ethical appeal, ask the following questions:

Does the writer come across as reliable?

• Viewpoint is logically consistent throughout the text
• Does not use hyperbolic (exaggerated) language
• Has an even, objective tone (not malicious but also not sycophantic)
• Does not come across as subversive or manipulative

Does the writer come across as authoritative and knowledgeable?

• Explains concepts and ideas thoroughly
• Addresses any counterarguments and successfully rebuts them
• Uses a sufficient number of relevant sources
• Shows an understanding of sources used

What kind of credentials or experience does the writer have?

• Look at byline or biographical info
• Identify any personal or professional experience mentioned in the text
• Where has this writer’s text been published?

The author’s ethical appeal can affect a reader’s willingness to trust the writer. This credibility is often generated by the author’s apparent ethics. If the reader perceives that he shares important values with the writer, the door of communication opens wider than if the writer and reader seem to lack common values.

Aside from the writer’s ethics, ethos can also be generated by the author’s credibility, which is usually based on the following:

(1) the ability to forward a logical argument (hence, ethos can be affected by logos!)

(2) thoroughness of significant research

(3) credentials proving the writer’s expertise.

Showing Ethos through Diction

When you enter the dialogue of an unfamiliar discipline, you are often confronted with unfamiliar vocabulary. If you have ever read a legal document, you understand this challenge of venturing into the territory of an unfamiliar professional dialogue. You may hesitate to sign this document until you have had a chance to look up the meanings of keywords in order to ensure that you really agree with the terms you’re signing off on. Similarly, in the fields of biology, political science, and education, we may run into specialized vocabulary that we must master in order to enter the dialogue of the field. Your academic essays in various disciplines represent your forays into these dialogues.

Literary studies can be frustrating for students because many already enjoy reading literature and talking about their favorite books with their friends. So, when a professor insists that students use specific literary terms to express their views on a work, students are sometimes forced to review their understanding of the terms themselves before they can write an English paper. “Why can’t I just explain in my own way why the novel is so powerful?” a student might ask.

To find the answer to this seemingly reasonable question, consider a parallel situation. If your car was running badly, you could go to the mechanic and tell her your impression of the problem: “It’s been making a weird sound. Instead of the usual hum of the engine, it sounds more like ‘mm-pachuk, mm-pachuk.’ I’ve also noticed my gas mileage is lower than normal.” The mechanic might be able to look under the hood, drive the car, and figure out the issue, but some car-owners worry that if they present the problem to the mechanic this way, not only will it take longer for the mechanic to diagnose the problem and fix it, but she might even take advantage of their ignorance and complete expensive additional “repairs” that are not immediately necessary.

Your ethos, or credibility, is weak in such an exchange, and that weakness may cost you extra time and money. However, if you were to tell the mechanic that you believe the car needs a new spark plug, your ethos would be stronger. The mechanic would recognize your relative expertise and might be more likely to call and ask for your approval before addressing other issues. In this case, simply using common professional terminology would have improved your position. Similarly, scientists using the accepted terms of their disciplines will be listened to with more respect than those using unconventional vocabulary (“the blobby-looking organism”). Your expertise is evidenced, in some part, by your ability to employ accepted terminology.

Character and Credibility

Appeals using ethos are typically two faceted focusing on audience values and authorial credibility/character.

On the one hand, when an author makes an ethical appeal, they are attempting to tap into the values or ideologies that the audience holds. Examples include patriotism, tradition, justice, equality, dignity for all humankind, self-preservation, or other specific social, religious or philosophical values (Christian values, socialism, capitalism, feminism, etc.). These values can sometimes feel very close to emotions, but they are felt on a social level rather than only on a personal level. When an author evokes the values that the audience cares about as a way to justify or support their argument, we classify that as ethos. The audience will feel that the author is making an argument that is “right” (in the sense of moral “right”-ness, i.e., My argument rests upon the values that matter to you. Therefore, you should accept my argument). This first part of the definition of ethos, then, is focused on the audience’s values.

On the other hand, this sense of referencing what is “right” in an ethical appeal connects to the other sense of ethos, the author. Ethos that is centered on the author revolves around two concepts: the credibility of the author and their character.

Credibility of the speaker/author is determined by their knowledge and expertise in the subject at hand. For example, if you are learning about Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, would you rather learn from a professor of physics or a cousin who took two science classes in high school thirty years ago? It is fair to say that, in general, the professor of physics would have more credibility to discuss the topic of physics than your cousin. To establish their credibility, an author may draw attention to who they are or what kinds of experience they have with the topic being discussed as an ethical appeal (i.e., Because I have experience with this topic – and I know my stuff! – you should trust what I am saying about this topic). Some authors do not have to establish their credibility because the audience already knows who they are and that they are credible.

Character is another aspect of ethos that is different from credibility because it involves personal history and sometimes personality traits. A person can be credible but lack character or vice versa. For example, in politics, sometimes the most experienced candidates – those who might be the most credible candidates – fail to win elections because voters do not accept their character. Politicians take pains to shape their character as leaders who have the interests of the voters at heart. The candidate who successfully proves to the voters (the audience) that they have the type of character that they can trust is more likely to win.

Thus, ethos comes down to trust. How can the author get the audience to trust him or her so that they will accept their argument? How can the author make himself or herself appear as a credible speaker who embodies the character traits that the audience values?

In building ethical appeals, we may see authors:

• Referring either directly or indirectly to the values that matter to the intended audience (so that the audience will trust the speaker)
• Using language, phrasing, imagery, or other writing styles common to people who hold those values, thereby “talking the talk” of people with those values (again, so that the audience is inclined to trust the speaker)
• Referring to their experience and/or authority with the topic (and therefore demonstrating their credibility)
• Referring to their own character, or making an effort to build their character in the text

When reading, you should always think about the author’s credibility regarding the subject as well as their character.

Here is an example of a rhetorical move that connects with ethos: when reading an article about organic farming, the author mentions that she has her own organic farm. That is an example of an ethical move because the author is creating credibility via anecdotal evidence and first-person narrative. In a rhetorical analysis project, it would be up to you, the analyzer, to point out this move and associate it with a rhetorical strategy.

Facts vs. Opinions

Facts are statements that can be definitely proven using objective data. The statement that is a fact is absolutely valid. In other words, the statement can be pronounced as true or false. For example, 2 + 2 = 4. This expression identifies a true statement, or a fact, because it can be proved with objective data.

Opinions are personal views, or judgments. An opinion is what an individual believes about a particular subject. However, an opinion in argumentation must have legitimate backing; adequate evidence and credibility should support the opinion. Consider the credibility of expert opinions. Experts in a given field have the knowledge and credentials to make their opinion meaningful to a larger audience; this credibility is sometimes called “ethos” and is one way that we make our arguments persuasive. For example, you seek the opinion of your dentist when it comes to the health of your gums, and you seek the opinion of your mechanic when it comes to the maintenance of your car. Both have knowledge and credentials in those respective fields, which is why their opinions matter to you. But the authority of your dentist may be greatly diminished should they offer an opinion about your car, and vice versa.

In writing, you want to strike a balance between credible facts and authoritative opinions. Relying on one or the other will likely lose more of your audience than it gains.

Another aspect of your credibility as a writer of argument, particularly in the college setting, is your attention to the needs of the audience with regard to presentation and style. In college, this means that you have used the style manual (MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.) required for the assignment and appropriate to the audience. In so doing, make certain to cite the sources you have used according to the style manual you are using.

Recognizing a Manipulative Appeal to Ethos

In a perfect world, everyone would tell the truth and we could depend upon the credibility of speakers and authors. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. You would expect that news reporters would be objective and tell new stories based upon the facts. Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Brian Williams all lost their jobs for plagiarizing or fabricated part of their news stories. Janet Cooke’s Pulitzer Prize was revoked after it was discovered that she made up “Jimmy,” an eight-year-old heroin addict (Prince, 2010). Brian Williams was fired as anchor of the NBC Nightly News for exaggerating his role in the Iraq War.

Others have become infamous for claiming academic degrees that they didn’t earn as in the case of Marilee Jones. At the time of discovery, she was Dean of Admissions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). After 28 years of employment, it was determined that she never graduated from college (Lewin, 2007). However, on her website (http://www.marileejones.com) she is still promoting herself as “a sought-after speaker, consultant and author” (para. 1) and “one of the nation’s most experienced College Admissions Deans” (para. 2).

Beyond lying about their own credentials, authors may employ a number of tricks or fallacies to lure you to their point of view. Some of the more common techniques are described below. Others may be found in the appendix. When you recognize these fallacies being committed you should question the credibility of the speaker and the legitimacy of the argument. If you use these when making your own arguments, be aware that they may undermine or destroy your credibility.

“Ethos” uses information from:

Informed Arguments: A Guide to Writing and Research  by Terri Pantuso, Sarah LeMire, and Kathy Anders, which was published in 2019 by Texas A&M University with an attribution, non-commerical, share-alike creative commons license. It was accessed through the Open Textbook Library.

Let’s Get Writing by Elizabeth Browning, Kirsten DeVries, Kathy Boylan, Jenifer Kurtz, and Katelyn Burton, which was published by Virginia Western Community Colleges and uses a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,

Writing and Literature: Composition as Inquiry, Learning, Thinking, and Communication  by Tanya Bennet was published in 2017 by the University of North Georgia Press and uses a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike License.