Response to Son Ngo's "Rhetoric Digression"

Son makes a good point when he mentions that rhetoric is used all the time in everyday situations, whether people are sarcastic to convey a message or purposefully persuading others to get what they want. I had never even heard of rhetoric until last year in one of my writing classes. Now that I know what it is and how it is used, I find myself paying much more attention to rhetoric in everyday life. For instance, I was over at my mom's house and she was trying to get my younger sister to do something, and when my sister asked why she had to do it, my mom responded, "Because I'm your mom and I said so." This is a perfect example of ethos, where my mom is building up her credentials to express why my sister should listen to her. Children are expected to listen to their parents, and my mom is simply reiterating this through her statement.

A question Son asks in his post is if all the elements of rhetoric; ethos, logos, and pathos, were used together in one sentence, would that increase the effectiveness of persuasion. I believe that one could easily put together an effective sentence using the three elements of rhetoric. However, I feel that it is up to the writer to decide which element, or combination of the three, will work the best with the topic and the audience being persuaded. Sometimes writers may want to use ethos and logos to build up credentials and present a good line of reasoning, while finding it inappropriate to play on the emotional side of things, given the situation.