During the forum for ethos the class covered a variety of interesting topics and I think there was some nice discussion going on. We managed to stay on task most of the time with little deviation from the discussion of ethos.
There was a brief section there in which we talked about the ethical implications of ethos, which the class seemed devided upon. It seemed that the morality of the subject that a rhetor is discussing must in some way effect the creation of their ethos, however this is not necessarily true.
We covered different interpretations and reactions of the State of the Union speech given by President Bush, as well as touched on how his ethos may have changed from previous speeches during his terms as president.
There were some good examples of how a rhetor may create a "negative" ethos with their audience by failing to adhere to the three ethical proofs. By understanding how one would create a negative relationship with their audience it will aid in avoiding this and creating a "positive" ethos for the rhetor.
Some ways to avoid "negative" ethos would be
- to have an understanding of your topic; in other words, know your facts
- an understanding of who your audience is and your relationship to them
- know whether or not you have situated ethos with your audience and whether that's a good or a bad thing
- do not appear impartial to the issues you are discussing. Detatchment from the subject will detatch you from your audience
