Abstract
In Aristotle's Rhetoric, logos must be conceived as enthymematical argumentation relative to the issue of the case. Ethos and pathos also can take the form of an enthymeme, but this argumentation doesn't relate (directly) to the issue. In this kind of enthymeme, the conclusion is relative to the ethos of the speaker or (reasons for) the pathos of the audience. In an ideal situation — with a good procedure and rational judges — logos dominates and in the real situation of Aristotle's time — with an imperfect procedure and irrational judges — ethos and pathos prevail.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I should like to thank R. Berkenbosch and J. Wisse for their comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Braet, A.C. Ethos, pathos and logos in Aristotle's Rhetoric: A re-examination. Argumentation 6, 307–320 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154696
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154696