How Logos, Pathos And Ethos Work Together Using Two Ads Essay Example

From a definition perspective, Aristotelian rhetoric constitutes the ability to convince a given audience to accept what is presented to them by standing up as being highly credible, appealing to their emotions and being logically clear by providing linking reasons why a presentation stands the way it was presented. In other words, Aristotle considered persuasion from the angle of speech, whereby speakers had to understand how important they were before they presented a speech and, thus, had to develop strong credibility with the audience. In addition, they had to understand what the people wanted in line with their presentation by learning the values and virtues of the people so that they could make presentations that appealed to their emotions.

The above second perspective was more important because it related directly with the people in the audience, created less resistance to messages, and perhaps eventually could influence the people in the audience to accept and follow that which the speaker had just presented to them. Such an achievement would be difficult to come by if the speaker could not articulate their messages correctly so that what they said previously and what they are saying now, and whatever they will conclude with will follow some line of correct reasoning that appeals to logic so that everyone simply accepts the connections. The following paper analyses two adverts, which promote cigarette smoking by exploring how the use of characters in them, including the lady smoking, and Santa, build up strong pathos backgrounds, while the use of disease and Christmas enjoyment arousing acceptance of ethos, and the use lack of advancement being the right logos of the times in which these advertisements were created, thereby, managing to convince people to smoke.

Advertisement 1: St. Nick made in 1920

The second Advertisement chosen for this paper is that of St. Nick, which was created in 1920, to promote Murad Cigarettes by convincing customers and potential buyers that these are the best cigars that one could have if they wanted to enjoy the moment. The Advertisement uses Santa as the main feature, pictured sited on the ground with his back on the wall and smoking while relaxed with legs stepping on the ground, taking in a puff of Murad cigarette smoke and then talking to the audience (CBS para 10). The message from Santa to the audience comes in the form of a rhetorical question, which is intended to stir their imagination into answering the question of what more enjoyable they could have a part from the Murad cigar.

Aristotle’s definition of ethos considers the degree of magnitude of importance that an argument holds concerning the time and person used to present the argument. Using the character of Santa, St Nick’s advert manages to convince the reader that Santa cannot be wrong to give people gifts or advice people what to have for Christmas. Therefore, using the pathos of wide or universal appeal, the advert manages to raise the degree of credibility of Santa to a larger target market audience to the extent that anyone reading the advert will automatically recognize Santa. Therefore, the use of Santa’s pathos leads to an evoking of audience ethos, which includes emotions of feeling good and subsequent happiness.

Generally, Santa is associated known to be gifting people Christmas presents, and the mere sight of Santa is synonymous with good things meant to celebrate this festive time. Therefore, when the audience viewing the advert gets to recognize Santa, the emotional processing runs good emotional pulses that arouse excitement and the longing to get to have whatever Santa has brought to the people. The association of Christmas celebrations with smoking, especially when the advert states that there is nothing better to have for that time except the Murad cigarette, heightens the audience’s excitement to try to acquire the cigar and perhaps achieve the wish of Santa advising people to look for the perfect Christmas gift of the Murad cigarette. The universality of belongingness and the ability to trust Santa all combine to increase the magnitude of importance that is used as a tool to convince or persuade the user. According to Aristotle ( Book 1 61), the magnitude of importance is classified as being either small or greater in ethos settings and thus, the universal wish of Santa and the need to please Santa by many people around the world heighten the greatness of the ethos used to convince people to smoke.

To make it more appealing, the designers of the Advertisement capitalize on or use a rhetorical question that seeks to invoke an internal processing mechanism to arouse running emotions that search for what could be more enjoyable than the Murad cigar. While the thought processes of the audience or viewer of the Advertisement will not be revealed to answer the question, it emerges that by the time the audience is through with this internal scanning, they will end up getting convinced that the Murad Cigar is indeed the most enjoyable. They will then get to smoke it, to get to enjoy the feeling of it. The above approach is quite appealing to the ethos of joy naturally, as celebrations and enjoyment go hand in hand, and the most appealing emotions naturally are those that promise or give joy and happiness. At the same time, while promises of relieving pain also constitute ethos of greater magnitude, the latter does not reach the level of the promise of joy unless the pain is quite excruciating, which is not part of the context of the Advertisement above.

Advertisement 2: Good for what ails you made in 1881

The main feature of this Advertisement is the use of a very beautiful woman, who was adorably the iconic model figure at the contextual time, to pass the message of cigarette healing to a target audience population of probably mostly young people and men who love beautiful women that cigarettes heal respiratory diseases. The young woman is pictured smoking and apparently seems to be urging the audience that smoking is the cure for ailments such as bronchitis, shortness of breath, asthma and influenza. The application of the Advertisement in relation to ethos, pathos and logos is in line with the definitions previously provided above.

The Advertisement combines ethos, pathos and logos using a different angle from the normal order that would apply currently. The pathos of the woman character in the advert is apparently strong because women at the time were considered to be telling the truth in everything and, thus, were to be trusted in whatever they said. Secondly, the credibility of the woman increases multiple folds when she is portrayed as being beautiful, and thus, the woman character fits all these features. The audience gets to connect to the image directly, and one feels like the woman character is talking to him or her in the same way.

While the ethos aroused in the user constitutes relief from pain and getting to retain the good feeling, the advert is thus based on the ethos of feeling good, loving the feeling and hating that which is contrary to it or causing harm and discomfort, such as the respiratory diseases listed therein. The ethos of the time was the taking in pride of beauty and nature, which combine perfectly in the Advertisement, with the woman representing beauty, while smoking and the resultant relieving of pain is directly at feeling good. These two were perhaps some of the most widely influential ethos of the time and would influence larger audiences with ease by appealing to the emotions of feeling good. Thus, the Advertisement capitalizes on appealing to instinct and nature rather than the scientific reality that the use of cigars would not make life better but worsen it.

Using the concept of logos, the creators of the advert used the impression of nature rather than using the reality of the time by trying to convince smoking audiences that doing so would result in making their lives better, even though it was not medically possible. According to Book 2 (150), youthful people tend to live on their natural instincts than they live by calculating the reality of the moment. In application to the audience that is targeted by the advert, apparently, the young are living more on the sensational feeling of the moment of feeling good than living up to the realization that smoking does not actually lead to healing. Instead, smoking may worsen the health condition of those with respiratory problems such as influenza, bronchitis and asthma, among others. These tactics of combining the logos of treatment as the reason for smoking, together with the appeal to natural instinct as well as capitalizing on love for feeling good and hatred for bad, could manage to make people smoke the Wilcox cigars.

Conclusion

The two advertisements use different features to convince audiences to smoke cigars contained in the ads. In the Murad cigar advertisement, the use of Santa is widely appealing and, thus, manages to gather sufficient pathos to convince smokers while focusing on the best thing to have than cigarette smoking seems to achieve the appealing ethos and logos of wanting to smoke. The Wilcox Cigars advertisement chooses to apply a beautiful woman as the pathos symbol, who focuses on preferring love to hatred for that which makes you feel good versus suffering from diseases and, eventually, the logos of healing bad feelings of disease as the eventual driving reason to smoke.

Works Cited

Morgan, David. Outrageous vintage cigarette ads, CBS News, November 26, 2022, https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/outrageous-vintage-cigarette-ads/

Book 2, Chapter 12, Aristotle’s ethos

Book 1, Chapter 6, The Good.

Choosing Off-Campus Or On-Campus Living Free Essay

University students must make numerous choices while in school, including which classes to take, what to study, and which events and extracurricular activities to participate in if students are enrolled in a school. They must also choose a new residence far from their previous neighborhood. When making this choice, undergraduates must consider the differences between living on and off campus. Cost, comfort, convenience, and security differ between these two types of settlement.

First, one of the most important factors is the price difference between on-campus and off-campus housing. For example, the government strictly regulates the prices of goods and services on college campuses, making it impossible to negotiate prices as opposed to off-campus housing, where the rent is variable depending on the number of occupants and the location of the residence. In addition to the high cost of living on campus, students are frequently required to purchase an expensive meal plan due to the quantity and quality of the food offered. In contrast, students living off campus can purchase and eat the food they desire. Many ingredients for a healthy meal are available from off-campus vendors for much less money and in greater quantity and quality (Demiris, Tiffany, and Chad Seifried).

Second, the comfort level varies depending on whether one resides on or off campus. Especially for those with extremely hectic schedules, university housing can be incredibly convenient. All university housing is conveniently located on campus, allowing students to walk quickly to class. Students with a packed schedule and limited time between classes will find this incredibly convenient (Nick et al., 189-205). This proximity to the university enables these students to return home for a quick nap or snack throughout the day. In addition, it enables students with the undesirable habit of sleeping through their alarms to still arrive at class on time and be prepared for the day.

Additionally, living on campus eliminates the hassle and expense of arranging utilities such as internet and electricity. The housing association takes care of these familiar sources of stress for many off-campus students, but this convenient service does come at a cost (Demiris, Tiffany, and Chad Seifried). The students who stay off campus have to face all the costs and bills around these amenities on their own, making their educational cost rise.

The lifestyle of students who live off campus is significantly less convenient. Depending on how far away each student lives, they may be required to wake up much earlier and devote most of their day to commuting to class. If they live outside the bus service area, this can become a significant problem (Nick et al., 189-205). In addition to driving or carpooling to school, students must now find a safe and legal place to park their vehicles. It may appear to be a simple task, but finding parking near campus is nearly impossible. If they can find parking, it is often a long distance from campus and prohibitively expensive to park there all day. The parking cost comes back to the students as an expense. Students who are supposed to commute will also have to cater for these costs.

Students who live off-campus are responsible for activating their utilities and maintaining a clean home regularly. That means they will have to spend part of their time ensuring that they are attending to their environment, like their fellows in school whose environment is under the care of the employed staff (Demiris, Tiffany, and Chad Seifried). Taking care of their environment will mean reducing the time frame for their studies.

Lastly, these two distinct lifestyles afford varying degrees of privacy. Students on campus typically have less privacy due to the high population density. Many students on campus reside in small sleeping pods that they share with another person. Often, dorm roommates are paired with little prior knowledge of one another and are crammed into a small space with no personal space or time to get to know one Revington (Nick et al., 189-205). Due to this, many roommates can quickly get into arguments and are forced to tolerate living so closely together. In addition to having less personal space, these students share common facilities such as lounges, bathrooms, and dining areas. Living off-campus provides significantly more solitude and privacy. They typically have their bedroom and, if fortunate, their bathroom. That allows for much-needed personal time, especially if roommates get into an argument or have a falling out; private rooms provide space for both individuals to be alone and calm down.

In conclusion, living off campus differs from living on campus in numerous ways. Off-campus students typically spend less and enjoy greater privacy, while on-campus students may have more conveniences and amenities. Students choosing between these two housing types must prioritize cost, convenience, and privacy when determining where to live.

Works Cited

Demiris, Tiffany, and Chad Seifried. “A Historical Study of the Path from Off-Campus to On-Campus Stadia: Stakeholders, Resources, and Contexts.” Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics (2022).

Revington, Nick, et al. “The urban dormitory: Planning, studentification, and the construction of an off-campus student housing market.” International Planning Studies 25.2 (2020): 189-205.

How Politics Influences Laws Essay Example For College

The purpose of politics may be defined as maintaining some set of mostly legal principles or institutions. In such a scenario, certain institutions and values political understanding become almost equal to the genuine legal understanding and comprehension of the same values or institutions. Second, the political realm may see the law as nothing more than a tool for achieving certain political ends. In this instance, politics has no stance toward the rule of law. In conclusion, political actors may see the rule of law as a barrier to achieving certain political aims. One of two things may happen here: politics wins, or the law loses (Kelsen, 2022). In the first scenario, political actors impose their solutions without regard for the rule of law. In contrast, in the second scenario, the independence of the rule of law is protected by the highest courts’ decisions or by other measures taken by intellectuals, lawyers, associations, the public, and organizations, to halt the illegal actions of political actors.

Legislation and government each construct their own unique versions of the world. Sometimes there is overlap between the two images, and other times there isn’t. But the law should not be applied to distinguish between enemies on the basis of merely political considerations. As a result, it becomes necessary to clearly demarcate “ours” from “yours,” or in its most extreme form, friend from foe. As a result of the latter, the rule of law loses its independence and becomes subservient to political considerations. This article examines the role of the law in politics via the lenses of abortion, gun control, Marbury v. Madison, and the governing elite.

Abortion

The Supreme Court’s decision to reverse Roe v. Wade means that abortion is no longer protected by the Constitution as a matter of right for American women. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobb’s v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the political process is free to decide how to handle the sensitive topic of abortion. What does this entail? At first look, this seems to return the law to its status before the Roe v (Kelsen, 2022). Wade’s decision in 1973. Each state has the option of upholding abortion rights or passing legislation criminalizing the procedure. More than half of the states are predicted to ban abortions entirely or almost entirely. Because of Roe v. Wade, abortion is now debated on the political stage. Conservative politicians have been ranting about their opposition to abortion rights for decades, and they have no plans to stop now (Mason, 2019). It’s conceivable that abortion bans will be enforced far more strictly than they were before 1973. More physicians and women will go to jail for breaking abortion restrictions in states after Roe than ever before.

As an example, conservative legislators in Missouri are considering a measure that would make it illegal for a woman to leave the state for an abortion. There is a movement afoot in certain jurisdictions to ban post conception birth control methods including IUDs and the morning-after pill (Mason, 2019). Some states may pass legislation mandating the implantation of all embryos created via medical techniques like in vitro fertilization. Claims will be filed, and the Supreme Court will be required to determine whether or not the Constitution imposes any constraints on states or even if the issue should be left solely to the democratic process.

Gun control

Despite the fact that the vast majority of Americans want tougher gun controls, current legislation fails to reflect this consensus. The functioning of the policy-making and its political system procedures determines the extent to which the gun lobby as well as cultural views about weapons may thwart the majority support effectuation for more regulation (Montez et al., 2020). Reforming parts of the political system like campaign financing rules and gerrymandering, which give the gun lobby its strength, may be necessary for the adoption of violence reduction programs. When the political system is reformed, it may change who gets to sit on the judicial and executive councils and make policy. In addition, initiatives at the ballot box, municipal legislation, and private lawsuits all provide other opportunities to influence policy (Kelsen, 2022). Each of these possible routes has major roadblocks that make successful action regarding gun policy change less likely (Montez et al., 2020). However, with the 2012 school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, and the 2019 nonschool indiscriminate mass shootings in Ohio and Texas, the winds of reforms or change may also be stirring since gun control advocacy organizations have expanded their financial and organizational power.

Marbury v. Madison

Although the retiring President Adams John had appointed William Marbury as a judge of the peace in 1801, incoming Secretary of State James Madison refused to hand over the document to him (deButts, 2019). So, Marbury took legal action to get his hands on it. An integral part of the “checks and balances” system designed to prevent any one arm of the American Federal Government from being too dominant, Chief Justice Marshall John created the notion of judicial review with his ruling in Marbury v. Madison.

An unconstitutional law is null and void. For the first time, the Supreme Court ruled that a statute approved by Congress and then signed by the President was unconstitutional, with Chief Justice John Marshall penning the decisive opinion. The Constitution does not explicitly provide the Court this authority. On the other hand, Marshall thought the Supreme Court must play a similar function to Congress and the president (deButts, 2019). When defending the Constitution, the Federalist, James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton declared that “you must first empower government to rule the ruled; and in the following place require it to control itself.” The Constitution’s framers had intended for the legislative and executive branches to check and balance each other and the judicial branch.

It is within Congress’s purview to impeach as well as remove any federal officer, even the President or a judge, as guaranteed by the Constitution. The President may select justices to the “Supreme Court” with the Senate’s advice and consent, and he has the power of the veto to limit Congress’ actions. The Supreme Court’s place in this complex framework was unclear. Therefore, it was necessary for a powerful Chief Justice such as Marshall to create the notion of judicial review in order to complete the triangle framework of checks and balances. Although no statute had been ruled unconstitutional prior to the Scott Dred Scott decision in 1857, the Supreme Court’s authority to strike down state and federal that run counter to the Constitution, which has never before been significantly disputed.

“The Constitution of America was not meant to fit us as a strait jacket,” Woodrow Wilson once stated. The greatest strength of this material is found in its adaptability. The writers of the Constitution are typically held up as wise because of their ability to hold back. They refrained from adding unnecessary details to the overarching text. They were pleased with setting up a system of governance with checks and balances to prevent abuse of power (deButts, 2019). After the Marbury v. Madison ruling by Justice John Marshall, the United States finally established a government that could pass, interpret, and enforce laws in the face of difficult conditions.

Ruling class

The power elite—government, large business, and the military—rules society and serves its own interests, according to Mills. Mills claimed power elite members socialize and serve on corporate, charity, and other boards. After retiring, cabinet ministers, senators, and high military leaders typically become company CEOs. Corporate CEOs often become members of the cabinet and other political officials. This elite circulation lets them rule America. Mills’ power-elite model is prominent, although alternative elite models exist. They disagree with Mills’s governing class composition. As Mills mentioned, some view the ruling class as largely enormous businesses and wealthy people, with the military and government supporting their needs instead of being part of it (Milanovic, 2019). According to G. William Domhoff (2010), the ruling class is the wealthiest 0.8% to 2% of the people, who control over half the nation’s wealth, participate on the board of directors, and belong to similar social clubs as well as other voluntary groups. Their control of companies and other political and economic entities helps them dominate American politics and life.

Elite ideas indicate the state is more independent than Mills realized. The government supports or opposes the ruling class as well as corporate interests (Milanovic, 2019). These ideas argue that relative autonomy helps the state maintain legitimacy because if it continually sided with the affluent, it would seem prejudiced and lose support. Thus, the state’s relative autonomy maintains ruling class power by making the public believe the state is unbiased when it is not. The government sometimes supports the corporate interests and the ruling class and sometimes opposes them. These ideas argue that relative autonomy helps the state maintain legitimacy because if it continually sided with the affluent, it would seem prejudiced and lose support (Milanovic, 2019). Thus, the state’s relative autonomy maintains ruling class power by making the public believe the state is unbiased when it is not

Conclusion

National and international law affect politics in three ways: as means, goal, mean or hindrance. First, politics—defined as the political actors or political mind —can aim for legal ideals or institutions like legal equality, the innocence presumption, or privacy rights. In this scenario, politics protects legal equality or privacy, just as the law does. Second, politicians might see the law as a tool for political ends. In this instance, politics is neutral toward the law, defining and achieving its political aims in line with legality as well as legal equality. Third, legality may hinder political ambitions. Here, politics or law wins. In the first case, politics implements its alternatives at the expense of the country’s rule of law for instance, the legislature makes laws that provide the executive branch the most discretionary powers; or even politics tends to leave the laws unchanged, but does not act according to them, whereas in the second case, international law is often preserved by the highest national or international, or by any other measures undertaken by lawyers, and intellectuals.

References

Kelsen, H. (2022). What is justice?: Justice, law, and politics in the mirror of science. Univ of California Press.

Montez, J. K., Beckfield, J., Cooney, J. K., Grumbach, J. M., Hayward, M. D., Koytak, H. Z., … & Zajacova, A. (2020). US state policies, politics, and life expectancy. The Milbank Quarterly98(3), 668-699.

Mason, C. (2019). Opposing abortion to protect women: transnational strategy since the 1990s. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society44(3), 665-692.

Milanovic, B. (2019). Capitalism alone: The future of the system that rules the world. Harvard University Press.

deButts, D. R. (2019). A Game Theoretic Analysis of Marbury v Madison: The Origins of Judicial Review. James Blair Historical Review9(2), 2.