Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Ch1 Q 1
I admire the person Ernesto (Che) Guevara as a speaker for the people. He was a man that was greatly respected my most people in South America and worldwide. I would say that he was an ethos speaker, because he spoke the truth to the people he was trying to help. He spent his life after college doing bad thing which were illegal but he told people that violence was the only way to make change since the government was not helping the people. He created a revolution with ever larger dreams if it wasent for his tragic death at an early age. I would to find myself to be ethos because i always strive to show my true colors and not lie to people. I pride myself to tell the truth and be a person who people can trust in and when it comes to persuasion my honesty can help get that connection i want with one another. I think Aristotles classification scheme does work with Che because he was a person who was an open speaker telling his viewpoints and the truth because what he thought about accomplishing was to have th people of Argentina have a greater quality of life looking up to the wealth and progress that the United States has created.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hello DREW SJSU,
ReplyDeleteCreative name! (BTW)
I would first like to note that I have never read about Che Guevara, I have only seen his face on books and known he was a revolutionary leader. But in response to your blog, I agree that ethos is an important and effective way of communication. Aristotle pointed out that when using ethos, the person must have source credibility; even if some communicators have achieved the goal of getting the point across, they may have missed out on the important aspect of trusts from the audience. When the speaker earned trusts from the audience, I believe that it is very easy to gain understanding and cooperation. I noted that you wrote Che spoke the truth to his followers. He explained to his followers that he spent years after college committing illegal acts because violence was the only way to achieve chance since the government is not helping. I can agree that violence is an effective way of gaining attention and possibly make changes. But I strongly disagree that violence is the ONLY way of getting change. Maybe at the time and during certain circumstances that Che felt violence was the only way, but I still feel there are other solutions.
It’s great reading your blog, I encourage to continue telling the truth and nothing but the truth because the truth matters.
Signing out,
Events Dreamer
Hello,
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to hear about Che Guevara, because I have never herd of him. I to agree that Ethos is very essential to being a good speaker, but I would have to say that in order to be a good speaker I think that ethos, pathos, and logos are essential. Along with a speakers character coming into place when they have followers, and being apart of their believe-ability, I think that it is necessary for a speaker to appeal emotionally to its audience, and that they are logical. From what you have written about him I can see that he definitely evokes emotion because of the way you speak of him. I would like to know if he uses logos as well?
I have never heard about Che Guevara but after reading your little introduction about him I am very interested in learning more about him. Back to your post ethos is very important in persuasion. I think it is the most important aspect of persuasion, because to me a persons credibility is what makes them the most persuasive. For me the two most important things I look for in a speaker is Passion and Ethos because those I believe are the most persuasive personality traits and persuasive attributes when relaying a message.
ReplyDeleteHello Drew! Do you think that a person should use ethos, pathos and logos equally? Or is focusing on one more than the others an 'ok' tactic for giving presentations? (Interesting post by the way!)
ReplyDelete