Emotional Roller Coaster

This chapter brought the triad of logos, ethos, and pathos into balance. I now have a much clearer understanding of the roles played by Aristotle’s three distinct modes of argument. I was, however, somewhat taken back by the Crowley and Hawhee’s reference that, “Of all the ancient kinds of rhetorical proofs, the appeal to the emotions seems strangest to contemporary rhetors, and perhaps a little bit shoddy as well. …In our culture, if you’re emotional, you’re irrational. Reason is associated with mind, and connotes a calm, studied approach to issues. Emotions are associated with the body and are thought to be superficial and dangerous.” (p.247) I was relieved when they stated, “these prejudices are inaccurate and unfair.” (p. 247) While I vehemently agree with the latter statement, I can’t help but feel that much of our society agrees with the former. In most cases, women are typically viewed as more emotional than men. Let’s say this is true. Does that then render women less able to make rational decisions? And what about equal opportunity for women? Should women not be hired or earn less money because of their “disability?”

In continuing with the chapter, I couldn’t help but think about the case heard yesterday by the U.S. Supreme Court, Albert Snyder v. Westboro Baptist Church. The issue boils down to First Amendment Rights versus a family’s right to privacy, harassment, etc. In March, 2006, Albert Snyder’s son, a soldier, was killed in the war in Afghanistan and was buried in Maryland. WBC showed up at the funeral and protested because against gays in the military. Snyder sued WBC for disrupting the funeral with their protests, and the case has worked its way through the court system to the U.S. Supreme Court. I realize that we have dealt with other First Amendment examples in previous chapters, but this one is so embroiled with emotion that I felt I had to address it under pathos. I can’t imagine the horror of having to bury a child, but to have people protest and disrupt a funeral service for any reason, let alone a lifestyle conflict, is more than any family should have to bear. While the Court’s decision probably won’t be rendered until June, 2011, I’ll be anxious to see what transpires in the meantime. It seems that kairos is part of this issue as well, as this case follows many examples of disputes surrounding homosexual marriage, serving in the military, etc. I wonder if this issue will still be as “emotionally charged” in five or ten years.

At the time of this writing, I’m still trying to find copies of the Court transcripts online – they were supposedly posted for review, and I can only imagine the examples of honorific and pejorative language exhibited by both sides of this issue. If I find them, I’ll bring some examples to class tonight. Looking forward to a lively discussion!