Rhetoric Burger...Hold the Reason!

Recently, I have begun to reconsider my own beliefs, my judgments of other people, institutions, values; never, in all my mental wanderings, have I come to a satisfactory resolution to these pressing issues. I wonder, while wresting on a wizened, boney tree limb in my backyard, Jimi Hendrix at my side, waiting by a fire, what the meaning of truth is. Sadly, Jimi could offer nothing to help me in my journey, though, as you would expect, these meetings have at the least resulted in some great tuneage on his part.
The question is, “How will logos, pathos, and ethos benefit me in my life?” I would gladly have skirted that question to Jimi, who is, I believe, far more capable of answering than I am. He has, however, been dead for almost 40 years, so I suppose I’ll pick up the bag…
Whenever I catch myself watching television-for whatever reason that was-, or if I am simply listening to people talk after class, or, found in the middle of a heated political debate with another student I loose control and act a fool, I am continually amazed at the apparent disregard of reason and soundness in our arguments. To use myself as an example: When talking about, say, religion, I usually make no pretense of wanting to share a “civilized conversation,” and, like some flea-bitten, glassy-eyed pit-bull, leap on the poor sap I’m talking to, aiming straight for his jugular vein. Why, I can’t say. No doubt, I’m just as able as anyone else of being logical, of breaking down another’s argument, and of showing where I disagree and why, without the need to humiliate them. And often I have done just that.
But-and I’m sure some of you reading this would agree-these are very contentious times in our countries’ history, for a host of different reasons, and, no matter which “side” we’re on, there seems always to be a lingering instinct in us to be right, not logical. To be even more cynical, I would go so far to say many people-the dispossessed, the jobless and unhappy-would not even care to fit ethics into their arguments; simply winning an argument would suit them fine.
One example: Three years ago, I took an “American Policy” class, which was meant to inform us of the various branches of government, how wealth is distributed, etc. There were two blokes sitting behind me, who, other than during this period, had never spoken to anyone else. That day, the class somehow touched on ethics, which led to subject of homosexuality. Before anyone knew it, the class was swept into a fiery, limb-tearing harangue, all over the “morality” of homosexuality, with the two boys behind me leading the charge. I’ll spare you the whole argument-“Homosexuality is like necrophilia!”; “God hates fags, and you’re defending them!”- but all throughout, as I was attempting to speak to them, calmly, and trying to get a small point across, I instead was forced to dodge all the gobs of mud being flung at me from the other direction. Has it always been this way, I thought, or is this a new type of person we’re making?
From the “Aahh shad-up”-ing of a Bill O’Reilly to the lip-pursing, “Worse Person in the World”-like sarcasm of a Keith Olberman, modern people tend to move towards the vileness of a bad argument. I could be wrong, but I don’t think our social life has always been this way. Looking back, I think that, though the United States has witnessed countless horrors in its brief history, their may once have been a time, however brief, when people could talk to one another respectfully, logically, and without the urge to turn the other person into a bloody, meat-like pulp over a parking space at WalMart.
This is what Jimi and I were discussing last night. For my own part, I would like to use more ethos in my arguments in the future. That way, I may better be able to understand the other person’s point of view, no matter how much I find fault in his ideas.