Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Credibility dates back to Aristotle's theory of Rhetoric.Aristotle defines rhetoric as the ability to see what is possibly persuasive in every situation. He divided the means of persuasion into three categories, namely Ethos (the source's credibility), Pathos (the emotional or motivational appeals), and Logos (the logic used to support a claim), which he believed have the capacity to influence ...
Ethos – a rhetorical appeal to an audience based on the speaker/writer's credibility. Ethopoeia – the act of putting oneself into the character of another to convey that person's feelings and thoughts more vividly. Eulogy – a speech or writing in praise of a person, especially one who recently died or retired.
For instance, the appeal to poverty is the fallacy of thinking that someone is more likely to be correct because they are poor. [16] When an argument holds that a conclusion is likely to be true precisely because the one who holds or is presenting it lacks authority, it is an "appeal to the common man". [17]
The modes of persuasion, modes of appeal or rhetorical appeals (Greek: pisteis) are strategies of rhetoric that classify a speaker's or writer's appeal to their audience. These include ethos , pathos , and logos , all three of which appear in Aristotle's Rhetoric . [ 1 ]
The philosopher Irving Copi defined argumentum ad populum differently from an appeal to popular opinion itself, [19] as an attempt to rouse the "emotions and enthusiasms of the multitude". [19] [20] Douglas N. Walton argues that appeals to popular opinion can be logically valid in some cases, such as in political dialogue within a democracy. [21]
Case history; Prior: 658 F.2d 1362 (9th Cir. 1981): Holding; The statute, as drafted and as construed by the state court, is unconstitutionally vague on its face within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to clarify what is contemplated by the requirement that a suspect provide a "credible and reliable" identification.
The denial of Laffitte’s appeal sets the stage for him to be sentenced on six bank fraud-related counts. No sentencing date has been set. He could get a maximum of 30 years.
] In such a case, the appeals court might find that, although there was evidence to support the lower court's finding, the evidence taken as a whole—including the eyewitness and the expert testimony—leaves the appellate court with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake was committed by the trial court.