Effective Communications: Aristotle's Rhetorical Triangle

[Source of image]

This is a wide-ranging tip that applies far beyond Asana to communications in general.

But specifically related to Asana, I feel it can help if you’re doing a presentation, say, on the “Why” of Asana, or for Asana trainings.

In an even more narrow Asana focus, it could help you in naming your next Task or writing its Task Description.

Below I quote (with some additions) from one of many web-based sources about the Rhetorical Triangle:

Aristotle taught that a speaker’s ability to persuade an audience is based on how well the speaker appeals to that audience in three different areas: logos, ethos, and pathos. Considered together, these appeals form what later rhetoricians have called the rhetorical triangle.

Logos (“logic;” the message/facts/research) appeals to reason. Logos can also be thought of as the text of the argument, as well as how well a writer has argued his/her point.

Ethos (“ethics;” the speaker’s or sources’ credibility) appeals to the writer’s character. Ethos can also be thought of as the role of the writer in the argument, and how credible his/her argument is.

Pathos (“emotion;” the audience’s experience or feelings; vivid examples/visuals) appeals to the emotions and the sympathetic imagination, as well as to beliefs and values. Pathos can also be thought of as the role of the audience in the argument.

It’s always helpful to consider these three aspects for any communication. But depending on the specific nature and purpose, you may want to favor one aspect over another.

I’ve written this fairly quickly—have I failed at all three? :slightly_smiling_face:




This is a very good tip, thanks for sharing @lpb
Funny enough I started my week reading an article from Oxford Review on the 3 human resources credibility factors.
It talks about the speakers plausibility, the content’s plausibility, and the intent of the content. It aligns with what you are saying and takes it from the receiver perspective.
Check it out: https://oxford-review.com/the-3-human-resourses-credibility-factors/



Thanks, @Rashad_Issa.

Nice coincidence! The first two credibility factors, speaker and content, correspond to Aristotle’s Ethos and Logos and maybe are even cribbed from it! But the third one does not match up with Pathos, I’d say, and kind of goes in a different direction.

Thanks for sharing this–interesting!


1 Like

What I have come to notice is that in today’s culture, Logos and Ethos are relatively easy to incorporate, but Pathos is the most difficult to fit into your own opinion as well as understanding other’s opinions too.

There should be an even 3-way sync, but sometimes they outweigh the other and one has to learn to decipher that for their own opinions and (respectfully) for other’s opinions too

Yet again, this could only relate to my generation and I’m blowing hot air :grin:

Thanks for sharing @lpb !

1 Like