Understanding the meaning of Logos and other rhetoric styles is something students become familiar with as early as middle school. Throughout the years leading into high school, the same basic interpretations of rhetoric are often overly-simplified and taught to generalize their specific meanings to just one word or phrase.
As a result, in her essay “Logos is Synonymous with Logic,” in Bad Ideas About Writing, author Nancy Fox states that logos, a rhetoric style, has much more meaning than just stating logical facts and basic reasoning. Instead, she describes it in a complex and artistic matter. One of the sources Nancy Fox mentions in particular, The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University, agrees that limiting the meaning of logos to “logic” is a bad idea because today’s understanding of logos doesn’t resonate with its complex structural purpose. The lack of detail when explaining rhetoric confuses a student’s knowledge of logos and makes it difficult to understand it thoroughly in the literature. Together, Nancy Fox and the Online Writing Lab believe that discussions about the meaning of logos and rhetoric need to take place more descriptively and give credit to their original interpretations. This way, students and future learners can better understand how to use rhetoric under real-life circumstances.
In her essay “Logos is Synonymous with Logic”, author Nancy Fox argues that the three basic rhetoric styles, ethos, pathos, and logos, have become overly simplistic, and there is a misinterpretation of their “potential meaning.” In her essay, Nancy Fox quotes from Aristotle’s, On Rhetoric, where he describes rhetoric, specifically logos, as much more complex and meaningful than perceived in today’s explanations.
A similar perspective is present in the article, The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University, where it expresses foundations of the meanings and interpretations of what Logos and Logic genuinely mean. It states that “Logos is frequently translated as some variation of “logic or reasoning,” but it originally referred to the actual content of a speech and how it was organized” (The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University).
In Fox’s chapter of “Bad Ideas About Writing,” she uses many references from the Greek philosopher Aristotle’s text “On Rhetoric” stating, “Aristotle presents logos as the argument itself, aligned with ethos, the appeal of a speaker’s character, and pathos, the appeal to audience attitude or feeling” (Nancy Fox 174). Fox further explains that “the ancient Greeks had a variety of definitions for logos, including computation and exposition, as well as forms of verbal expression, such as oratory and poetry, that represent an expansive and faceted story” (Nancy Fox 174). This further explains her argument that logos in its original explanations isn’t limited to the simple meaning of “logic.” She expresses that when logos is described logically, it defines the ideas and thoughts expressed by students and writers.
The limitation of their verbal thoughts and ideas is often confusing when teachers or instructors tell students to “make arguments about political, social, artistic, policy, or cultural topics that cannot be demonstrated or logically proven” (Nancy Fox 175). This statement emphasizes how crucial it is for teachers to explain the true meaning of logos in its original form, not limited to “rhetorical arguments,” and how this can help reduce students’ confusion when put in professional argumentative situations (Nancy Fox 175). Therefore, she further explains how the interpretation made by students when watching movies or listening to songs affects their understanding of its true meaning. Teachers and students should appropriately analyze logos to decoy the confusion as well “teaching logos as logic in rhetorical arguments sets students up for confusion” (Nancy Fox 175).
They may study the myriad ways we build arguments, from articles to films, stories, songs, and marketing or political campaigns (Nancy Fox 175). She conveys how the implementation of new “technologies” to express logos in its original creative forms adequately, such describes logos not as simply meaning ‘logic’ but also “as fuzzy logic and informal logic” (Nancy Fox 176).
As Fox and Purdue University states, today’s meaning of “Logos” is displayed simplistically and not related to any other sense rather than “logic.” The limitation of this information limits one’s understanding of logos and how it needs to go against current teaching standards. Purdue University also states that today’s path of understanding logos primarily reflects logical reasoning rather than its structure. “Today, many people may discuss the logos qualities of a text to refer to how strong the logic or reasoning of the text is. But logos more closely refers to the structure and content of the text itself. In this resource, logos means “text.” (The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University). Furthermore, this explains how simply interpreting logos from a different perspective can change one’s understanding. Therefore, it should be taught in broader descriptions and give much more credit to its original explanators.
Just as Nancy Fox uses information from the sources of rhetoric, the ancient Greeks, The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University, also refers to them. The OWL makes the statement that “many people have heard of the rhetorical concepts of logos, ethos, and pathos even if they do not necessarily know what they fully mean.” (The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University) It also states that “these three terms, along with kairos and telos, were used by Aristotle to help explain how rhetoric functions.” (The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University) In basic terms, all rhetoric styles work together descriptively, providing information even in everyday situations.
In conclusion, expressing logos and rhetoric needs to be addressed in language and literature for future generations. Thoroughly teaching and understanding the true meaning of logos can help students learn and develop professional standards for themselves and their futures. It is up to teachers to improve these standards and a student’s responsibility to accept and appreciate the appropriate knowledge when presented to them. It is a double standard.
On the contrary, can logos ever truly be understood?
Works Cited
Fox, Nancy. “Logos is Synonymous with Logic.” Bad Ideas about writing, edited by Cheryl E Ball and Drew M Loewe, West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, pages 174-177, https://textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf
Writing Lab, Purdue. “Aristotle’s Rhetorical Situation // Purdue Writing Lab.” Purdue Writing Lab, n.d., https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/rhetorical_situation/aristotles_rhetorical_situation.html