I am proud of the way I write.
Many people dislike the way I write, which is fine, but I like it. When writing is impersonal, it’s not as much fun to read. When I’m typing on my blog I like talking to you. Or I wouldn’t be writing on a blog. This means I write like I talk. So I’m like using the world like all the time and my sentences are like not always phrased right and like… Okay so I don’t say like that much.
So Aristotle said there are three components/styles in which you write. Ethos, logos and pathos. I’ll give you an example of each using my favorite topic, embryonic stem cell research.
A person who writes with ethos style would say one of two things about stem cell research.
1) Stem cell research is the ethical thing to do, because it could save lives.
or 2) Stem cell research is unethical because it uses human beings.
It’s all about whether or not something is ethical.
Ethos goes well with pathos. Someone who would write with pathos would say.
1) If someone you know needs a transplant, stem cell research could save their lives.
or 2) This research involves killing potential babies.
I don’t really think much as far as ethos and pathos go. I am more of a logos styled person.
A logos styled person could only say one thing. Logos is logical, and truly there can’t be multiple logical answers as far as “yea” or “nay” questions go most of the time.
Embryonic stem cell research can save the lives of living people. Harvesting embryos is not a problem because embryos are just embryos. They are not living beings and have no rights under the law.
So theres that explaination.
Do you think I should take people’s feelings into account when I’m writing rather that just state facts in the manner in which I do? I really want advice on this one.