Patrick Lambe — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:20:52 GMT

Really interesting to see the rhetorical framework used in this way. I think there’s an element missing however, and it relates to your “thin” use of ethos. The analysis is synchronic, ie only exalining what happens at one point in time.

In rhetoric, ethos has a diachronic dimension, and encompasses past history (reputation) typicality of behaviour and future intent. This contributes to a sense of “character” in the speaker which leads directly to their credibility with their audience. In modern communications terms, you might associate this with brand, although brand doesn’t fully encompass this.

I have used this framework to look at knowledge management approaches (logos maps to information management; pathos maps to collaboration and social interaction; ethos maps to identity, vision and culture). See my book Organising Knowledge for more (www.organisingknowledge.com). Looking at both synchronic and diachronic needs lead me to add the element of “sophos” – wisdom, which reflects the function of learning and building experience over time. In your terms, wouldn’t that map to the “legacy” of the experience in your visitors’ minds – ie richness as a contribution that they take away with them?

Patrick Lambe — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 00:42:13 GMT

I’m tempted to take a rhetorical stance and argue for the existence of present and future history (I would probably dig up some historiographical support) but you’re absolutely right, you caught me in a verbal slip, Joe. Red handed :)

Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Patrick Lambe