Ethos is a Greek word that means "character." It describes the core beliefs or values that define a group, country, or idea, as well as the balance between being careful and being passionate. The Greeks also used the word to explain how music can affect emotions, actions, and morals. Early Greek stories about Orpheus clearly show this idea. In speeches, the term comes from Aristotle's ideas about three ways to persuade: ethos, pathos, and logos. It shows the speaker is trustworthy or honest.
Etymology and origin
The Greek word "ethos" (pronounced "ee-thos") originally meant "a place where something is commonly found," such as the "habitats of horses" mentioned in the ancient poem Iliad. It also refers to "customs" or "habits," similar to the Latin word "mores." The word "ethos" is the root of "ethikos," which means "related to morality" or "showing good character." In Greek, "ethikos" is used as an adjective in the phrase "ta ethika," meaning "moral matters."
Current usage
In modern times, ethos refers to the attitudes, character, or core values that are unique to a particular person, group, organization, culture, or movement. For instance, the poet and critic T. S. Eliot wrote in 1940 that "the general ethos of the people they have to govern determines the behavior of politicians." Similarly, the historian Orlando Figes wrote in 1996 that in Soviet Russia of the 1920s, "the ethos of the Communist party had a strong influence on every part of public life."
Ethos can change when new ideas or forces appear. For example, the Jewish historian Arie Krampf noted that ideas about economic modernization brought into Palestine in the 1930s led to "the abandonment of the agrarian ethos and the acceptance of…the ethos of rapid development."
Rhetoric
In rhetoric, ethos refers to the credibility or trustworthiness of a speaker. It is one of three ways to persuade an audience, along with logos (using logic) and pathos (using emotions). Aristotle, an ancient Greek philosopher, discussed these ideas in his work Rhetoric. He said speakers must show they are trustworthy from the start. This includes being moral, knowledgeable, and skilled. Schools and universities often focus on this idea of ethos. However, some scholars argue that a speaker’s credibility also depends on their character and past actions, even before they speak (as noted by Isocrates).
Aristotle identified three categories of ethos. He believed that ethos is not only about the speaker but also about the audience’s feelings and beliefs. The audience decides whether a speaker is credible or not. Problems with ethos include actions that make a speaker seem dishonest or untrustworthy. Dismissing an argument because of these issues is a mistake in reasoning called an "appeal to motive." Even if an argument is questionable, it may still have valid points.
Although Plato, another ancient philosopher, did not use the word "ethos" in his writings, some scholars, like Collin Bjork, believe he explored similar ideas in The Apology of Socrates. Aristotle described ethos as a strategy to gain trust by showing good sense, good character, and goodwill. He linked ethos to habit, saying that virtuous behavior becomes part of a person’s character over time. This idea is also found in The Essential Guide to Rhetoric (2018).
Scholars like Karlyn Kohrs Campbell note that in the 19th century, women faced challenges in being seen as credible in public spaces. They often had to join "counter publics" to express their views without losing their moral standing. Feminist theorists have redefined ethos to include how identity and culture shape credibility. For example, Johanna Schmertz suggests that ethos can be separated from a person’s identity to allow more ways for women to speak. Similarly, Nedra Reynolds and Susan Jarratt argue that ethos is flexible and depends on how people see themselves and others.
Michael Halloran explains that classical ethos focuses on shared cultural values rather than personal traits. He says ethos is about showing the virtues a culture values. Karen Burke LeFevre adds that ethos is created in the space between a speaker’s private life and their public actions.
Nedra Reynolds also says ethos changes over time and across different situations. She argues that ethos is rooted in community values, not just individual choices. John Oddo suggests that in today’s media-driven world, a person’s credibility is shaped by how journalists and media portray them. He calls this "intertextual ethos," meaning a public figure’s credibility is built across many media sources.
Coretta Pittman points out that race has often been ignored in discussions about ethos. She notes that Black women in the U.S. have historically been judged unfairly, with their credibility tied to stereotypes about criminality or sexuality in media and culture.
In Greek tragedy
The way characters are created is important when studying ethos, or character, in Greek tragedy. Augustus Taber Murray explains that the way characters were shown was influenced by the conditions in which Greek tragedies were performed. These conditions include the use of a single, unchanging scene, the necessity of a chorus, a small number of characters that limited how much they could interact, the size of outdoor theaters, and the use of masks. These factors made characters appear more formal and simple. Murray also says that the natural features of Greek tragedies affected how characters were developed. One feature is that characters were usually based on well-known myths. This meant the characters and their stories were tied to existing myths. Another feature is that Greek plays were generally short, which limited how much detail could be given to characters and their goals. Characters were often driven by one main purpose from the beginning of the play.
However, Murray notes that Greek tragedy characters were not always completely consistent. He uses the example of Antigone, who starts the play by strongly opposing Creon but later questions her actions and asks for mercy as she is taken to her death.
Other aspects of characters in Greek tragedy are also important. C. Garton points out that sometimes characters are unclear or confusing because of conflicting actions or incomplete descriptions. One way to understand this is to see characters as flat, or typecast, meaning their traits are centered around one main quality. Characters could also be seen as symbols, like the Eumenides representing vengeance or Clytemnestra symbolizing a family curse. Another view, according to Tycho von Wilamowitz and Howald, is that character development was not a major focus. They suggest that plays were meant to affect the audience moment by moment, with characters only defined enough to explain their actions based on their situations.
Garet makes three observations about characters in Greek tragedy. First, there is a wide variety of character types in these plays. Second, characters often reflect human nature in a way that makes them relatable. Third, characters may have unusual traits or behaviors. Garet also says that Greek tragedies combine language, character, and action, which work together throughout the play. He explains that actions usually define how characters are shown. For example, Brutus in Julius Caesar is a character whose actions do not always match his credibility. Garet also notes that the interaction between language, character, and action affects how the story unfolds, with characters influencing the events of the play.
Augustus Taber Murray also discusses how plot and character interact. He refers to Aristotle’s Poetics, where Aristotle says that a plot can exist without characters, but characters cannot exist without a plot, making plot more important. Murray explains that Aristotle did not mean complicated plots were most important, because Greek tragedies often had simple plots that were not the main focus of interest. Murray suggests that modern people disagree with Aristotle because today’s audiences often remember characters more than plots. However, Murray agrees with Aristotle that a character cannot be shown without some basic outline of the plot.
Another term used to describe how characters are revealed in writing is "persona." While "ethos" comes from the tradition of rhetoric, "persona" comes from literature and is linked to a theatrical mask. Roger Cherry explains the differences between ethos and pathos to show how a writer’s real self differs from the character they create through a narrator. These terms also help distinguish between "situated ethos," which relies on a writer’s authority, and "invented ethos," which depends on the situation in which the message is given.
In pictorial narrative
Ethos, or character, is shown in ancient Greek visual art, such as murals, pottery, and sculptures. These artworks often tell stories from famous or mythical events and are called pictorial narratives. Aristotle praised the Greek painter Polygnotos for including character details in his paintings. In visual art, how a person is shown and what they do can express their moral qualities, just like in poetry or plays. This helped convey the main message of the artwork. In these stories, characters were shown as they should be, matching Aristotle’s idea of what character should be in tragedies. (Stansbury-O'Donnell, p. 178) Mark D. Stansbury-O'Donnell explains that pictorial narratives often focused on showing characters’ moral choices. (Stansbury-O'Donnell, p. 175) David Castriota agrees that Aristotle saw poetry and visual art as equal in their ability to show characters and how their choices affect events. However, Castriota also says Aristotle believed that art’s value came from how it influenced people’s behavior. Castriota adds that Aristotle thought the work of artists was important because it helped the public by showing ethical lessons. This is why characters, or ethos, were shown in public art. To show a character’s decision, pictorial narratives sometimes showed events before the main action happened. Stansbury-O'Donnell gives an example of this in a painting by the Greek artist Exekia, which shows the hero Ajax placing his sword in the ground as he prepares to commit suicide, not the actual act of suicide itself. (Stansbury-O'Donnell, p. 177) Castriota also explains that ancient Greek art showed that character was a major reason for how the Greeks won or lost battles. Because of this, "ethos was the essential factor in the connection between myths and real events."