Previous
Irony
Definition of Logos
Logos, along with ethos and pathos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective speaking or writing). Logos is an argument that appeals to... read full definition
Logos, along with ethos and pathos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective speaking or writing). Logos is... read full definition
Logos, along with ethos and pathos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective... read full definition
Part 1, Chapter 3
Explanation and Analysis—Money and Clean Shirts:
When Don Quixote acknowledges that he has no money to pay for food or lodging, the innkeeper uses logos to convince him that it is appropriate for a knight to carry money and other supplies:
Quixote replied that he did not have so much as a single real, because he had never read in histories of knights errant that any of them had ever carried money. To this the innkeeper retorted that he was deluding himself – even if it wasn’t written in the histories, because their authors had considered that there wasn’t any need to record something as obviously necessary as money or clean shirts, that wasn’t any reason to believe that they’d travelled without supplies of both [...]
When he set out on his first adventure, Don Quixote left his money at home. He did not do so out of mere forgetfulness, but rather due to his belief that knights do not carry money with them. He believes this because he “had never read in histories of knights errant that any of them had ever carried money.” The innkeeper, however, uses logos, or an appeal to logic, in his argument that Don Quixote should be more prepared in the future. Aware that Don Quixote believes himself to be a knight from chivalric literature, the innkeeper argues that the authors of these stories considered it “so obviously necessary” that the knights carried supplies that “there wasn't any need to record” it. Here, he presents a reasonable and logical argument in language that Don Quixote can understand, reflecting the innkeeper’s shrewd and perceptive nature.
Related Themes:
Part 1, Chapter 33
Explanation and Analysis—Lotario's Argument:
After an innkeeper and a priest debate the merits of chivalric literature, the innkeeper notices that the priest is carrying some papers entitled “The Tale of Inappropriate Curiosity." The priest offers to read the story, which concerns two good friends, Anselmo and Lotario. When Anselmo, who is married, asks Lotario to test his wife's fidelity by attempting to seduce her, Lotario responds by using logos to critique his friend's plan:
If you don’t believe her to be what you say she is, why do you want to test her instead of dealing with her as you think best and as befits a wicked woman? But if she’s as good as you say she is, it’s inappropriate to go performing experiments on truth itself, because it can’t have a greater value afterwards than it had in the first place. And so the conclusion we must reach is that to attempt things that are more likely to do us harm than good is an action of rash, unstable minds [...]
Lotario attacks the topic logically, treating it like a thought experiment. First, he notes that either Anselmo does or does not believe his wife to be faithful. If he has reason to believe her unfaithful, Lotario states, then he should treat her in the manner that “befits a wicked woman.” Conversely, if he does believe her to be faithful, then it is “inappropriate to go performing experiments on truth itself,” as there is no additional benefit and he already values his wife highly. Concluding his argument, he notes that “to attempt to do things that are more likely to do us harm than good” must be the product of “rash, unstable minds.” Here, Lotario emerges as a voice of reason that stands in contrast to Anselmo’s anxiety and paranoia.
Related Themes:
Part 2, Chapter 1
Explanation and Analysis—The Size of Giants:
When Quixote returns to his village, badly injured and exhausted, the doctor and barber attempt to test his sanity. Though he at first appears quite lucid and reasonable, he soon launches into a defense of knights errant and expresses his belief in fantastical creatures such as giants. When asked about the size of giants, he responds with a characteristic mix of logos and fallacy:
‘With regard to giants,’ replied Don Quixote, ‘there are different opinions as to whether they ever existed or not [...] I cannot speak with certainty as to the size of Morgante, although I suspect that he cannot have been very tall; and I am inclined to this opinion by reading in the history where his exploits are described in detail that he often slept under a roof, and since he found houses in which there was room for him it is evident that he was not excessively large.’
At various points in the novel, Quixote combines reasonable arguments with absurdities, blending logos with fallacy. Here, he attempts to calculate the size of giants. Though he first notes that there has been some debate about “whether they ever existed or not,” he quickly affirms their existence and begins to calculate their size. Considering a famous giant from an Italian epic poem named Morgante as an example, he reasons that Morgante could not have been “excessively large” as he is described in the poem as sleeping in ordinary houses. Quixote, then, has made a logical argument based on the fallacious premise that events described in literature are invariably true.
Related Themes:
