Write On!, 0420 WYBJ, Vol. 43 No. 2. 48
| Author | Michael R. Smith |
| Position | Vol. 43 2 Pg. 48 |
Traits of Credibility, Part 3: The Tension Between Zeal and Good Will
Michael R. Smith
This is the third installment in my series on ethos, “the process of persuading by establishing credibility as a trustworthy source of information.”[1] In the prior discussion, I briefly introduced the concepts zeal and good will as crucial elements of an advocate’s credibility. In this edition, I explore zeal and good will in more detail, particularly focusing on the tension that can exist between the two.
In my Advanced Persuasive Writing textbook, I explain zeal as a trait of credibility as follows: [Another] quality that an advocate should evince through his or her writing is zeal; that is an advocate should project passion, conviction, and confidence in a client’s position. . . . [I] f a reader receives the impression through an advocate’s writing that the advocate is not confident in and committed to the client’s arguments, the reader will likely give less weight and attention to those arguments. After all, if a party’s own advocate lacks conviction and confidence in the party’s position, why then should the impartial decision-maker give it must consideration? A passionate advocate has more credibility than one who appears disinterested or lacking in confidence . . . .
The manifestation of zeal in a legal writer’s document is mainly affected by two things: (1) the substantive effort made by the advocate on behalf of the client, and (2) the language or tone of the argument. . . . [W]henever an advocate’s document demonstrates through its substance that the advocate is zealously pursuing the client’s cause, . . . the credibility of the advocate’s argument is enhanced by the zeal and commitment reflected in the advocate’s effort. . . . [Furthermore,] [t]he advocate who evinces confidence through [forceful language and tone] gains the confidence of the decision-maker.
[2]
I also explain the concept of good will:
Good will in the context of persuasion refers to how an advocate feels or is disposed toward others involved in the matter under discussion. According to classical rhetoricians, a decision-maker will doubt the veracity of what an advocate has to say if the advocate does not appear to be well-disposed toward Laramie, Wyoming . . . [an opposing party]. If a decision-maker receives the impression that an advocate is angry at, resentful of, or otherwise...
To continue reading
Request your trial