You Don't Know Me, Don't Pretend That You Know Me

Assigned Section:
Helaman 13 -> 3 Nephi 4

Sections of Spoken Word:
Helaman chapters 13, 14, 15 (sermon)
Helaman 16:16 (dialogue amongst themselves)
Helaman 16:18-21 (dialogue amongst themselves)
3 Nephi 1:13-14 (dialogue from the Lord to Nephi)
3 Nephi 3:20-21 (dialogue between Gidgiddoni and the people)
3 Nephi 4:29-32 (the people crying out)

Selected Section:
Helaman 13:24-29

I chose this section specifically, as I noticed Samuel using a certain rhetorical technique that I've seen used before but thought would be interesting to analyze.

Throughout this short section, Samuel uses various "quotes" that suggest what the people may or may not say in certain situations. For example: "When ye talk, ye say, 'If our days had been in the days of our fathers of old, we would not have slain the prophets.'" In essence, "if someone says this, you will say this." He uses these hypothetical phrases to--in my estimation--appeal to the pathos, logos, and ethos of his audience, the wicked Nephites.

Sharing these little hypotheticals appeals to their ethos by showing the people that he has a greater knowledge of them than they might think. By directly pointing out things they've said or could have said he proves that he knows his audience and is ready to address them. I can only imagine some of the Nephites thinking, "oh boy I heard Craig saying that just the other day..." or "oh no he must've heard me saying that just the other day."

More obviously, these hypotheticals appeal to their pathos as the words strike the people right in their hearts. "You will say that he is a false prophet, and that he is a sinner, and of the devil, because he testifieth that your deeds are evil." He's essentially telling them that even if they did hear the word of God that they would deny it on account of their hypocrisy and evil.

Lastly, I feel that this technique might appeal to the logos of the audience, by providing them with some vague "examples" of things that have been said by them, assuming they're accurate statements.

By this account, Samuel the Lamanite was an expert speaker, which seems appropriate considering he had to talk on top of a wall to a large population of wicked, prideful people.

"Oh good"

If I was asked to give one word describing Elder Holland it would easily be, blunt. No sugar frosting, no cherry on top, not the slightest been of gooey, cheesy, fluff that we so often want to hear in talks. He says it plain and simple. Because of that he is easily one of the most popular speakers in the Mormon world.

Marion G Romney said “I always know when I am speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost because I always learn something from what I've said" This is something I believe Elder Holland would agree with. He starts out simply, asking the audience to be respectful, something not often said across the pulpit. By doing this he is setting a serious tone and establishing his Ethos for the whole rest of the meeting, not just his talk. He then continues to a topic that we all know to be a serious one, reinforcing the tone he previously set.

Elder Holland mainly uses Logos throughout this entire talk, speaking of doctrine, telling stories and research studies all about the seriousness of human intimacy. But he doesn't only use logos. At one specific point he really hit me hard, pulling out the Pathos in his argument. He is talking about the seriousness of purity and how it is the worst sin other than murder. He then compares sexual transgression to the taking of a life and how in control we all are when it comes to taking care of other people's lives. We don't walk up to someone and put a gun to their head and pull the trigger hoping the gun won't go off and think;
"Oh good, I didn't go all the way"
To me, this is the point where his Ethos is the strongest. This, I believe, would be one of those "inspired one liners" that Neal A. Maxwell was talking about.

Through his use of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos Elder Holland is one of the most straight forward and powerful speakers out there, and that is definitely an example of that.

The Perfect Balance

Elder Holland is one of the most popular speakers, for a variety of reasons. As a speaker he has the ability to completely tear down all the false pretenses we have and speak directly to our souls. The majority of the reason he is able to do this is because of his powerful words and the rhetoric he uses to address his audience.

Approaching the topic of his talk Elder Holland addresses his goal.

“I wish to speak,” he says, “to the best of my ability, on why we should be clean, on why moral discipline is such a significant matter in God's eyes. I know that may sound presumptuous, but a philosopher once said, tell me sufficiently why a thing should be done, and I will move heaven and earth to do it. Hoping you will feel the same way as he and fully recognizing my limitations, I wish to try to give at least a partial answer to ‘Why be morally clean?’”

Beginning this way, he combines both pathos and logos to appeal to the audience. The pathos comes as he quotes a philosopher and tells a story. The logos appears more as he explains and helps us understand the reasoning behind why we do (or do not) participate in certain activities.

He is, in a way, able to walk the line that so many others struggle to find. His talks are so perfectly balanced—and real—that people have to pause what they are doing to listen.

That is ultimately the reason why Elder Holland is such a powerful speaker. He approaches with enough love to make us want to listen, but then his argument is so incredibly forceful and accurate that we can’t stop listening.