Logos vs. Pathos and the Struggle for Truth

There is an interesting variable contributing to the division of America–the debate over the truth.

It is inevitable that some political publications will be sugar-coated in inaccuracies, manipulation, deception, or sometimes even outright fabrication and (or) malice. Part of the problem ties back into the struggle between good and evil.

In the eyes of political rivals, stretching the truth, overusing pathos, and creating toxicity (whether directly or indirectly) are all for “the greater good.” 

Right now, a multitude of issues are being warped by both sides of the political aisle, and possibly the most heated and unstable of them all are the issues involving minority groups.

On October 21st, 2022, MediaVSReality published an article expressing frustration over the “woke” movements in America and their alleged ignorance of conditions and civil rights outside of the nation. 

The biggest problem with this article is its ignorance on what the “woke” movements are actually about–both originally and currently.

The term “wokeness” originally revolved around the African-Americans in the United States who faced oppression long before the Civil Rights Movement. By 2014, the term had become widespread as a result of the Black Lives Matter Movement. Keep in mind that this movement, and the term “woke,” were largely American affairs within its borders. It was weighted much more in terms of domestic issues than foreign ones.

While MediaVSReality’s article can’t be called a complete lie, it’s definitely questionable in terms of its relevancy and honesty. The main problem is simply the fact that their argument over the unawareness of the woke movements doesn’t line up with what many woke people are actually advocating for. 

It wouldn’t make sense for a movement sparked in response to attacks on Black people–and other minorities–within America to be heavily concerned on issues outside of the nation, yet MediaVSReality still berates the woke community for this. 

They do claim that woke Americans never think “to look at the world beyond their own borders and their own culture,” and while that could be a potential issue, they have no data to back it up. But even if there was evidence provided, it still isn’t exactly relevant to criticize a group largely focused on domestic issues of being ignorant of foreign problems.

Ultimately, what this article has done–intentionally or not–is spin the narrative in a way to make the woke movements look bad for reasons that aren’t so justified. MediaVSReality claims that woke Americans believe that minority issues in America apply across the entire world, and then makes arguments that easily refute that claim as if it were a legitimate truth. The problem is that their claim isn’t true, and that woke movements aren’t focused heavily on woke issues outside of the United States.

However, this is certainly not a one-way street. The tactic of bringing irrelevant information to distract readers from the truth is something the political left is just as guilty of. 

Take the issues surrounding the integration of transgender athletes–most notably transgender women–into competitive sports.  Obviously, all people–regardless of their gender identity–should be respected and accepted, or at the bare minimum, not actively discriminated against. 

An article written by Chase Strangino and Gabriel Arkles, two members of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), on April 30th, 2020, does a good job of outlining the negative effects of excluding trans athletes from competitive sports. But the article fails to properly address a central argument that opponents hold, dodging counterarguments by introducing issues that are–while relevant on a broader spectrum–unrelated to the problem at hand.

The problem that opponents possess with the integration of trans athletes is the idea that transgender women may have an unfair advantage over cisgender women, due to biological differences within the body. 

On March 27, 2022, CBS News reported on this debate, collecting statements from Dr. Michael Joyner, a physiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota. Joyner reported on the results of the testosterone levels of a trans athlete, Lia Thomas, stating how her “testosterone suppressants have indeed lowered her hormone levels down to those of cisgender women.”

However, Joyner also listed other variables that could not be reversed through hormone therapy. He stated, “Height’s probably not reversible, hand size, foot size. Some of the issues related to muscle mass, lung size, and other things probably are never gonna revert completely, if at all.”

Clearly, the process of integrating trans athletes is more complicated than one may assume. A balance must be reached in order to ensure that all women, both transgender and cisgender, are on an even playing field.

But the first section of the ACLU article claims that the idea that “the participation of trans athletes hurts cis women” is a “myth.” This wouldn’t be a problem if they presented clear evidence to back the claim. However, what they actually state is how excluding trans women could invite “gender policing that could subject any woman to invasive tests or accusations of being ‘too masculine’ or ‘too good’ at their sport to be a ‘real’ woman.”

While what the Strangino and Arkles state is certainly a real problem, it has nothing to do with the “myth” they are trying to disprove. The reason cisgender women could potentially be “hurt” is the possible unfair advantage that comes with biological differences in the body, and there is nothing addressing this legitimate concern in this first section of the article. While “reinforc[ing] stereotypes” is a dangerous side effect, it isn’t exactly a relevant counterargument to the “myth” in question.

The second section of the article claims to bust a similar falsehood: “Trans athletes’ physiological characteristics provide an unfair advantage over cis athletes.” However, the section leads with a paragraph discussing how trans women and girls “face discrimination and violence that makes it difficult to even stay in school.”

As painful as it may be to hear, this is simply a calculated use of pathos to boost readers’ sympathy. While discrimination and violence are absolutely unacceptable, the authors’ tactic holds very little water against the actual issue at hand–the potential unfair advantage. 

This second section does eventually present a tenable point against the myth the authors claimed to disprove, but the problem is that it only came after a paragraph of distracting information that dodged the real point of relevance. 

Both articles are guilty of dishonest strategies — whether that be an excessive use of pathos, a lack of evidence for extremely bold claims, exaggerated vocabulary (which will be touched on in the next section), seemingly supporting information that isn’t relative to the topic that was presented, or even straw man arguments. 

So why do these articles bend the truth?

It’s possible that MediaVSReality’s article was genuinely written out of a fear that Woke Americans will subvert the values of other populations–an act that could be viewed as evil. Therefore, it is possible (but not certain) that the authors chose to bend reality for the sake of the greater good.

The same can apply to the ACLU article, where the authors saw the exclusion of trans athletes as an act of evil, so they employed distracting information and pathos as a defense.

But again, both sides are manipulating their audiences for the same reasons, and perhaps it’s time that people realize the possibility that their opponents may not lie out of malice after all. Such a recognition may ease some tension, and perhaps, gradually, the incentive to lie can be reduced.

However, the good vs. evil conundrum is only one of two major explanations for the division in America. The second ties into a much greater issue that has acted as a major catalyst for the division of America (and by extension, the world)–the incentive for profits.