The Letter from Birmingham Jail: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos

Introduction

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Baptist clergyman and civil rights activist who advocated nonviolence in the 1960s. He was also the head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a significant organization that promoted nonviolent protests such as sit-ins and peaceful marches. In Birmingham, Alabama, Martin Luther King Jr was hosting a nonviolent protest to the continuance of segregation and extreme racial tension in Birmingham. The protest, however, did not go as planned, and King was jailed for inciting public dissent. The 'Ungodly' behavior enraged and outraged many fellow white clerics. As a response, the Clergymen issued a statement, 'A Call For Unity', labeling King and his efforts within Brimingham as radical. King wrote the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” as a response to the divisive criticism in “A Call for Unity” and to address the horrifying inequalities in the city. Although it is primarily aimed at the clergymen, it also addresses the segregation and racial inequality issues within Birmingham inflamed by those who discourage nonviolent direct action programs. In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Martin Luther King Jr. utilizes ethos via establishing goodwill, pathos by appealing to readers’ emotions, and logos using citations of authority and syllogism to stress the importance of participating in the civil rights movement through nonviolent direct action programs when facilitating the definite end of segregation. This essay will further explore the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and the use of ethos, pathos, and logos in it.

The Letter From Birmingham Jail: Rhetorical Analysis

Ethos

Martin Luther King establishes his moral character through ethos, gaining the clergymen's trust and belief. His pleasant demeanor and Christian expertise establish the required ethos to convert the clergymen into receptive readers early on.The first step is for King to use a respectful tone and set up his character as a reasonable man. In the first paragraph, he refers to the clergymen as 'men of real goodwill' whose harsh objections 'are sincerely set forth' (175). King establishing such a civil foundation gives the clerics the impression that their concerns are highly regarded. When King does denounce the clerics’ beliefs and advice for nonfiction, they will be much more inclined to perceive King's concerns as an effort to foster understanding between the two groups rather than an attack on their personal traits. The use of honorifics such as 'sirs' (179), 'my Christian and Jewish brothers' (175) to refer to the clergymen adds to the King's reverent tone. He even ends his letter asking for forgiveness if at any point he “overstated the truth and indicated unreasonable impatience”(188). Even as his indignation grows throughout the letter, King’s ability to remain respectful compels the white clegeric to be a part of the conversation instead of rashley invalidating his solutions. His benevolence towards the clergymen cultivated a safe environment for those who initially opposed his ideas like nonviolent direct action, as they did not sense the need to be defensive and completely void King’s critiques.

Pathos

King incited empathy within his white audience while also inspiring the black community to take action through his usage of powerful narratives. He utilizes strong visual stories like “dog sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes , watching “ vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will”, and being “ humiliated…by nagging signs reading ‘white’ and ‘colored’ ”(179). King pivots his focus on the white moderate population of voters. He tries to place this audience into the shoes of the black people by giving vivid descriptions of the trials and tribulations black people have been going through in hopes it pushes them out of their harmful bystander approach. King keys into the dangers of listening to the white moderate highlighting that the black community “have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights” (179). As you can see, this statement is in direct relation to the hypocrisy of the clergyman's 'untimely' comment made in regards to King’s nonviolent direct action program. King triggers the white population guilt as they begin to realize the extreme privilege in telling black people “wait” out racism. However, one would do good to realize his underlying audience. The 'we' in this statement refers to black citizens taking an active role in the civil rights movement. This statement, other than inciting empathy, lights the fire of inspiration under King’s “ black brothers and sisters''. It’s a wake up call and realizing that “340 years” have been more than long enough of waiting . King is pushing the people of the black community to act,and those of the white community to recognize the urgency required in this conflict.

King also cites authority to show the hypocrisies within the white sector that stands for segregation. King established that segregation is not a just law later on in his letter but introduces the idea that just because it is a law and “legal” does not mean it should be followed. For example what “Hitler did was ‘legal’, but we like to think we would have gone against those laws”(179). Here he establishes an effective instance of an unjust regulation and how he would have reacted to it (providing resources to his “Jewish brothers”). This puts the ball back in the Clerics Court, meaning that they must make assumptions regarding what they would have done. It's supposed that, as good Christians, they would have helped any character who needed it. He draws a parallel between the horrors perpetrated against Jews and the atrocities perpetrated against African Americans in America — though on a much smaller scale, the conditions are comparable, with unjust legal norms causing violence and fatalities. The clergy are forced by the King to consider the ethically correct course of action. Martin Luther King then justifies his fight for an 'extreme' cause by citing specific examples of past historical 'extremist' causes that genuinely resulted in positive results.o respond to the accusation that he is an extremist, the king goes back in time and cites a number of famous “extremists.” “I gradually gained a sense of satisfaction from being labeled an extremist,' he says (184). He continues by mentioning amazing people who have accomplished tremendous things. Jesus, Amos, Paul, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson are just a few of them. He uses this to argue that being an extremist can be beneficial if one is doing so for the sake of love and justice. In this quotation, King's appeal to icons of exceptional quality that has the greatest impact on his target audience — white preachers. By bringing up important historical and religious leaders like Jesus Christ, Martin Luther, and Thomas Jefferson, King establishes the clear truth that if these people are doing the right thing, he is as well. This interest in trademarks demonstrates that 'extreme' motives are no longer always bad, and can represent beneficial, much-desired change.

Logos

Martin Luther King Jr. employs logos through several syllogisms in the letter to effectively argue that it is one’s moral responsibility to disobey segregation. King guides his readers through a sound line of reasoning, concluding segregation is an unjust law. He first asserts “any law that degrades human personality is unjust”. He followed that statement with the negative effects of Segregation which “distorts the soul and damages the personality” (180). Therefore, the logical conclusion readers come to is that segregation is unjust, for it degrades human personality. It is imperative that Kings does not leave much room for debate on whether or not segregation is a law that should be followed. By equating unjust to an “illegal” law, King is able to switch the discussion from whether or not segregation should be followed to why are people heeding this unjust, even criminal, law. King’s second line of reason begins with the major premise that a law is unjust when it is imposed on a majority of people who did not vote upon that law. Even though black people “constitute a majority of the population, not a single negro [was] registred” to vote (179). Therefore, segregation can not be considered just or “democratically structured”, since it was passed without the approval or participation of the black community, the actual stakeholder in this situation. King goes on to say that disobeying unjust laws is a moral obligation. Using the preceding conclusion that segregation is unjust, disobedience to segregation is a moral responsibility. King’s usage of syllogism does not end there. He then shepherds his readers to another conclusion: that it is a moral obligation to follow Brown v. Board of Education, in which the Supreme Court declared segregation to be illegal and issued desegregation decrees. He states that the Supreme Court decision in Brown V. Board is just , for its a 'man-made code that squares with the moral law or God's law”(179). Because it uplifts the human personality instead of promoting the detrimental racial hierarchy, the decision of Brown V. Board is a just law that people should abide by. King plainly breaking down the logic of disobeying unjust laws, makes it at the very least impossible to ignore the ethical dilemmas faced when pursuing bigoted laws like segregation.

Conclusion

Throughout his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. establishes himself as a legitimate authority in the eyes of his audience, shows the trials his people have gone through, justifies his cause, and argues the necessity of immediate action. By using religious examples which appeal directly to his audience, the preachers, he attempts to gain their support and legitimize his course of action. The overall urgency and call for action in the letter is emphasized by his strong appeals to pathos. His imagery, personal experiences, and appeals to ethos and logos throughout make a strong, well rounded argument. He effectively demonstrates the impact of the trials the African American people have gone through and proves that what they are fighting for is a just cause on both legal and moral grounds. By inspiring sympathy through strong emotional appeals, King brings hope for positive change, that the white clergymen reading his letter will begin to understand the overlying problem and work for change. That is the ultimate goal; to bring about a better world for those under persecution and create an equal future for America as a whole.