What is Ethos Really?

In my experience ethos has always been synonyms with credibility, the reliability of the author of an argument, how well you can believe what someone is saying based on the facts and credibility they can provide; however, when comparing that to the ancient concept of ethos, it is rather less about what you say than how you say it.  Ethos represented character far beyond an individual's personal life--in the book they use the example of the politician’s personal life, how the public is often concerned with their romantic upheavals rather than their political stances and beliefs, at least that’s what gets the most attention most of the time. 

Tying in kairos with the ability to properly implement ethos is vital in achieving as successful argument, because as many rhetoricians argued, a bad man cannot make a good argument, it takes a good man to have a good argument.  Understanding the audience is something that politician unknowingly struggle with today; they assume that if they are attempting to make good in the world then they will be good people, but it is reversed, a good man makes those kinds of decisions and achieves those kind of results.   An individual’s character means everything in a community of people, and it ought to mean everything to himself.

A proof did not always come in the form of concrete fact to the ancients; the ethical proofs that can be provided in order to assist an argument, those that are invented and situated or found.  At times an observation that is discovered can carry more weight than those situated proofs.  Having a good attitude and an appearance of good intention are not the means by which a community determines a rhetor’s integrity, but rather the practice of only speaking well and others knowing that they only speak well.