Explanation: Ethos, Pathos and Logos

I don't think I've explained Ethos properly. Here's a better definition:

Ethos: Ethos is the hardest rhetorical approach to define, because it doesn't translate well into English. John Gage, in The Shape of Reason, defines it as "authority." Ethos does include authority, but it also includes something of charisma and individual character. It is whatever inspires trust in an audience. Basically, ethos involves three traits:
(1) Rhetors must show themselves to be honest individuals of good moral character who sincerely believe what they claim.
(2) Rhetors must show themselves be competent, intelligent individuals who know the material or subject-matter they are talking or writing about.
(3) Rhetors must show themselves to be open-minded individuals who write, not merely out of personal interest, but because they are also concerned about the audience's best interest or well-being.

Pathos: Pathos is the use of language, examples, diction, or images to create an emotional reaction in the reader. The most common types are anger at a social injustice, sympathy for another's misfortune, or laughter at a humorous or illogical state of affair

Logos: There are two types of logical argument, inductive and deductive. In an inductive argument, the reader holds up a specific example, and then claims that what is true for it is also true for a general category. For instance, "I have just tasted this lemon. It is sour. Therefore, all lemons are probably sour." Deductive reasoning works in the opposite manner; it begins with a general or universal rule accepted by most people ("all lemons are sour") and then applies that claim to a specific example. ("That is a lemon. Therefore, it too must be sour.")

http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/logic.html