Only one comment to make. When you write "Given the surge of outsider politicians coming to power [...], it seems like established political credibility is less important to voters.", I would be of the oposite opinion. It is because voters do not trust the ethos of "traditional" politicians that they appreciate the ethos of "outsiders", possibly rooted in business acumen or civil society actions. My two cents.
I'd agree with both of you tbh; ethos is about fitting one's presentation to the arena, which is why you see politicians losing their tie in informal settings, or ruffling their hair, or wearing a hard-hat to show they're an 'everyman', or being depicted in business contexts / beer halls etc. (I'm not sure whether women politicians have the same scope of presentations from which to select and still carry credibility.) IIRC, Aristotle included a lot around how we depict ourselves and perform as part of ethos.
An interesting post, Michael, with fantastic images (seriously, I get so confused about what to do when attacked by a bear. I live in paranoia!). Though I will say it hurt my very soul to see the citation of AIT. I realise I've been thoroughly co-opted by the Theory of Constructed Emotions (Feldman Barrett), but it does seem like cool people in the field are moving in this direction - e.g. Koschut's volume on the Power of Emotions in World Politics. That volume doesn't quite make the leap to the body, but that's covered by TCE. I really need everyone to know about it! (But apparently not enough to publish the theory chapter of my thesis - mostly because I have no idea how.) (Also, just imagine how many parentheses that would involve.)
Great post, thank you.
Only one comment to make. When you write "Given the surge of outsider politicians coming to power [...], it seems like established political credibility is less important to voters.", I would be of the oposite opinion. It is because voters do not trust the ethos of "traditional" politicians that they appreciate the ethos of "outsiders", possibly rooted in business acumen or civil society actions. My two cents.
Good point! Ethos is still important, just maybe not the technocratic kind. (For example, career politicians trying to 'look normal').
I'd agree with both of you tbh; ethos is about fitting one's presentation to the arena, which is why you see politicians losing their tie in informal settings, or ruffling their hair, or wearing a hard-hat to show they're an 'everyman', or being depicted in business contexts / beer halls etc. (I'm not sure whether women politicians have the same scope of presentations from which to select and still carry credibility.) IIRC, Aristotle included a lot around how we depict ourselves and perform as part of ethos.
An interesting post, Michael, with fantastic images (seriously, I get so confused about what to do when attacked by a bear. I live in paranoia!). Though I will say it hurt my very soul to see the citation of AIT. I realise I've been thoroughly co-opted by the Theory of Constructed Emotions (Feldman Barrett), but it does seem like cool people in the field are moving in this direction - e.g. Koschut's volume on the Power of Emotions in World Politics. That volume doesn't quite make the leap to the body, but that's covered by TCE. I really need everyone to know about it! (But apparently not enough to publish the theory chapter of my thesis - mostly because I have no idea how.) (Also, just imagine how many parentheses that would involve.)