Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Preparing to Persuade

The ability to think critically is an important basic skill. We are faced with pleas to
change our minds, our beliefs, our ways of doing things and even how we spend our
time and our money. We are faced with thousands of persuasive appeals daily. Every
commercial we see and hear on television, radio, and the Internet is a persuasive
appeal. To avoid being overwhelmed, taken advantage of, and making critical errors in
judgment, we must develop our skills and abilities to analyze the ideas and requests of
others and evaluate the potential outcomes for us.

Whether we are using these skills and abilities to advance a claim of our own to get
others to see our way of thinking or to make an assessment of the appeals of others, we
must develop a critical spirit and keen mind. WE NEED TO KNOW HOW TO
CONSTRUCT ARGUMENTS THAT ARE SOUND AND BASED ON RATIONAL
THOUGHTS AND SOUND DATA.

Arguments are developed around three elements-- the Claim or Proposition, the
Evidence, and the Reasoning Pattern, or Warrant.

Claims or Propositions
Speeches that seek to persuade an audience are usually based on one of three
claims or propositions.

CLAIMS OF FACT -- Asserts that something is or is not the case.


The critical listener will ask these questions to determine the validity of the
claim.
1. By what criteria can we measure the truth or accuracy of the claim?
2. Do the facts fit the criteria?

CLAIMS OF VALUE-- Asserts that something is good or bad, just or unjust, fair
or unfair. Often has a moral value.
The critical listener will ask these questions.
1. By what standards are these judgments being made?
2. How does this item measure up to the accepted standards?
CLAIMS OF POLICY-- Asserts that the recommended course of action should or
should not be approved.
The critical listener will ask these four questions.
1. Is there a need for this policy or course of action?
2. Is the proposal practical or practicable?
3. Do the benefits outweigh the disadvantages?
4. Is this the best possible solution to the problem?
Evidence
There are many types of evidence. When choosing the evidence to support a
specific claim, the speaker should determine what type of evidence will the
audience demand and what specific evidence will generate the desired response.

Some of the best types of evidence are: Facts (as opposed to opinions and
beliefs), Statistics, Comparisons and Contrasts, Testimony on this subject (from
authorities on the subject or witnesses), Examples both actual and hypothetical
and Cause to Effect. The speaker's reputation, goodwill, and knowledge are also
evidence in many cases. In all cases evidence should come from reputable,
recent and reliable sources.

Patterns of Reasoning
The ability to reason accurately from the evidence is probably the most important
single characteristic of an effective speaker. Reasoning has been described as
the detection of relationships. Speakers reason from examples, generalization,
observation, parallel case or causal relation. Also the speaker's ethos, logos, and
pathos are all part of reasoning in argumentation. Four common types of
reasoning are:

1. Inductive reasoning: The thought process in which reasoning moves from the
specific to the general. If evidence indicates that this case, this case, and this
case are true, you reason that in consequence the general principle is true.
However, the validity of inductive reasoning requires checking. Since each
president (each case) of the United States has been a man, does the next
president have to be a man?
2. Deductive reasoning: The thought process in which reasoning moves from
the general to the specific. Aristotle invented the syllogism to express and to test
deductive reasoning. In contemporary discourse, the enthymeme is more likely
to be the basis of the deductive argument. If the general principle is true and
accepted, then is your specific case relevant to the general principle? If so the
argument is valid. However, the validity of the argument must be tested to assure
that the specific case is related to the general principle in significant ways.

3. Reasoning by Analogy: The thought process in which reasoning moves from


the specific to the specific or the general to the general, by comparing or
contrasting two items or two concepts. There are two types of analogies, first is
the literal analogy. You compare two existing entities that are sufficiently similar
in all required aspects and then either compare the benefit of one over the other
or contrast the differences. Ex. Compare the statistics of Drew Brees to Payton
Manning in order to determine which is the better quarterback.

4. Causal Reasoning: The thought process similar to analogy in that reasoning


moves from the specific to the specific or the general to the general. To reason
from cause to effect, the argument would follow this pattern: " If this law passes,
taxes will rise." To reason from effect to cause, the argument would follow this
pattern: "Where there's smoke, there's fire."
The most common faulty causal reasoning is the post hoc fallacy.

Other Impacts on Reasoning


Three other issues that affect the audience's acceptance of an argument should
be considered.
1. Transitions: These show relationships, and relationships are the heart of
reasoning.
2. Audience Motivations: Relate your evidence and reasoning to the listener's
motives, drives, and existing attitudes. Maslow's Hierarchy of needs helps the
speaker determine which motives to address in a given speech.
3. Fallacies in Reasoning: Logical Fallacies, or faulty reasoning, are false or
erroneous statements or invalid or deceptive lines of reasoning. These may occur
inadvertently or on purpose. A good speaker will avoid fallacies and good
listeners will attempt to identify any that occur. Remember that under the right
circumstances, some of the same reasoning may be correct. You have to look
carefully to determine if the reasoning is valid or faulty.

Arrangements or Ordering of the Speech


There are many ways to arrange or order a speech. The choice often
depends on the audience or the particular argument to be presented.
1. Topical Order: This is a good choice when presenting specific
reasons for some suggested action. It is most useful when the
message you want to convey covers several different issues. It
involves the selection of categories of a subject and the development
of each part.
2. Spatial Order: This is a good choice for topics that can be covered
by geographical locations or when the relative size of one part is
related to the overall size of another part.
3. Chronological Order: This is a good choice for issues taken in
historical sequence. It is also used as a "flashback" method.
Sometimes used to describe the past, present and future. It is based
on when events occurred. It focuses on the position of an object in
relation to another object.
4. Stock Issues: May be described as the "pro and con division."
This is the debate format. One side wants to change and one side
wants the status quo. In our legal system, the Defense wants the
status quo and the Prosecution wants change. Here the speaker will
attempt to answer reasonable questions that most people would want
answered before making a decision.
5. Causal Division: This presents either the cause and the effects of
an action, or the effects resulting from some pervious cause. Often
used in Persuasion.
6. Problem-Solution: One of the most frequently used formats in
persuasive speaking. It is a logical way to solve issues. The audience
is systematically led through the problem and shown how the chosen
solution is the most practicable or best possible solution.
7. Monroe's Motivated Sequence: This is another good way to order
certain issues. The speaker starts by getting attention and then giving
a strong need for change. This is followed by a workable solution
called the satisfaction step. This is followed by the visualization of the
success of the solution and finally the action step.
8. Circular Division: This is done by starting with an argument and
showing how that leads to another issue and another and another and
finally back to the first.
9. Refutation: This is a particular argument where the speaker
focuses only on showing why the opponents argument will not work.
This is similar to the closing arguments in a trial.
10. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning: Specific examples leading a
general conclusion or general issues leading to a specific conclusion.
These methods are usual blended in one of then other types of orders.
Organization around a syllogism is deductive.
11. Narrative: This is an argument where the speaker tells a story in
order to get the audience to accept the speakers point of view. It
often is filled with pathos.

S-ar putea să vă placă și