13 03 pers_logos_15ed_notes

28
PERSUASIVE SPEAKING - LOGOS Chapter 13

Upload: turnercom

Post on 28-Nov-2014

148 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

PERSUASIVE SPEAKING - LOGOS

Chapter 13

Review – Ch 14

Goals & Propositions Organizational Frameworks for speech

III. Nature of PersuasionIV. Elaboration Likelihood Model

V. LogosVI. EthosVII. Pathos

III. Nature of Persuasion

What is Persuasion? Text: Goal is to influence audience

attitudes, beliefs, values and / or behaviors

Aristotle – Proof

Inartistic Proof Research Facts Statistics Examples

Artistic Proof Logos Ethos Pathos

III. Artistic Proof

Logos Reasoning / Argument (speech)

Ethos Credibility (speaker)

Pathos Emotional appeal (audience)

IV. Processing Persuasion (ELM)

How do we respond to persuasive messages? Do we think it through? Do we go with our feelings?

Reading

“UFO cults and Us”

IV. Elaboration Likelihood Model Petty & Cacioppo What is the “Likelihood” that people will

evaluate information in an “Elaborate” way?

What increases the chance people will use critical thinking?

ELM – Two routes

Central route Peripheral route

V. Logos

Two types of Reasoning: Inductive Deductive

Inductive Reasoning

Sherlock Holmes House, MD CSI

Deductive Reasoning

Major Premise: Generally accepted idea minor premise: Specific example of this

idea Conclusion: Proposition / claim

MP, mp, C

Deductive Reasoning

Major Premise: My niece likes pink (idea) minor premise: This doll is pink

(example) Conclusion: She will like this doll

MP or mp is often implied, not stated

Deductive Reasoning

Major premise: (Worldview) American citizens have the right to free

speech Minor premise: (Specific instance)

Person A, a U.S. citizen, says controversial things

Conclusion: Person A has this right

Deductive Reasoning

Major premise: (Worldview) American citizens have the right to free

speech Minor premise: (Specific instance)

Person B, a U.S. citizen, says controversial things of a different sort

Conclusion: Person B should be locked up (?)

Elements of Argument (Toulmin) Claim Support (Data) Warrant

Types of Argument

You can argue from… Sign Example Analogy Causation

Arguing from sign

Claim: It is going to rain Support: I observe dark clouds Warrant: Accepted idea that dark clouds

are a sign of rain

Arguing from sign

Example from UFO reading: Using political parties to draw conclusions

about positions on an issue

Arguing from sign

Tests Do signs generally indicate conclusion? Are there contradictory signs?

Arguing from Example

Claim: It is going to rain Support: On three different dates in the

past few months, similar weather patterns have produced rain

Warrant: What is true in many cases will be true in this case

Arguing from Example

Tests Enough examples Typical examples Negative (opposing) examples

Arguing from Analogy

Claim: School “A” should have XYZ policy Support: School “B” has success with

XYZ policy Warrant: Since “A” and “B” are similar in

many ways, they will also be similar here.

Arguing from Analogy

Tests Are examples similar enough?

“Apples and Oranges”

Arguing from Cause

Claim: Home sales will increase Support: Mortgage interest rates have

dropped Warrant: Lower interest rates are

understood to lead to higher home sales

Arguing from Cause

Tests Are events along sufficient to cause 2nd

event? Are there other factors?

Fallacies

Errors in reasoning Hasty generalization False cause (post hoc, ergo propter hoc) Either – Or (False dilemma) Straw man Ad hominem