Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Chapter 13: Persuasive Presentations (Fallacies (Causal fallacy ("…
Chapter 13: Persuasive Presentations
Persuasion
Limiting the options that are perceived as acceptable
Influencing another person's
Attitudes
Values
Beliefs
Behaviors
Persuasion demands
proof or evidence that the thesis or claim argued steams from sound reasoning
and can be either informal or formal
Persuasion involves
Reinforcing
an attitude, value, belief or behavior
Discontinuing
an attitude, value, belief or behavior
Preventing
an attitude, value, belief . or behavior
Present only ONE side of your position if
Audience favors the advocated position
Your credibility is high
Your role is . expected . to be one sided only
Audience is unlikely to hear the other side
You want audience to take immediate action
Present BOTH sides and REFUTE the opposing side if
Preparation Steps
Analyze the audience
If you don' t know, they might not be interested or understand
Write a position statement
Initial credibility
Sources
Experience
Research topic and determine method for presenting evidences
Determine organization
Claim pattern
Casual pattern
Problem/Solution pattern
Prepare outline
Speaking
Working
Review presentation for ethical violations
PRACTICE
Organizational Patterns
Comparative Advantages pattern
Criteria Satisfaction pattern
Monroe's Motivated Sequence pattern
Attention
Need
Satisfaction
Visualizstion
Action
Fallacies
a false reasoning that occurs when someone attempts to persuade without adequate evidence or with arguments that are irrelevant or inappropriate
Opposite? -> fact
Causal fallacy
"post hoc, ergo propter hoc" (Latin) means "after this, therefore, because of this" -making a faulty casual connection
Example 1: "The decline of morals in this country is caused by excessive government spending."
Example 2: "As long as you . wear this lucky rabbit's foot, you will never have a car accident."
False Dilemma (either/or)
someone who argues that there . are only 2 approaches to a problem
Hasty generalization
a person who reaches a conclusion from too little evidence or nonexistent evidence
Ex: "We don't need mandatory lawn-watering rules in our city because the people I know do their best to conserve water."
Bandwagon
Sweeping Generalization
using red flag words such as "all", "never", "always", and "none"
Ex: all men are trash
Attacking a person
"Ad Hominem" (Latin) attacking irrelevant personal characteristics about the person who is proposing an idea rather than attacking the idea itself
Ex:
Red Herring
False Authority
Slippery Slope
Non Sequitor
your conclusions do not follow your evidence