UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS & TECHNIQUES OF PERSUASION Flashcards
Underlying Assumptions
Suppositions upon which
an argument is based
ex: “what must we believe if we are
to see the evidence as relevant to the
claim being made?”
Reality assumptions
- Beliefs → what events have taken place, what exists, how things work in world
- Shaped by first-hand experience, conversations & what we read/see
Value assumptions
- Ideals, standards of right & wrong, the way things SHOULD be
- Shaped by family, teachers, friends, religion, culture
- Often resistant to change
How can we evaluate the accuracy of a reality assumption?
Use data/provide new information
How can we evaluate the accuracy of a value assumption?
We can’t & don’t need to
Casual claims
Claims that argue that certain events or factors (causes) are responsible
for creating other events (effects)
- ex: Collecting customer feedback makes companies successful
- Commonly used to understand the world
- BUT…difficult to accept as effects may have rival causes
Casual claim examples
smoking causes cancer
social media causes anxiety and other mental health issues for teenagers
NOTE: a causal claim is contestable, but…
a contestable claim isn’t necessarily causal
3 possible rival causes
- Difference between groups
- Correlation between characteristics (correlation vs causation)
- Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Difference between groups
there could be other differences between the groups
(like golfers are healthier because they have more money)
Correlation between characteristics
- Correlation does not necessarily indicate causation
- Direct Causation = A causing B
- Reverse Causation = Is it also possible that B is causing A?
- Third Factor Causation = A is not causing B, C is causing B
ex: golfers could be living longer cuz they have better diets
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (Fallacy)
After this (post hoc),
therefore (ergo)
because of this (propter hoc)
- Cause due to chronological succession alone
- Such arguments only focus on one factor; fail to take into account other causally relevant factors
- Reasonable direct causal relationship due to chronological succession
- Unreasonable direct causal relationship due to chronological succession
- common in superstitions (E.g. wear blue suit to interview & got job → blue suit now “lucky suit”)
How do you anticipate and counter objections?
- destructive testing of ideas
- discussing and rebutting objections INCREASES your credibility
Negative/Contrary Evidence? →
Show why it is misleading
Rival Cause? →
Show why it is unlikely
Debatable Assumptions?
- Reality Assumption: provide explicit data
- Value Assumption: Show why your
values are worth consideration
How do I Limit my Claim if I Have no Rebuttal?
- Acknowledging limitation makes your writing/speaking more persuasive
- Limit your generalizations (use a qualifier)
- Acknowledge level of probability is not 100%
- Refine or redefine your terms
- Show your reader that you understand the complexity of the issue
Review “they say, I say” templates
What is Rhetoric & how do I Use it Effectively?
- Rhetoric isn’t bad, empty rhetoric is
- Persuasive, appropriate rhetoric is:
- Complete using full clear detail
- Written w/appropriate tone
- Vivid & concrete, not vague or cliche
Logos
appeal to logic, evidence
Ethos
appeal to credibility, authority
Pathos
appeal to emotion, feeling
