persuasion and debate theory
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Persuasion and Debate Theory

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 82

Persuasion and Debate Theory - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 120 Views
  • Uploaded on

Persuasion and Debate Theory. Mr. Lyke. What is debate?. Formal method of interactive representational argument Includes Persuasion - which appeals to the emotional responses of an audience Rules - enabling people to discuss and decide on differences within a specific framework.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Persuasion and Debate Theory ' - hunter


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
what is debate
What is debate?
  • Formal method of interactive representational argument
  • Includes
    • Persuasion - which appeals to the emotional responses of an audience
    • Rules - enabling people to discuss and decide on differences within a specific framework
propositional types
Propositional types
  • Value
    • A proposition of value contains a relative term that makes a value judgment
    • Matter under consideration—problematic
      • “X is good/bad.” under given criteria
      • The possession of nuclear weapons is immoral.
propositional types1
Propositional types
  • Policy
    • A proposition of policy evaluates potential courses of action – “Should we do something?”
    • Agent—cupula (should)—action called for
      • Systemic: “The US shouldoutlaw smoking.”
propositional types2
Propositional types
  • Belief
    • All other declarative sentences
propositional characteristics
Propositional characteristics
  • Appropriate to the knowledge, experience, and interests of both speakers and audience.
  • Debatable--that is, not obviously true or false. The statements should involve an honest difference of opinion, with arguments and evidence on both sides.
propositional characteristics cntd
Propositional characteristics cntd.
  • Phrased in the affirmative. Positive statements prevent confusion by making the issue clear-cut.
  • Restricted to only one idea. This policy keeps the debate within narrow limits.
  • Worded clearly. The words should be ones that can be defined exactly, so the debate does not become a matter of semantics
thought systems

“Thought” systems

SKEPTICISM:

“There is no truth”

DOGMATISM

“My source of information could not be wrong”

RELATIVISM

“Everyone has their own version of truth”

CRITICAL THINKING

“The truth exists, though I may not know it…

…yet

socrates dialectical procedure
SocratesDialectical procedure
  • Advance a proposition.
  • Draw out the implications.
  • Note any resulting contradictions.
dialectic
Dialectic
  • Dialectic – discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation
  • Dialectic statements must be concrete
    • Cannot be defined using “relational” words e.g. “like” and “better than”
      • These terms cannot be defined positively (through necessary and sufficient characteristics)
    • They must be defined DIALECTICALLY (via a CRITERIAL ABSOLUTE)
      • A is like B (with respect to C)
      • A is better than B (with respect to C)
factors affecting dialectic
Factors affecting Dialectic

UNCONTROLLABLE FACTORS

1. PUBLICITY 2. REPUTATION 3. DEMOGRAPHY

CONTROLLABLE FACTORS (VERBAL)

  • DOWNGRADING SELF OR SUBJECT
  • USE OF AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES
  • 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF OWN AUTHORITY

CONTROLLABLE FACTORS (NONVERBAL)

  • APPEARANCE
  • Dress
  • Grooming
  • Posture
  • Expression.
  • VOICE
  • Modulation
  • Breathing
  • Fluency
  • Diction
  • DELIVERY
  • Animation
  • Enthusiasm
  • Friendliness
  • Conversationality
dialectic1
Dialectic

The “first principles” which constitute the structure of reason and the denial of which renders discourse meaningless.

These principles cannot be operationally denied from any theoretical perspective and may be reducible to the law of non-contradiction.

They provide the means by which the dialectician can escape the phenomenological circle of his rhetoric and validate the components of his deep rhetoric

slide13

SURFACE

RHETORIC

ACTUAL, EMPIRICAL, RECORDABLE COMMUNICATION OR BEHAVIOR (TALK)

MATERIAL ADDED (UNCONSCIOUSLY) BY THE LISTENER TO COMPLETE THE ENTHYMEME

DEEP

RHETORIC

slide14

SURFACE

RHETORIC

Argument bases

Ultimate terms

(God, Devil)

Pertinences

Resonances

Style

DEEP

RHETORIC

How is this accomplished??

so what
So What!?!

What we know

is affected by

What we learn

which affects

What we do

slide16

Human action involves choice

To say, “I choose A,” is to say

all things considered

that “A”

(the option I elect)

“I believe,

is better than “B”

(all the options I reject.)

But “better than” is a form of “good,” and “good” is the fundamental value term.

Therefore;

All human choice, hence, all human action is value laden. It involves sentiment.

realms of choice
Realms of Choice

1. A person operates according to his/her meaning

2. A person operates through choice.

3. To say “I choose A” is to say, “(I believe, all things considered)

A is better than B.

4. But, “better than” is the comparative form of “good.”

5.All human choice, hence, action, involves value--is “value laden.”

person

realms of choice1
Realms of Choice

order

state

God

aesthetic

political

religious theological

person

senses

Moral ethical

Taste appetite

goal

Etc.

Practical prudential

person

slide19

Law of non-contradiction

“A” is not “not “A”

A thing cannot both “be” and “not be”

at the same time.

law of the excluded middle
Law of the Excluded Middle
  • Every statement is either true or false.
slide21

Test

Determine for oneself if a proposition is true

Proof

Establish the validity of the proposition

Convince

Bring others to believe the proposition is true

proof

PROOF

Anything that leads to assent

That gets the audience to say “YES” to an assertion.

proof1
PROOF

artistic

nonartistic

speaker created

evidence

roadmap notes

“stuff” standing about

If the speaker did not exist, neither would the artistic materials.

Propositions the audience establishes are relatively free of speaker bias

proof2
PROOF

Modes of persuasion used in Speech Communication

ethos

pathos

logos

Personal

Proof

Emotional proof

Sentiment

Intellectual proof (argument) (logic & evidence)

ethos
ETHOS

(ETHICAL PROOF PERSONAL PROOF CREDIBILITY)

audience assessment of the speaker

Classical formulation

character (virtue)

benevolence (good will)

sagacity (wisdom)

trust-worthiness

dynamism (charisma)

Expertise (knowledge)

Modern formulation

slide27

PATHOS

Emotional proof - Sentiment

Includes all those materials and devices calculated to put the audience in a frame of mind suitable for the reception of the speaker\'s ideas

pathos proper sentiment
Pathos:Proper sentiment

Bathos:Sentimentality, loose laughter and unnecessary tears

Must not be confused with

slide29

LOGOS

An appeal toreason:

Argument using

Form (logic)

&

Material (evidence)

syllogism argument
SYLLOGISM (ARGUMENT)

Major premise

if

“A” is “B”

and

Minor premise

if

“C” is an “A”

then

Conclusion

“C” is “B”

VALID FORM

syllogism argument1
SYLLOGISM (ARGUMENT)

Major premise

if

All pigs are green

and

Minor premise

if

Rosie is a pig

then

Conclusion

Rosie is green

Valid form; untrue material

syllogism argument2
SYLLOGISM (ARGUMENT)

Major premise

if

All men aremortal.

All men aremortal.

All men aremortal.

Middle term

and

Major term

Minor premise

if

Socrates is a man.

Socrates is a man.

Socrates is a man.

then

Minor term

Conclusion

Socrates is mortal.

Socrates is mortal.

Socrates is mortal.

Valid form, true material Sound argument

slide33

Hypothetical Syllogism

(very similar to scientific inquiry)

  • The major premise of a hypothetical syllogism is a hypothetical proposition (an “if…then” [antecedent…consequent] statement)
  • The minor premise must affirm or deny the hypothesis or consequent
  • Valid options:
  • A. Affirm the antecedent (the “if” statement)
  • B. Deny the consequent (the “then” or conclusion
  • Invalid options:
  • A. Deny the antecedent
  • B. Affirm the consequent
slide34

If plants are green Then the plants are alive

hypothesis

consequent

The plants are green

Stuff

Living stuff

The plants aren’t green

The plants are alive

The plants aren’t alive

Green plants

Major premise All green plants are alive

Minor premise

Conclusion

slide35

If plants are green Then the plants are alive

hypothesis

consequent

The plants are green

Stuff

Living stuff

The plants aren’t green

The plants are alive

The plants aren’t alive

Green plants

Major premise All green plants are alive

Minor premise

Conclusion

how would you test the validity of the following statements
How would you test the validity of the following statements?
  • Water is composed of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen.
  • CG & E built its first hydroelectric plant in 1911.
  • Slavery is immoral.
slide37

Domains of knowledge

Science

History

Philosophy

Goal of inquiry

Discover eternal, universal natural laws

“capture” particular, spatio-temporally bound event

Discover eternal, universal non-natural principles

Source of knowledge

Experiment involving empirical data

testimony

Dialectical examination

Validation assumption

Data under consideration is articulated via material causation

Event is not logically or materially necessary

Universe is coherent

(logos)

causation
Causation
  • The concept of causation is that you can assign the reason for a result to a specific initiating action
  • There are several issues with causation both positive and negative
  • The most important element of causation is support and analysis
formulations
Formulations
  • If “A” then, necessarily, “B.”
  • If “not A” then “not B.”
  • If “not B” then “not A.”
  • “A” is the generator of “B.”
  • “B” is the inevitable result of “A.”
types of causation
Types of causation
  • Sufficient condition
    • Establish causal chains (to where intervention can alter outcome)
    • Whole chain constitutes sufficiency
  • Necessary condition
    • If B, then A
      • and
    • If not—A then not—B
    • “A” is the presumed causal factor—”B” the event
  • Necessary and sufficient condition
    • If B, then A and if not—A then not—B
    • All variables “A” must align to complete the event “B”
designating factors as causes
Designating factors as causes
  • Triggering factor
  • Unusual factor
  • Controllable factor
    • Factors can also be referred to as events
causal explanation
Causal explanation
  • X: To say: “A caused B” (about particulars)
    • “X” can be coincidental so is not positive explanation
  • Z: “When A occurs (under conditions C) then B occurs”
    • “Z” constitutes a “causal law.” and the grounds of a deductive explanation
method of agreement
Method of Agreement
  • If two or more instances of the phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common…

logically…

  • The circumstance in which alone all the circumstances agree is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon.
the method of differences
The Method of Differences
  • If an instance in which a phenomenon under investigation occurs and and an instance in which it does not occur have every circumstance in common save one…

Logically…

  • That one occurring in the former; the circumstance in which the two instances differ is the effect, or the cause , of the phenomenon.
the joint method of agreement and difference
The Joint Method of Agreement and Difference
  • If two or more instances in which the phenomenon occurs have only one circumstance in common

and

  • Two or more instances in which it does not occur have nothing in common save the absence of that circumstance…

Logically…

  • The circumstance in which alone the two sets of instances differ is the effect, or the cause of the phenomenon.
the method of concomitant variation
The Method of Concomitant Variation
  • If a phenomenon varies in any manner whenever another phenomenon varies in the same manner, it is either a cause or an effect of that phenomenon or is connected with it through some fact of causation.
complications of causation
Complications of Causation
  • Experiment bias
  • Theoretical prevarication
  • Poor operationalization
  • Statistical errors
    • Lack on balance (universality) condition
    • Inappropriate data level
proper understanding requires distinctions between
Proof

Truth

Evidence

Opinion

Fact

Whatever convinces (subjective)

The way things are, objectively—regardless of anyone’s opinion

Nonartistic materials

Claims one believes

Opinions based on empirical data.

Proper understanding requires distinctions between:
slide49
Sign
  • Ratio Cognoscendi (a way of knowing)
  • Uses a symptom or outward mark to prove the existence of something which cannot be directly observed.
reliability
Reliability
  • Infallible (cannot be disproven)
    • Pregnancy is caused by sexual activity
  • Fallible (easily proven wrong)
    • Black clouds will cause rainfall
using signs in proof
Using signs in proof
  • A “sign” must bear a necessary relationship to the object.
  • The reliability of signs is relative to the context.
  • Significations (proof) typically require more than one sign.
examples of sign usage
Examples of sign usage
  • Make abstract ideas concrete
  • They assist documented evidence—
  • They do not substitute for it
types of examples
Types of examples
  • Historical instances
    • Past
    • Current
  • Hypothetical cases
    • Strictly illustrative
    • Non-conclusive
applicability
Applicability
  • Audience must find the example
    • Clearly relevant to point
    • Representative of the matter under discussion
    • Appropriate for the desired conclusion
    • Vivid
    • Timely
evidence
Evidence
  • Non-artistic proof
  • Documentable “stuff found lying about” in books, magazines, etc.
  • The parts of a speech that would exist even if the speaker did not.
advantages of evidence
Advantages of evidence
  • Establish the speaker’s credibility
    • Show respect for audience
    • Show respect for source
  • Borrow the credibility of the source
problems with evidence
Problems with evidence
  • Consumes time
  • Complicates message
  • Fatigues audience
when using evidence
When using evidence:

1.   Give citation (as briefly as possible.)

3. Apply to point.

2.   Read evidence.

slide59

Full argument organization

point

citation

support

evidence

apply to point

transition

slide61

Testimony

Claims by someone besides the speaker.

When using:

  • Quote experts and qualify them.
  • Avoid purely conclusionary material.
  • Don’t use too much (about 1/10 total time)
  • Keep reading as brief as possible.
  • Apply the evidence to the point.
slide62

Statistics

  • Compilation of numerical facts based on a relative number of occurrences
slide63

Statistics

  • Generally, the most effective form of evidence.
  • Probably, the most abused form of evidence.
when using statistics
When using statistics

1. Give source 

 2. Round off, if possible 

3. Relate to audience\'s experience; place the statistics in a context the audience can understand

typically statisticians do not lie
Typically, statisticians do not lie,

but

They may get you to lie to yourself.

visual

Visual

Tricks

And

Distortions

graphic assumptions
Graphic Assumptions

1. The graph occupies the top right quadrant of a graphing axis.

graphic assumptions1
Graphic Assumptions
  • The graph occupies the top right quadrant of a graphing axis.
  • The units on the vertical axis are the same as the units on the horizontal axis
slide74

A

B

A=B

statistics demonstrate correlations
Statistics demonstrate correlations

They cannot demonstrate causation

They can show the significance of causative effects established in other ways.

valid statistical inferences require
Valid statistical inferences require
  • Consistent theory application
  • Random data gathering
  • Ceteris paribus conditions
    • (all other things being equal )
  • The proper level of data
ad