Assignment

Explain the three major elements of a complete argument.

Use evidence, reasoning, and quali ers to develop claims in a persuasive speech.

Apply logos, ethos, pathos, and mythos e ectively in speeches to persuade.

Distinguish between deductive, inductive, causal, and analogical reasoning.

Identify and describe common fallacies in argument. Start with a quick warm-up activity and review the chapter’s learning outcomes. The ability to create a winning argument de nes public speaking as an “art.” But the power of argument also depends on principles embedded in the scienti c method. Chapter T he foundation of persuasive speaking— argument—evolved gradually over the long span of our social history. As our distant ancestors became better and better communicators, they looked to leaders who could persuade them to take particular courses of action. Even before modern language developed, the emerging leaders of our ancient communities were the ones who were best able to convince others to follow them and their ideas—the ones who could argue well. The Greek philosopher Aristotle was the rst to identify and write comprehensively about the role of argument in public communication. Aristotle said that for a democratic society to advance, its political leaders must be able to argue positions that are supported by compelling evidence and delivered skillfully to an audience. Perhaps no one in modern American history accomplished this more e ectively than Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the great civil rights advocate of the last century. Throughout history, the ability to create a winning argument is what best de nes public speaking as an “art.” But science also comes into play. Aristotle wrote that the power of argument also ultimately depends on principles embodied in the scienti c method: the ability to observe the natural world dispassionately and use logic to draw valid inferences (or conclusions) about what is observed. The discipline of Aristotelian thought—especially the crucial role of logic ( logos ) as a path to knowledge—foreshadowed the scienti c revolution of Galileo, Newton, Darwin, and many other scientists who have shaped our understanding of the natural world. The link from science to modern public discourse has become clear: Although other factors are involved, an argument stands the best chance of being convincing if it makes good sense—if it is logical. AP Images/File PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S In common usage, the term argument refers to a disagreement or a confict. But in public speaking, argument does not have negative connotations. Individual arguments are developed to support a persuasive speaker’s position on questions of fact, value, or policy (Chapter 14). Successful speakers formulate their arguments efectively and present them well. An argument makes a claim and backs it up it with evidence and reasoning. 4 In public speaking, a claim is the position or assertion a speaker wants the audience to accept, and evidence refers to the supporting materials—narratives, examples, defnitions, testimony, facts, and statistics—that the speaker presents to reinforce the claim. Reasoning is the method or process used to represent the claim and arrive at the argument’s conclusion. 5Figure 15.1 illustrates the elements of an argument. Efective public speaking, especially persuasive discourse, is artful. Te speaker uses language, delivery style, and presentation media—the tools of contemporary rhetoric—to make an argument as convincing as possible to the audience. Good rhetoric does not make an argument more valid; artful language and the clever use of media can be used to persuade us of falsehoods as well as truths.

But rhetorical skill can defnitely make an argument more persuasive. 6 Tis chapter discusses the elements of argument in detail and how they work together to create the foundation of a successful persuasive speech. You’ll learn how to craf an argument efectively and avoid fallacies in persuasive speaking.

Claims go beyond facts and other supporting materials to propose conclusions based on the evidence presented. For example, a speaker might say, “Video games are addictive.” That is a claim or a position the speaker is taking. The speaker might then present scientific studies to support that claim. But the claim “Video games are addictive” is still an inference based on the results of those studies. So claims require that listeners make a leap from what is known—the evidence—to some conclusion. 7 Claims lay the groundwork for the argument that makes up your thesis. Tey respond to basic questions about your topic and the position you take. Claims answer the question, “What is the speaker asserting?” As you develop your speech, consider the questions your topic raises and how you might respond to them. How you answer those questions will help you identify the claims you’ll make in your speech and reveal your position on the topic. Table 15.1 provides an example of the questions a speaker might ask about a speech on paying collegiate student athletes in the United States and the claims that correspond with those questions. Read, highlight, and take notes online.

evidence Supporting materials—narratives, examples, de nitions, testimony, facts, and statistics—that a speaker presents to reinforce a claim.

reasoning The method or process used to link claims to evidence. What Makes Up an Argument?

Using Claims E ectively Figure . Elements of an Argument EVIDENCEsupportingmaterials CLAIMposition orassertion REASONING method orprocess Source : Adapted from Toulmin, S. E. ( ). The uses of argument (updated ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

argument Presenting claims and supporting them with evidence and reasoning.

claim A position or assertion that a speaker wants an audience to accept. Chapter Understanding Argument Types of Claims Arguments include two types of claims: conclusions and premises. Te conclusion is the primary claim or assertion a speaker makes. A premise gives a reason to support a conclusion. Both conclusions and premises are claims, but premises are smaller claims that lead up to a conclusion—the central claim or position the speaker promotes. 8 For example, in a speech supporting new nuclear power plant construction, Eileen Claussen, founder of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, 9 ofered one conclusion and three premises as support: PREMISE : Climate change is real. PREMISE : Protecting the global climate is necessary. PREMISE : All forms of energy have problems. CONCLUSION: Nuclear power should continue to be part of the solution to climate change. For audience members to agree with the conclusion, they must agree with all the premises leading up to it. If they find fault with one premise, they’re highly unlikely to support the conclusion. Specifc words, either implied or stated, ofen identify premises and conclusions. Words indicating a premise include because, whereas, since, on account of, and due to. Words indicating a conclusion include therefore, consequently, and so, thus, and accordingly. Tink of the relationship between premises and conclusions in this way: Because (premise 1), because (premise 2), and because (premise 3), therefore (conclusion). Claussen asserted that because climate change is real, because protecting the environment is necessary, and because all forms of energy have problems, it is therefore right to create a role for nuclear energy in the national energy policy. Although because and therefore were unstated, Claussen made the relationship between her premises and conclusion clear. Table 15.2 presents additional examples of premises and conclusions. conclusion A primary claim or assertion.

premise A claim that provides reasons to support a conclusion. Table . Questions and Claims for Speech on Paying College Athletes Topic Question Claim Why should major sport college athletes be paid? These athletes generate huge pro ts for their universities. Aren’t these athletes already compensated? Athletic scholarships do not provide a su cient level of compensation for the total cost of attending school. Don’t the athletes receive a valuable free education and career opportunities? Colleges and universities fail to graduate an alarming number of their student athletes. Very few become professionals, and many su er debilitating injuries. How do we know paying athletes will improve the situation? Authoritative, objective studies show that reform would create measurable bene ts for the athletes and their schools. Prochasson frederic/Shutterstock.com If the premise of an argument stipulates that all forms of energy have problems, is that su ciently convincing? Or would the severity of potential problems need to be taken into account? PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S Sometimes an argument’s premises or conclusion are implied rather than stated. Tese kinds of arguments, called enthymemes ,assume members of the audience will fgure out the premise or conclusion on their own. Enthymemes depend on the audience’s social information or knowledge to complete the argument. 10 For example, in a speech on a question of policy about downloading music from the Internet, the speaker might argue: PREMISE: Downloading music without payment or permission is against the law. CONCLUSI ON: Don’t download copyrighted music illegally. Tis basic argument leaves out one premise: It is immoral to download copyrighted music without payment or permission because it amounts to stealing someone else’s property.

But there’s no need for the speaker to say that because the audience already knows it. Speeches on questions of fact or value ofen leave the conclusion unstated. In a speech on trafc congestion, for example, the speaker might include these premises: PREMISE f: Tra c congestion in our city wastes time. PREMISE : Tra c congestion in our city wastes resources. PREMISE : Tra c congestion in our city increases pollution. Te unstated conclusion is that something should be done about trafc congestion.

But as this is a speech addressing a question of fact, the speaker is concerned only with whether or not something is true (or false), not with taking some kind of action. An enthymeme invites audience participation because listeners mentally fll in the missing parts of the argument, facilitating a dialogue between the speaker and the audience. 11 Encouraging these kinds of thought processes can give the audience a better understanding of the topic and a more favorable view of the speaker’s argument. 12 Qualifying Claims To accept a claim, an audience must view it as reasonable. Because claims are assertions, they can always be challenged. Some claims, such as “smoking causes cancer” and “a college education leads to a better job,” are quite easily supported. enthymemes An argument in which a premise or conclusion is unstated.

Table . Examples of Premises and Conclusions Topics Visual Ergonomics Globalization and Labor Online Dating Services Premises .Poor visual ergonomics when using a desktop, laptop, or tablet computer causes eyestrain.

.Poor visual ergonomics when using a desktop, laptop, or tablet computer leads to neck and shoulder problems. .Globalization allows for the free movement of goods between countries.

.Globalization allows for the free movement of services between countries.

.Globalization allows organizations to locate freely to other countries. .In today’s world, single people are too busy to join clubs and organizations to meet other singles.

.Today, interacting with people online is a normal way to communicate. Conclusion Improving visual ergonomics is essential for the health and safety of desktop, laptop, and tablet computer users. Globalization should also allow for the free movement of individual workers between countries. Online dating services are a practical way to meet romantic partners in today’s world. Chapter Understanding Argument Tose claims are feasible. But others, such as “U.S. employers don’t provide adequate health insurance for their employees” or “Hunting whales does not impact their long-term survival rates,” are not so widely accepted. Tey are “de-feasible”—they could be shown to be wrong. 13 Even topics that seem completely uncontroversial are not always without question. By the 17th century, science had proved Earth revolves around the sun, but 20 percent of Americans today still believe the sun revolves around Earth. 14 Quali ers De ned Qualifers provide a way to make your claims more reasonable to an audience. A qualifer indicates the scope of the claim with words such as probably, likely, ofen, and u s u a l ly. Tese words help you stay away from indefensible assertions or claims that must hold up in every case. Qualifers answer the question “How strong is the claim?” For example, instead of claiming “Major airline outsourcing of plane maintenance increases the number of plane accidents,” you might say, “Major airline outsourcing of plane maintenance likely increases the number of plane accidents.” Here you acknowledge that outsourcing probably increases accidents, but you’re not defnitely sure. Tere may be other factors leading to an increase in accidents, or it may be that accidents haven’t increased at all.

Figure 15.2 shows how a qualifer fts in with the elements of argument.

Why Use Qualifers? As a persuasive speaker, you want to anticipate alternative assertions or claims related to your topic by acknowledging and carefully refuting objections or diferent points of view in your speech. Considering other claims lets audience members know you are not just single-minded about the topic.

Acknowledging positions held by audience members that difer from your view shows you understand their perspective, even if you don’t agree with it. Tis helps you establish a respectful and productive connection with your listeners. 17 For instance, Eileen Claussen used this strategy in her speech advocating construction of new nuclear power plants. Claussen is well aware that many people, including some environmental groups, oppose further development of nuclear power. Afer claiming that “nuclear power could make a substantial contribution to our eforts to reduce greenhouse gasses,” she said, However, there are other things we can’t ignore. And these are the potential problems associated with the expanded use of nuclear power in this country and around the world…. She pointed out that the main objections to nuclear power today are the safety of the power plants and the storage of nuclear waste. To put those problems into perspective, she also briefy discussed the obstacles posed by wind and solar power—public opposition to huge wind farms and solar power’s relatively low and intermittent power production. Te strength of her argument, therefore, rests not only on the evidence she presents and the reasoning she uses to weave her ideas together but also in the way she defly raises objections to her position and then refutes possible counterarguments. Similarly, a speech designed to convince an audience that globalization helps poor countries raise their standard of living will be stronger if the speaker acknowledges S PEA K ING O F ... Images and the Naturalistic Enthymeme Not all claims are expressed with words; some claims involve images. For example, advertisers often use images to advance claims that you should buy their products or services. Soft drink ads, for instance, typically show individuals or groups laughing and enjoying themselves. The claims are Premise : Everyone likes to have fun. Premise : Drinking this soft drink is one way to have fun. Premise : If you drink this soft drink, you’ll have fun. Conclusion: You should buy this soft drink. Yet no one has to say anything in the ad—you know how to interpret those visual claims based on your social and cultural experiences. One key reason that visual claims work so well is the naturalistic enthymeme —audiences assume that unless there’s evidence to the contrary, a camera captures a realistic and natural view of what they would see. Of course, when an image is clearly altered, as with computer-generated imagery in photos, video, or lm, the naturalistic enthymeme does not hold true. But even when viewers know images have been staged, as with the soft drink commercials, they still tend to assume that the images represent something real—the rst step in visual persuasion. quali er A word or phrase that clari es, modi es, or limits the meaning of another word or phrase. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S that globalization has also widened the gap between rich and poor in many countries.

By voicing alternative claims, the speaker gains the trust of the audience for being fair.

When speakers ignore or hide information they disagree with or try to mislead the audience about difering viewpoints, they behave unethically and undercut their own position on the topic.

Figure . Elements of an Argument with Quali er Source: Adapted from Toulmin, S. E. ( ). The uses of argument (updated ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. EVIDENCEsupportingmaterials CLAIMposition orassertion QUALIFIERmoderatesassertion REASONING method orprocess A claim answers the question “What is the speaker asserting?” Evidence answers the question “What is the speaker’s support for the assertion?” Evidence provides the foundation for your claims. In presenting evidence to support a claim, the persuasive speaker relies on some combination of the four types of appeals that were introduced in Chapter 1. Tese appeals and the kinds of evidence usually associated with them are summarized in Table 15.3. Logos: Appeals to Logic Logical appeals, or logos, can be a particularly persuasive type of appeal when presented well. Te nature of logical appeals is data driven and stems from the world of science and rationality. Audiences expect qualifed public speakers to use logical appeals in their speeches for most topics. 18 Using Evidence Efectively Table . Types of Appeals Appeal Brief De nition Example Logos Logical proof Veri able facts and statistics Ethos Speaker’s credibility References to own expertise on topic Pathos Emotional proof A humorous quote or story Mythos Cultural beliefs and values A well-known fable or morality tale Chapter Understanding Argument Factual claims and evidence are always subject to interrogation. Audience members naturally question the legitimacy of what they hear, especially when they are unfamiliar with the topic or disagree with the position taken by the speaker. Tey ask themselves, “Do the speaker’s claims, evidence, and reasoning make sense?” Te power of logical appeals therefore relies on the audience believing that the argument made by the speaker is truthful, reasonable, and supported by strong factual evidence. Although logical appeals typically are associated with valid facts and statistics, defnitions and testimony may also ft this category of evidence. Generally, logical evidence is verifable. For example, listeners can research the scientifc facts a speaker presents or look up an historical event the speaker describes.

Using Logical Appeals When using logical appeals, efective speakers gather up- to-the-minute statistical data, facts, defnitions, or expert opinions. For instance, a just-released poll of Americans’ attitudes favoring congressional reform would add considerable weight to an argument calling for changes in campaign fnancing laws. A damaging new report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration would bolster an argument against consumption of highly cafeinated energy drinks. By demonstrating the currency of research you cite on your topic, you’ll earn your audience’s respect and keep its members listening to you. Your audience must be willing to listen carefully and comprehend the logical evidence you present. Long lists of facts and statistics can overwhelm listeners and cause them to lose interest. Good speakers fnd ways to present logical appeals in ways that are not dry and boring. Speakers should: Not apologize for presenting concise statistical or other fact-based information.

Make the data interesting by connecting the factual information to the needs and interests of the audience. Integrate logical appeals with other kinds of appeals into the argument. Avoid jargon and overly-scientifc language when describing quantitative information. Use presentation media to complement, not just repeat, factual information that is presented orally. Logical appeals and presentation media were combined efectively by Dr. Nora D. Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, in her speech “Drug Addiction: Free Will, Brain Disease, or Both?” 19 She presented her speech to city residents at a town hall meeting in Los Angeles. In this part of her speech, she focused on her claim that drug addiction is a brain disease: Drug addiction is a developmental disease. What do we mean by that? What we’ve learned from many years of epidemiological studies is drug addiction develops during these periods of our lives, during adolescence and early adulthood. Tis is a graph [on a digital slide] that actually describes at what age individuals develop, at frst, a dependence on marijuana. Similar graphs occur for cocaine, nicotine, and alcohol. You can see the peak in this case is around age eighteen. By age twenty- fve, if you have not become addicted to marijuana the likelihood that you will do so is very minimal. It’s not zero but it’s very minimal. 20 Volkow presented data from a large number of studies to support her claim. She used a digital slide to show the statistics, and then explained in clear, nontechnical terms what the statistics mean to the audience. logical appeals Use of rational thought based on logic, facts, and analysis to in uence an audience; also known as logos. A. Ramey/PhotoEdit Presenting veri able evidence in a thought-provoking and easily understandable way increases the power of your logical appeals. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S Ethos: Appeals to Speaker Credibility Te efectiveness of appeals to speaker credibility , or ethos , rests on the degree to which the audience perceives the speaker as competent, trustworthy, dynamic, and likeable—the speaker’s ethos. Te elements of speaker credibility were discussed in detail in Chapter 5. As you develop your argument for a persuasive speech, remember that it is the audience’s perceptions of your credibility that matters. Te speaker’s job is to create that favorable impression. Using Appeals to Speaker Credibility Perceived competence or expertise on the topic has a direct positive impact on a speaker’s persuasiveness. If audience members believe you’re an expert on your subject matter, you’re far more likely to convince them.

But speaker credibility also depends on the degree to which listeners trust and feel personally connected to you. If you haven’t established a good relationship with your listeners, expertise alone will not convince them. 21 Te degree to which an audience fnds a topic personally relevant also infuences your persuasiveness as a speaker. 22 Even when audience members consider the source of a message to be competent and trustworthy but fnd the subject uninteresting, they judge the speaker to be not very persuasive. Similarly, if audience members don’t think the topic applies to them, they don’t pay much attention to it. Fortunately, a dynamic, engaged delivery of the speech can remedy these potential problems. Your sincere enthusiasm for the topic and your ability to relate your topic to the audience’s interests will keep your listeners on track with your argument. How you frame your argument is key. Telling people what they will gain from your proposal, not what you personally think about it, works best. Build a new library on campus? Specifcally, how will it beneft your audience? Decrease funding for the Department of Defense? What does your audience gain? In favor of a high-speed rail system in your state? How would that help individual members of your audience? In a persuasive speech titled “Te Power of Introverts” author Susan Cain called for greater understanding and appreciation of people like her who naturally direct their thoughts and interests inward more than outward. 23 She proposed specifc behaviors people can take to accomplish that goal. A third to half of the population are introverts … so even if you’re an extrovert yourself, I’m talking about your coworkers and your spouses and your children and the person sitting next to you right now—all of them are subject to this bias that is pretty deep and real in our society. Extroverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereas introverts feel at their most alive and their most switched-on and their most capable when they’re in quieter low-key environments … but our most important institutions, our schools and our workplaces, are designed mostly for extroverts. Cain then asked her audience to take three positive steps to develop the power of introversion. First, “Stop the madness of constant group work.” She encouraged all her listeners to learn how to work independently with more privacy, freedom, and autonomy.

Tat gives introverts the space they need to create and produce original ideas. It helps extroverts engage in productive deep thought, too. Second, “Go out to the wilderness.” It’s not necessary to build a log cabin, but by eliminating constant social distractions, people can “get into their heads a little more ofen.” And third, “Take a good look at what’s inside your own suitcase and why you put it there.” Extroverts have little trouble showing of the things they love to do—party or skydive, for instance. But introverts should show of the introspective lifestyle they represent, too: … because the world needs you and it needs the things you carry. So I wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speak sofly. Tank you. appeals to speaker credibility Creating a perception of the speaker as competent, trustworthy, dynamic, and likeable to in uence an audience; also known as ethos. Chapter Understanding Argument Susan Cain skillfully appealed to everyone in her audience. She asked the more outgoing people in the group to respect and learn from introverts. She reinforced the less outgoing members of her audience by praising their personality while encouraging them to modestly share the personal rewards and great ideas that can be produced by private, inward thinking.

Pathos: Appeals to Emotion Emotional appeals ,or pathos , rely on emotional evidence and the stimulation of feelings to infuence an audience. Speakers typically use human interest stories, personal examples, and human testimony when appealing to our emotions. Emotional appeals alone seldom work to convince an attentive audience, yet when used in conjunction with other types of appeals they can win over even skeptical listeners. 24 Appeals to emotion are especially efective when they tap into the audience’s beliefs and needs, call up personal associations with the topic, and help listeners identify with and recall the speaker’s message. 25 Te fundamental, bottom-up principle of human evolution applies here. 26 According to social psychologist Abraham Maslow, humans are motivated by fve types of needs, beginning with the most basic requirement—sheer survival. 27 Physiological needs are those necessary for our body to function, including food, water, and sleep. Safety needs are associated with the desire to feel free from harm. Love/belonging needs include wanting to feel part of a group and loved by others. Esteem needs focus on our status and having others recognize our accomplishments. Self-actualization needs are concerned with personal growth and self-fulfllment. You’re motivated to fulfll your needs in a hierarchical order, satisfying more basic needs before progressing to higher-order ones ( Figure 15.3 ).But no one does this alone. You interact emotionally and connect with others to satisfy your needs. For example, you depend on others to help you feel safe and loved. Even obtaining basic needs such as food and water requires the help of others. 28 Using Emotional Appeals Telling a story channels emotion and makes it persuasive. Te speaker and the listener create the positive efect together. Te co-created narrative encourages audience members to relate to ideas and individuals with whom they might not otherwise connect. 30 A touching story about the struggle of a local family to survive the winter might help an audience overcome the idea that real poverty doesn’t exist in America. A speaker who recounts the agonizing details of a dying loved one could open minds about doctor-assisted suicide. A heartwarming tale of a young girl who emotional appeals Use of emotional evidence and stimulation of feelings to in uence an audience; also known as pathos. Figure . Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs self-actualization esteem love /b elonging safety physiological PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S volunteered time to help immigrant families adjust to life in her city might encourage others to do the same. Describing how a college football player’s disability was caused by repeated concussions might inspire the audience to support stricter safety measures for the sport. Persuasive speakers ofen use presentation media to help elicit emotion. For example, to support the claim that your community needs a new theater, you might show slides or a short video clip of an especially powerful performance by the local theater group, presented in its current dilapidated venue. Digital slides of unwanted pets waiting for adoption at the Humane Society can stir feelings of sympathy and buttress the claim that all pets should be spayed or neutered. Emotional appeals must do more than stimulate an emotional response. Such appeals must serve as evidence— direct support for your claim. When you tell a story, defne a term, recite a quote, or show a photograph, you want to be sure you are appealing to your audience’s emotions in ways that advance your claim. As with any form of evidence included in your persuasive speech, an emotional appeal must be relevant to your topic and appropriate for your audience.

Mythos: Appeals to Cultural Beliefs Telling original stories allows speakers to connect with listeners by arousing their emotions. But retelling existing stories can be very persuasive, too. Appeals to cultural beliefs , or mythos , rely on values and beliefs embedded in familiar cultural narratives or stories to infuence an audience. All cultures have defning narratives. Creation myths, folk tales, parables, folk songs, legends, corridos (Spanish-language ballads), and literature all help cultural groups form coherent identities that are passed from one generation to the next. 31 By referring to these cultural narratives in their presentations, speakers can forge a common bond with their audiences. But to be persuasive, the cultural stories used by the speaker must also create a positive impression for the argument. For example, the myth of the American hero who does good deeds, works hard, and triumphs over misfortune is deeply engrained in our culture. 32 Stories related to this mythic fgure tap into our cultural beliefs about helping others, being industrious, and persevering in the face of adversity. A speaker who can tie the thesis of the speech to this kind of traditional mythology improves the chances the argument will be accepted. Te “immigrant makes good in America” myth has been adopted by many politicians as they tell the story of their ancestors’ triumph over hardship. Tey then link their political platform to that story. For conservative politicians, the cultural appeal might be that learning English, getting an education, starting a small business, and relying mainly on self and family are the key to fnancial success in America.

Te argument they make in their public speeches, for instance, might be to support policies that reduce taxes, downsize government, and limit welfare. Progressive candidates, on the other hand, might tell a similar story of their family’s origins in America but interpret success more as a community efort where government plays a positive role. So paying fair taxes, supporting public education, and providing social services—these can be linked to the same mythology used by conservatives but to support an opposing argument about policy.

Do Myths Have to Be True? Cultural myths can be verifably true or fctional. Tere are lots of true accounts of American heroes and plenty of successful immigrants whose appeals to cultural beliefs Use of values and beliefs embedded in cultural narratives or stories to in uence an audience; also called mythos. Getty Images Sport/Getty Images Emotionally gripping stories of the devastating e ects of concussions have led to greater public awareness and changes in the rules of football. Chapter Understanding Argument struggles actually happened, for instance. But sometimes myths are fully or partly made up. Tat doesn’t make them less powerful symbolically or necessarily less efective as evidence. Te audience doesn’t even have to be personally familiar with the myth. To be efective, however, the myth must resonate with the audience’s overall sense of the culture. Te myth can then be used to advance the speaker’s argument. For example, consider the West Virginia legend of “John Henry, the Steel Driving Man.” Te original story was turned into a folk song that has been recorded by dozens of artists from Woody Guthrie to Bruce Springsteen. Te story describes the physical prowess of a man born a slave in 1840. 33 Freed afer the Civil War, he went to work for the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad driving steel spikes into the rocky Appalachian countryside to lay tracks. A thousand men died trying to drill their way through the rough mountainous terrain. But John Henry kept drilling tirelessly with a 14-pound hammer and could sometimes go as far as 10 or 12 feet in a single day. Ten one day a salesman came along to the camp. He had a steam- powered drill and claimed it could out-drill any man. Well, they set up a contest then and there between John Henry and that there drill. Te foreman ran that newfangled steam-drill. John Henry, he just pulled out two 20-pound hammers, one in each hand. Tey drilled and drilled, dust rising everywhere. ... At the end of 35 minutes, John Henry had drilled two 7-foot holes—a total of 14 feet, while the steam drill had only drilled one 9-foot hole. John Henry held up his hammers in triumph! Te men shouted and cheered. Te noise was so loud, it took a moment for the men to realize that John Henry was tottering. Exhausted, the mighty man crashed to the ground, the hammer’s rolling from his grasp. ... A blood vessel had burst in his brain. Te greatest driller in the C&O Railroad was dead. How might a speaker today use the legend of John Henry as cultural evidence for an argument? One could make the point, for example, that even though a machine-based, impersonal industrial society (represented by the steam drill) may win out in the end, the spirit and willpower of every single human being can never be diminished. Te other side of the issue could also be argued: Try as we may to resist the dehumanizing trend, automation and industrial development make many kinds of manual labor unnecessary.

Don’t kill yourself: Adapt to new technology when the inevitable confronts you. Te skilled speaker adapts cultural beliefs to ft the specifc purpose of the persuasive speech.

Guidelines for Using Evidence in Argument Follow these guidelines for using evidence efectively in your persuasive speech: Keep your evidence relevant to your topic. Your audience must be able to grasp quickly and clearly how the evidence you present supports your claim. For example, if you wanted your audience to support a policy of testing elderly drivers more frequently, you would cite statistics concerning the role of advanced age as a factor in causing accidents. You might show how easy it is for the elderly to renew their licenses without having to pass a driving test for many years. But you would not mention other kinds of problems encountered by elderly people. Every piece of evidence you include must directly support your argument. AP Images/The Register-Herald, Dayton Whittle The familiar cultural myth of “John Henry, the Steel Driving Man” is commemorated near Talcott, West Virginia. The statue helps legitimize and perpetuate the myth. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S Draw your evidence from highly credible sources. Credible evidence comes from identifable, respected sources. If you want to demonstrate the wide gap in pay between chief executive ofcers (CEOs) and their corporate employees, for example, provide data about average executive and workers’ incomes available from the U.S. Labor Department. When conducting interviews about any topic, be sure to choose individuals who are truly experts on your topic—then make your interviewee’s impressive credentials clear to your audience during your speech. Select evidence from diverse sources. Integrating evidence from a variety of sources provides a stronger foundation for your claims, shows you’ve done your research, and enhances your credibility. For example, in a speech advocating a ban on personal freworks, you could cite state and local statistics on freworks-related injuries and property damage, interview the fre chief, and present supportive facts from areas where such a ban is in place. Incorporate evidence addressing multiple types of appeals. Speeches that include only one type of evidence seldom succeed in persuading the audience. Employing logical appeals, appeals to the speaker’s credibility, emotional appeals, and appeals to cultural beliefs provides a broad foundation of evidence to support your claims. Tell the story of someone who was hurt emotionally by a romantic Internet hoax, for example, and then use credible statistics to demonstrate the extent of the problem. You could also add testimony from expert authorities about how fast attraction to an unscrupulous online “friend” can develop. Juli Hansen/Shutterstock.com In his bid to become president, Bernie Sanders constantly pointed out the huge di erences in pay between bosses and workers in the United States, and how almost all new wealth created in America goes to the top percent. Reasoning is the method or process speakers use to link their evidence with their claims.

Claims answer the question “What is the speaker asserting?” and evidence answers the question “What is the speaker’s support for the assertion?” Reasoning then answers the question “How are the support and assertion connected?” Reasoning provides the bridge between the claim and the evidence, indicating to the audience why the evidence presented should be accepted as support for the claim. Although many types of reasoning exist, this section discusses those most relevant to persuasive speaking.

Table 15.4 summarizes the types of reasoning. Using Reasoning E ectively Chapter Understanding Argument Deductive Reasoning In deductive reasoning , the speaker argues from a general principle to a specifc instance or case. Persuasive speakers apply deductive reasoning to categories of people, objects, processes, and events, claiming that what applies to the group also applies to the individual: “Compact fuorescent light bulbs save energy and last longer. Te light bulb I bought is compact fuorescent, so it will save energy and last longer.” With deductive reasoning, if the general principle is true, the specifc instance must be true as well. You use deductive reasoning in everyday life. For example, you might read research that shows the best way to learn a second language is through immersion learning—where you are permitted to speak only the language you are trying to learn.

You reach the conclusion that you should enroll in such a course locally or study abroad.

Here you’re reasoning from the general—people who successfully learn a second language—to the specifc—yourself. Deductive reasoning relies on formal logic and most commonly follows this pattern: major premise (general condition), minor premise (specifc instance), and conclusion.

With this form of reasoning, also called a syllogism , both premises must hold true for the conclusion to be true. Here are some examples. deductive reasoning Reasoning from a general condition to a speci c case.

syllogism A form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, minor premise, and conclusion. Table . Types of Reasoning Type Brief De nition Strengths Weaknesses Deductive From general principle to speci c case Relies on established formal logic Invalid premises leading to false conclusions Inductive From speci c examples to general principle Visualizes and personalizes argument Lack of representation, su ciency, relevance Causal One event causes another Useful for explanation and prediction Incorrect cause–e ect link Analogical Draw similarities between two distinct cases Links the unfamiliar with the familiar Ignores key di erences MAJ OR PREMISE: All triathletes are in excellent physical condition. MIN OR PREMISE: Taylor is a triathlete. CONCLUSI ON: Taylor is in excellent physical condition. MAJ OR PREMISE: All accredited colleges and universities must go through a rigorous assessment process for certi cation. MIN OR PREMISE: My college is accredited. CONCLUSIO N: My college went through a rigorous assessment process. MAJ OR PREMISE: No one in our family missed the reunion. MIN OR PREMISE: Afarin is part of our family. CONCLUSI ON: Afarin did not miss the reunion. MAJ OR PREMISE: Citizens may rightfully overthrow a tyrannical government. MIN OR PREMISE: The king of Great Britain’s rule in the American colonies is a tyrannical government. CONCLUSI ON: The citizens of the American colonies may rightfully overthrow the king of Great Britain’s government in the colonies. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S Validity of Premises To successfully employ an argument based on deductive reasoning, persuasive speakers must demonstrate the validity of their major and minor premises with supporting evidence, then work their way toward the conclusion. If speakers do this well, listeners cannot easily refute the argument.

Consider the following example from a student speech advocating a ban on smoking in all public places: TOPIC: Smoking Ban in All Public Places GENERAL PURP OSE: To persuade SPECIFIC PURP OSE: To convince my audience that smoking should be banned in all public areas in our state THESIS: Smoking should be banned in all public areas throughout our state because secondhand smoke harms nonsmokers. MAJ OR PREMISE: One obligation of the state is to keep individuals safe from harm in public places. MIN OR PREMISE: Smoking in public causes harm to nearby nonsmokers. CONCLUSI ON: Smoking should be banned in all public places in our state. For the audience to accept the conclusion that smoking should be banned in all public places, the speaker must frst show that (1) the state is responsible for protecting people from harm when they’re out in public and (2) secondhand smoke harms nonsmokers. Supporting the major premise may pose a challenge, because the state government cannot protect individuals from all forms of harm. For example, driving, cycling, or walking on a road can be dangerous. Because roads can’t be removed, states can only develop laws and regulations that make roads safer, though never completely safe. For the minor premise, the speaker must demonstrate the magnitude of the harm. Research indicates a strong link between secondhand smoke and several diseases. 34 Still, the speaker’s evidence must convince the audience that the minor premise is true. Once the audience accepts both premises, the conclusion becomes logically apparent.

Validity of Reasoning For deductive reasoning to be valid, the premises and conclusion must be true, as we saw in the previous examples. Sometimes, however, premises do not guarantee a true conclusion. In those cases, the argument is invalid. 35 Consider the following syllogism: Tribune News Service/Getty Images In deductive reasoning, conclusions must be based on valid premises, like restrictions on hoverboards (conclusion) based on the proven danger of ery accidents (valid premises). Chapter Understanding Argument MAJ OR PREMISE: Reducing stress helps students get good grades. MIN OR PREMISE: Playing video games reduces stress. CONCLUSI ON: Playing video games helps students get good grades. Te speaker may be able to fnd evidence supporting the major and minor premises.

And for some audience members, the conclusion may also hold true. But for many others, playing video games wastes time that could be spent preparing for tests, writing papers, or doing other things that help ensure good grades. Terefore, the conclusion that playing video games will help students get good grades is not proven. It may be true for some people, but other determining factors limit the conclusion’s more general truth. In this case, the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises, so the argument is invalid. In persuasive speaking, there are two keys to applying deductive reasoning when linking claims to evidence: 1. Te speaker must have sufcient supporting evidence to convince the audience that the general condition (major premise) and specifc instance (minor premise) are true or correct. 2. Te speaker must have sufcient supporting evidence to show that the conclusion is the correct one based on the premises. Inductive Reasoning Speakers use inductive reasoning when they support a claim with specifc instances or examples. Also called reasoning by example ,inductive reasoning asks the audience to accept a general claim based on a few cases or even just one case. People naturally think inductively, using their own experiences to draw conclusions about the world. 36 Suppose you practice a speech for your public speaking class in front of friends and get more out of the experience than when you only practiced by yourself. Based on that single experience, you decide that practicing with an audience is probably always more productive than practicing alone. In this case, you applied inductive reasoning. When speakers use inductive reasoning to make their arguments, they rely on the principle of probability—that the evidence they present in their argument leads to a conclusion that is probably correct. Inductive reasoning depends on the quality of the evidence presented and the way speakers make sense of it.

Sampling Quality How do you know when you have enough evidence when reasoning inductively? You can never know for sure. Unlike deductive reasoning or formal logic, where you’re certain of your conclusion, inductive reasoning relies on probability—the idea that the conclusion is likely true. So your task as a persuasive speaker is to present enough evidence to show that your position has a high probability of being correct. But it’s more than a numbers game. A small number of examples that represent a population well can make a much stronger case than a large number of examples that only represent a portion of the population. If you were arguing, for instance, that students on your campus should support building a new student center and you interviewed only students who live in campus dormitories you wouldn’t have an appropriate sample. But if you interviewed a cross-section of students who live in dorms, sororities, fraternities, apartments of campus, and at home with their spouses or parents you would have much greater confdence in reasoning from those specifc cases to the general student population. inductive reasoning Supporting a claim with speci c cases or instances; also called reasoning by example. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S Inductive reasoning stimulates human emotion in a way that deductive reasoning rarely does. One strong example—a case study of a severely autistic child, for example— or one compelling story—the devastating efect that gang violence had on one family in South Chicago, for instance—can provoke great interest and sympathy. One example alone, however, seldom convinces an audience of a claim’s legitimacy. Inductive reasoning works best when speakers use multiple, diverse, and relevant examples. 37 Te examples used must clearly represent the general conclusion they support.

Causal Reasoning In causal reasoning , the speaker argues that one action or event brought about another action or event. 38 Persuasive speakers use causal reasoning in four ways: to explain why something happened, explain why something happened, explain why to identify who’s responsible for something, to determine whether people can control an event, and to predict what might occur in the future. In each of these cases, the speaker wants to show the cause of something. People frequently use causal reasoning to make sense of their everyday experiences. You take on an extra project at work, for instance, and afer you complete it you get a raise. To explain the salary increase, you point to your eforts on the project as the cause.

Causal reasoning also plays an important role in your attempts to predict the future. If you can determine a causal relationship between two events that occurs consistently, you can expect the relationship will continue to occur. You might observe, for instance, that if you take a brief nap during the day you feel more alert in the evening than on the days you skip a nap. You’d predict, then, that in the future taking a nap will help you feel refreshed later in the day.

Strength of the Causal Relation Causal reasoning can prove quite persuasive because humans are naturally inquisitive—they like to know why and how things happen. People also like a sense of stability and predictability in their worlds, which causal reasoning can provide. As a persuasive speaker, however, you must be sure that the two events are indeed related and that one truly causes the other. You must consider, for example, other factors that might lead to a particular result. For instance, let’s say you want to argue that a recent increase in crime on Indian reservations in the Southwest was caused by a dramatic spike in unemployment among Native Americans. You argue that social stress increases when people lose their jobs and that employment opportunities on Indian lands have been hit especially hard. Based on this premise, your thesis is that the government should provide intensive new work programs for these areas. However, it could also be that increase in crime on the reservations was caused largely by a cutback in funding for local law enforcement, public safety, and tribal courts. Tis doesn’t mean that you couldn’t argue a case for more job opportunities for Native Americans. But when you argue a thesis based on causal reasoning, be sure to take all possible factors into account for any phenomenon you try to explain, and do the research necessary to make certain that all the elements of your argument can hold up to alternative explanations.

Analogical Reasoning An analogy is a comparison between two things. Analogies work well when the things being compared share clear points of relevance. For example, most people probably understand the now-classic analogy “Te Internet is an information super highway” because both the Internet and highways involve speed, networks, points of access, and causal reasoning Linking two events or actions to claim that one resulted in the other. Chapter Understanding Argument long-distance travel. But the analogy “Te Internet is an information country road” likely wouldn’t resonate with an audience because the two objects don’t have obvious points of comparison. When persuasive speakers use analogical reasoning , they compare similar objects, processes, concepts, or events and suggest that what holds true for one also holds true for the other. Te similarities provide the rationale for the conclusion the speaker ofers. In a motivational speech given at Occidental College, the founder of Motown Records, Berry Gordy, Jr., used analogical reasoning when he described his struggle to become a successful music producer in Detroit: I was a songwriter…I wanted to be the greatest songwriter. I was writing about everything—everything I saw. But I was not making money, and I fnally agreed with everyone I ever talked to who knows me, who said, “Boy, you need to get a job—a r e a l o n e .” So I got a job on the Ford assembly line. And every day I watched how a bare metal frame rolling down the line would come of the other end a spanking, brand-new car. Wow, I thought: what I great idea. Maybe I can do the same thing with my music—create place where a kid of the street can walk in one door an unknown and out the other as a star. Tat little thought that came to me while running up and down at Ford Motor Company became a reality you now know as Motown. 39 As with all arguments, analogical reasoning must reach some conclusion. 40 Barry Gordy, Jr., made an analogy based on his own life experience to insinuate the conclusion he wanted his audience to grasp: You can apply the underlying process that characterizes one thing to something completely unrelated in order to create remarkable possibilities: Producing music isn’t that much diferent than producing cars.

Comparison Suitability When speakers reason by analogy, the two things they compare must have enough similarities to make the comparison believable. For example, a persuasive speaker might argue that alcohol and marijuana are similar, so the latter should be legalized. But the audience must be convinced that the two are truly similar. analogical reasoning Comparing two similar objects, processes, concepts, or events and suggesting that what holds true for one also holds true for the other.

pumkinpie/Alamy Stock Photo When you use causal reasoning, think carefully about what the true causes of an event or action are. For example, do violent video games and movies cause people to commit violence?

If so, should violent media be censored? Or do other factors—broken homes, substance abuse, high unemployment, or mental illness, for instance—contribute more to violent behavior? PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S In addition, the speaker must recognize diferences between the things compared. If the diferences are larger or more important than the similarities, the analogy won’t work. For example, solutions to environmental problems in one city may not translate to another city because of diferences in climate and geography, even if the two locations share similar environmental problems.

A fallacy is an error in making an argument. 41 Te error may reside in the claims ofered, the evidence presented, or the reasoning process. At frst, fallacies may appear valid and reasonable. Tey may even persuade an uncritical listener. 42 But upon closer inspection, fallacies do not hold up. Including fallacies in a persuasive speech—even when done unintentionally— refects poorly on the speaker and can constitute unethical behavior. Efective speakers recognize fallacies in their arguments and eliminate them before they make their presentations. Fallacies fall into four main categories:

1. Faulty claims 2. Flawed evidence 3. Defective reasoning 4. Erroneous responses Table 15.5 summarizes common fallacies in public speaking. Fallacies in Claims Fallacies stemming from the claims a speaker makes refer to errors in basic assumptions or assertions.

The False Dilemma Fallacy Also called either–or thinking, the false dilemma fallacy occurs when a speaker tries to reduce the choices an audience can make to two fallacy occurs when a speaker tries to reduce the choices an audience can make to two fallacy even though other alternatives exist. For instance, to say that “We must fund this arts program or it is doomed” fails to acknowledge other options, such as supporting parts of the program and eliminating others.

Begging the Question Also referred to as circular reasoning, begging the question is rooted in a speaker’s claims. When speakers beg the question, they imply the truth of the conclusion in the premise or simply assert that the validity of the conclusion is self- evident. For example, in attempting to persuade an audience to support closing some elementary schools to reduce costs, a speaker states, “Closing these schools will save the district money. We will only eliminate schools whose closure will fnancially beneft the district.” But the speaker has provided no support for the premise that closing these schools really will actually reduce costs. Students from the closed schools will have to be educated somewhere. Te premise implies the conclusion, which essentially only restates the premise.

The Slippery-Slope Fallacy When a speaker says that one event will necessarily lead to another without showing any logical connection between the two, the speaker has used the slippery-slope fallacy . Although the conclusion might possibly follow from the premise, the speaker skips the steps between them. Te speaker argues, for example, “If the government passes a law requiring all citizens to carry a national identifcation card, it will be a lot easier for the government to invade our private lives in other ways, too.” So the claim made is that a national identity card will inevitably lead to the dismantling fallacy An error in making an argument.

false dilemma fallacy Argument in which a speaker reduces available choices to only two even though other alternatives exist; also called the either–or fallacy.

begging the question Argument in which a speaker uses a premise to imply the truth of the conclusion or asserts that the validity of the conclusion is self-evident; also called circular reasoning. Avoiding Fallacies in Argument slippery-slope fallacy Argument in which a speaker asserts that one event will necessarily lead to another without showing any logical connection between the two events.

Watch It: View a video on the elements of argument. Chapter Understanding Argument Table . Common Fallacies in Public Speaking Fallacy Brief De nition Example Fallacies in Claims False dilemma Choices are reduced to just two. We must either raise student tuition or lay o teachers. Begging the question Something is true because it is. Our program is the best one because we rate it highly. Slippery slope One event leads to another without a necessary logical connection. Passing stricter gun laws is the rst step by the government to take away our guns. Ad ignorantiam A thing is true because it hasn’t been disproved. Angels and devils must exist because we have no proof that they don’t. Fallacies in Evidence Red herring Distract with irrelevant point or example Lots of trolls post on social media. We must not use social media to raise awareness of the growing heroin epidemic in our community. Ad populum Appeal to popular attitude or emotion If you’re a true progressive thinker, you’ll support our petition for gender-neutral restroom facilities. Appeal to tradition Support the status quo In-person college classes are better than online classes because City College has always taught face- to-face classes well. Comparative evidence Inappropriate use of statistics Violent crime in our city doubled from last year. [Speaker omits previous year’s number, which was very low.] Fallacies in Reasoning Division Parts of a whole share the same properties. The Warriors play unsel sh team basketball. Deandre is a member of the team so he must be an unsel sh player. Hasty generalization Insu cient examples or inadequate sample Two local restaurants have seen an increase in pro ts since the stadium was built, so all local businesses have bene ted. Post hoc Misrepresent causal relationship The year after the department hired a new manager, sales increased. Weak analogy Key dissimilarities make the comparison misleading. Buying stocks is like gambling because both involve money and risk. Fallacies in Responding Ad hominem Personal attack That administrator is an idiot so it’s no surprise she came to the wrong conclusion. Guilt by association Claim linked to objectionable person Any terrorist would support this crazy idea. Straw man Misrepresentation of a claim My opponent’s position would greatly weaken our nation’s ability to defend itself. [In reality, the speaker’s opponent is calling for limited cuts of outdated Defense Department programs.] Loaded words Emotionally laden, misleading language Hunting is the utterly senseless murder of innocent creatures. PART SPEAKING SI TUAT ION S of other privacy rights. Tis type of argument is fallacious because one event will not necessarily lead to a much larger and more signifcant event.

The Ad Ignorantiam Fallacy Also called appeal to ignorance, the ad ignorantiam fallacy suggests that because a claim hasn’t been shown to be false, it must be true. It is also called the burden-of-proof fallacy. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy famously used this tactic in the 1950s to accuse people, especially Hollywood movie producers, of being communists. He argued that if an individual couldn’t disprove his allegations, then the person must be a communist. Claims of UFOs, alien abductions, and paranormal activities also usually rely on the ad ignorantiam fallacy: Scientists have no proof that UFOs don’t exist; therefore, UFOs probably exist. 43 Fallacies in Evidence Even if a speaker presents valid claims, the evidence used to support those claims may be irrelevant, inaccurate, or insufcient.

Red Herring When speakers present evidence that has nothing to do with the claim, they create a red herring , distracting the audience with irrelevant evidence. To urge the audience to support abolishing all competitive sports on campus, a speaker might argue, “We need to end competitive sports here at our college. Te state is in a budget crisis, and tuition is going up.” Te state’s budget crisis and rising tuition are not necessarily related to the cost of competitive sports, but mentioning those points sensationalizes the topic—and takes audience members’ minds of the real issue.

The Comparative Evidence Fallacy Te comparative evidence fallacy occurs when speakers compare numbers in ways that mislead the audience and misrepresent the evidence included to support the argument. Tis may happen unintentionally when a speaker simply misinterprets statistical data. In other cases, the speaker may manipulate the numbers or omit some information and purposefully deceive the audience. For example, some urban universities highlight their low rates of crime by reporting only crimes that occur on the campus itself, leaving out any that are reported even within a block or two of the campus’s borders. Although the statistics may be technically accurate, omitting nearby crime incidents may give students, faculty, and staf a false sense of security. In addition, speakers may favor one kind of evidence too heavily—for example, privileging numbers over other forms of evidence such as testimony, narrative, and examples. Although statistics can provide powerful evidence, they are not always the best choice. Statistics ofen shed little light on how things work. A speaker may present statistics showing that students who learn math using a new method score higher on tests than do students using an old method. But the reason for the higher scores may be the increased attention that students using the new method received, rather than the method itself.

Without additional evidence, the audience can’t be sure of what really led to the results. 44 The Ad Populum Fallacy Although efective speakers sometimes employ stories and examples from popular culture that touch audience members’ emotions, the ad populum fallacy plays on popular attitudes without ofering any supporting material. Speakers may appeal to audience members’ cultural prejudices or their desire to be part of a group.

Advertisers do this all the time. For instance, to be considered cool you should drive a certain car or use a particular smartphone. Trying to persuade an audience to go on a gluten-free diet because everyone’s doing it is another example of the ad populum fallacy. The Appeal to Tradition Fallacy When speakers use the appeal to tradition fallacy , they argue that maintaining the status quo is inherently better than trying a new idea or approach. Audience members ofen fnd this fallacy persuasive because it comfortably reinforces what is familiar and safe. But danger lurks in these situations. ad ignorantiam fallacy Argument in which a speaker suggests that because a claim hasn’t been shown to be false, it must be true; also called an appeal to ignorance.

red herring Argument that introduces irrelevant evidence to distract an audience from the real issue.

comparative evidence fallacy Argument in which a speaker uses statistics or compares numbers in ways that misrepresent the evidence and mislead the audience.

ad populum fallacy Argument in which a speaker appeals to popular attitudes and emotions without o ering evidence to support claims.

appeal to tradition fallacy Argument in which a speaker asserts that the status quo is better than any new idea or approach. Chapter Understanding Argument Cultural traditions always represent particular social interests but are not always recognized as such. 45 For instance, the appeal to tradition fallacy has been used to argue against allowing women in all-male colleges and vice-versa. Sometimes traditional ways of doing things are indeed the best course of action. But the speaker must present sufcient evidence to support that contestable point of view.

Fallacies in Reasoning Fallacies in reasoning involve errors in how the speaker links the evidence and the claims.

The Division Fallacy When they use the division fallacy , speakers assume that what’s true of the whole is also true of the parts making up the whole. Consider the statement, “Our university has an excellent reputation for scholarship.” Tis image may be widely recognized as true, but it does not necessarily apply to every department on campus. Or, to claim that a food item is “organic” does not always mean that every ingredient is natural.

The Hasty Generalization Fallacy When speakers draw a conclusion based on too few examples or from an unrepresentative sample, they’ve made a hasty generalization, a faw in inductive reasoning. Te hasty generalization fallacy occurs hasty generalization fallacy occurs hasty generalization fallacy when the speaker makes a claim afer ofering only one or two examples, or when the examples ofered don’t represent the larger group. For example, a speaker who argues for improving the quality of national disaster relief training by using data drawn only from a couple small cities would not be able to establish convincingly the need for reform at the national level.

The Post Hoc Fallacy Also called the false cause fallacy, the post hoc fallacy post hoc fallacy post hoc involves fallacy involves fallacy concluding that a causal relationship exists simply because one event follows another in time. Let’s say that the coach of your successful college football team quits to accept a job at another university. Next season, your team fails to win many games. Did the loss of the coach lead to your team’s poor performance on the feld? Maybe, but many other factors could be involved as well, such as the graduation of key players from your team, the high quality of opponents the following year, and the poor quality of recruits brought in by the former coach. When a speaker argues that one event necessarily caused another, always consider additional possible explanations for why something occurred.

The Weak Analogy Fallacy Te weak analogy fallacy results when two things weak analogy fallacy results when two things weak analogy fallacy have important dissimilarities that make the comparison inaccurate and the analogy faulty. Although it’s possible to identify similarities between almost any two things you might want to compare, the similarities must contribute much to the argument and the dissimilarities must not detract from it. A speaker argues, for example, “Grafti is like any other form of public art and should be supported.” But the process for displaying public art is quite diferent from that for displaying grafti. With public art, members of the community decide on the type of art and where it should be placed. With grafti, the person applying the paint is making those choices.

Fallacies in Responding Speakers aren’t the only ones who commit logical fallacies. Listeners sometimes make serious errors in judgment when they respond to a speaker’s arguments.

The Ad Hominem Fallacy Also called the against the person fallacy , the ad hominem fallacy is probably the most common fallacy in responding. fallacy is probably the most common fallacy in responding. fallacy Tis fallacy occurs when a claim is rejected based on perceptions of the speaker’s character rather than the evidence. Te ad division fallacy Argument in which a speaker assumes that what is true of the whole is also true of the parts that make up the whole.

hasty generalization fallacy Argument in which a speaker draws a conclusion based on too few or inadequate examples.

post hoc fallacy Argument in which a speaker concludes a causal relationship exists simply because one event follows another in time; also called the false cause fallacy. ad hominem fallacy Argument in which a speaker rejects another speaker’s claim based on that speaker’s character rather than the evidence the speaker presents; also called the against the person fallacy. weak analogy fallacy Argument in which a speaker compares two dissimilar things, ideas, or concepts, making the comparison inaccurate. hominem fallacy typically follows this pattern: “You want me to accept your thesis, but [for whatever reason] I don’t like you so I reject your position.” Although you should certainly evaluate a speaker’s credibility, you must critique the argument based on the evidence presented rather than something about the person that has nothing to do with the topic. Personally attacking the speaker distracts from the merits of a claim and is unethical.

The Guilt-by-Association Fallacy Te guilt-by- association fallacy suggests something’s wrong with people association fallacy suggests something’s wrong with people association fallacy who support the speaker’s claim. Also known as the bad company fallacy, this fallacy links the thesis with someone the audience fnds objectionable, deplorable, or repulsive.

For instance, responding to a speaker arguing for national health care, an audience member says, “Fidel Castro set up a government health care system in Cuba. I certainly wouldn’t want something in the United States that was designed by a dictator.” Of course, all relatively developed democratic countries have some form of tax-supported national health care, but by associating the speaker’s claim with someone the audience probably dislikes, the person responding employs the guilt-by-association fallacy.

The Straw Man Fallacy Te straw man fallacy misrepresents a speaker’s argument straw man fallacy misrepresents a speaker’s argument straw man fallacy so that just a shell of the original claim, if any of it, remains. Ten the argument is easily refuted because it appears implausible or too simplistic. 46 Tese fallacies ofen occur in political campaigns when candidates present distorted and exaggerated views of their opponents’ positions. For instance, an argument in favor of teaching young people contraceptive methods in public schools to protect them if they choose to have sex might be reduced to “support for birth control just gives our kids license to have sex with no consequences.” 47 Or, a candidate for president of student government who advocates revising the grading system might be denounced as calling for an end to grades entirely.

In both cases, the original claim is misrepresented so that the argument against it becomes obvious.

The Loaded Word Fallacy Te loaded word fallacy uses emotionally laden words to distract from the speaker’s argument and evaluate claims based on a misleading emotional response rather than the evidence presented. 48 Te intent in using such language is to refute a speaker’s claims without ofering any substantial evidence.

Responding to a speaker’s claim that our country needs a comprehensive immigration policy by saying, “many immigrants are criminals, rapists, and terrorists” plays on emotions but does nothing to refute the speaker’s original argument. guilt-by-association fallacy Argument in which a speaker suggests that something is wrong with another speaker’s claims by associating those claims with someone the audience nds objectionable; also called the bad company fallacy.

straw man fallacy Argument in which a speaker misrepresents another speaker’s argument so that only a shell of the opponent’s argument remains.

loaded word fallacy Argument in which a speaker uses emotionally laden words to evaluate claims based on a misleading emotional response rather than the evidence presented. AP Images/HALEY/SIPA Guilt by association is a common fallacy often found in political speech. The most infamous and unfair comparison is with Adolph Hitler. Te well-constructed argument forms the foundation of persuasive speaking. An argument consists of claims, evidence, and reasoning. Claims lay the groundwork for the thesis of your speech, answering the question “What am I asserting?” Every claim includes at least one premise and a conclusion. Evidence refers to the supporting materials presented to back up the claim, answering the question “What is the support for my assertion?” Speakers may use logical Summary PART SPEAKING SITUATIONS Chapter appeals (logos), appeals to the speaker’s credibility (ethos), emotional appeals (pathos), or appeals to cultural beliefs and values (mythos). Reasoning answers the question “How are my supporting materials and assertions linked together?” and shows the audience how the evidence you’ve chosen provides justifcation for your position on the topic. Persuasive speakers rely on four types of reasoning: deductive, inductive, causal, and analogical. A fallacy occurs when an error is made in constructing an argument. Although fallacies may be persuasive, they are nonetheless a deceptive and unethical approach to convincing an audience. Fallacies may stem from errors in claims, evidence, reasoning, or responding.

Adam was an undergraduate student enrolled in a beginning public speaking class. His assignment was to prepare a persuasive speech on a topic of his choice. His topic is very timely and important to his audience, and his argument is well formed. In particular, notice how Adam handles a requirement his instructor gave him to cite at least four sources in the speech and his call to action. ll miss just being around her.” “I didn’t want to believe it.” “It’s such a sad thing.” Tese quotes are from the friends and family of 15-year-old Phoebe Prince, who committed suicide by hanging herself. Why did this senseless act occur? Te answer is simple: Phoebe Prince was bullied to death. Many of us know someone who has been bullied in school. Perhaps they were teased in the parking lot or in the locker room. In the past, bullying occurred primarily in school. However, with the advent of cell phones, text messaging, instant messaging, blogs, and social networking sites, bullies can now follow and terrorize their victims anywhere, even into their own bedrooms. Using electronic communications to tease, harass, threaten, and intimidate another person is called cyberbullying. As a tutor and mentor to young students, I have witnessed cyberbullying frst hand, and by examining current research, I believe I understand the problem, its causes, and how we can help end cyberbullying. What I know for sure is that cyberbullying is a devastating form of abuse that must be confronted on national, local, and personal levels. Today, we will examine the widespread and harmful nature of cyberbullying, uncover how and why it persists, and pinpoint some simple solutions we must begin to enact in order to thwart cyberbullies and comfort their victims. Let’s begin by tackling the problem head on. Many of us have read rude, insensitive, or nasty statements posted about us or someone we care about on social networking sites. Well, whether or not those comments were actually intended to hurt another person’s feelings, if they did hurt their feelings, then they are perfect examples of cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is a pervasive and dangerous behavior. It takes place all over the world and through a wide array of electronic media. According to Susan Keith and Michelle Martin’s article in Reclaiming Children and Youth, 57 percent of American middle- school students had experienced instances of cyberbullying ranging from hurtful comments to threats of physical violence. Quing Li’s article published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior noted that cyberbullying is not gender biased. According to Li, females are just as likely as males to engage in cyberbullying, although women are 10 percent more likely to be victimized. Li noted that Internet and cell-phone technologies have been used by bullies to harass, torment, and threaten young people in North America, Europe, and Asia. However, some of the most horrifc attacks happen right here at home. According to Keith and Martin, a particularly disturbing incident occurred in Dallas, Texas, where an overweight student with multiple sclerosis was targeted “I’ Adam, Together, We Can Stop Cyberbullying ANALYZE IT Chapter Understanding Argument Watch and analyze this speech on MindTap. PART on a school’s social networking page. One message read, “I guess I’ll have to wait until you kill yourself which I hope is not long from now, or I’ll have to wait until your disease kills you.” What is most disturbing about cyberbullying is its efects upon victims, bystanders, and perhaps even upon bullies themselves. Cyberbullying can lead to physical and psychological injuries upon its victims. According to an article in the Journal of Adolescent Health, Michele Ybarra and colleagues noted that 36 percent of the victims of cyberbullies are also harassed by their attackers in school. For example, the Dallas student with MS had eggs thrown at her car and a bottle of acid thrown at her house. Ybarra and her colleagues reported that victims of cyberbullying experience such severe emotional distress that they ofen exhibit behavioral problems such as poor grades, skipping school, and receiving detentions and suspensions. Furthermore, Peter K.

Smith and his co-researchers suggested that even a few instances of cyberbullying can have these long- lasting negative efects. What is even more alarming is that, according to Ybarra and colleagues, victims of cyberbullying are signifcantly more likely to carry weapons to school as a result of feeling threatened.

Obviously, this could lead to violent outcomes for bullies, victims, and even bystanders. Now that we have heard about the nature, scope, and efects of cyberbullying, let’s see if we can discover its causes. Let’s think back to a time when we may have seen a friend or loved one being harassed online. Did we report the bully to the network administrator or other authorities? Did we console the victim? I know I didn’t. If you are like me, we may unknowingly be enabling future instances of cyberbullying. Cyberbullying occurs because of the anonymity ofered to bullies by cell phone and Internet technologies, as well as the failure of victims and bystanders to report incidents of cyberbullying. You see, unlike schoolyard bullies, cyberbullies can attack their victims anonymously. Ybarra and colleagues discovered that 13 percent of cyberbullying victims did not know who was tormenting them. Tis devastating statistic is important because, as Keith and Martin noted, traditional bullying takes place face-to-face and ofen ends when students leave school.

However, today, students are subjected to nonstop bullying, even when they are alone in their own homes. Perhaps the anonymous nature of cyberattacks partially explains why Li found that nearly 76 percent of victims of cyberbullying and 75 percent of bystanders never reported instances of bullying to adults. Victims and bystanders who do not report attacks from cyberbullies can unintentionally enable bullies. According to De Nies, Donaldson, and Netter of ABCNews.com, several of Phoebe Prince’s classmates were aware that she was being harassed but did not inform the school’s administration. Li suggested that victims and bystanders ofen do not believe that adults will actually intervene to stop cyberbullying. However, ABCNews.com reports that 41 states have laws against bullying in schools and 23 of those states target cyberbullying specifcally. Now that we know that victims of cyberbullies desperately need the help of witnesses and bystanders to report their attacks, we should arm ourselves with the information necessary to provide that assistance.

Tink about the next time you see a friend or loved one being tormented or harassed online. What would you be willing to do to help?

Cyberbullying must be confronted on national, local, and personal levels. Tere should be a comprehensive national law confronting cyberbullying in schools. Certain statutes currently in state laws should be amalgamated to create the strongest protections for victims and the most efective punishments for bullies as possible. According to Susan Limber and Mark Small’s article titled State Laws and Policies to Address Bullying in Schools, Georgia law requires faculty and staf to be trained on the nature of bullying and what actions to take if they see students being bullied. Connecticut law requires school employees to report bullying as part of their hiring contract. Washington takes this a step further, by protecting employees from any legal action if a reported bully is proven to be innocent. When it comes to protecting victims, West Virginia law demands that schools must ensure that a bullied student does not receive additional abuse at the hands of his or her bully. Legislating punishment for bullies is difcult. A comprehensive anticyberbullying law should incorporate the best aspects of these state laws and fnd a way to punish bullies that is both punitive and has the ability to rehabilitate abusers. However, for national laws to be efective, local communities need to be supportive. Local communities must organize and mobilize to attack the problem of cyberbullying. According to A. S. Green’s article published in the Journal of Social Issues, communities need to support bullying prevention programs by conducting a school-based bullying survey for individual school districts. We can’t know how to best protect victims in our community without knowing how they are afected by the problem.

It is critical to know this information as Greene noted, only 3 percent of teachers in the United States perceive bullying to be a problem in their schools. Tere are several warning signs that might indicate a friend or loved one is a victim of a cyberbully. If you see a friend or loved one exhibiting these signs, the decision to get involved can be the diference between life and death. According to Keith and Martin’s article Cyber-Bullying: Creating a Culture of Respect in a Cyber World, victims of PART SPEAKING SITUATIONS Chapter cyberbullies ofen use electronic communication more frequently than do people who are not being bullied.

Victims of cyberbullies have mood swings and difculty sleeping, they seem depressed or become anxious, victims can also become withdrawn from social activities and fall behind in scholastic responsibilities. If you witness your friends or family members exhibiting these symptoms, there are several ways you can help. According to Juliana Raskauskas and Ann Stoltz’s article in Developmental Psychology, witnesses of cyberbullying should inform victims to take the attacks seriously, especially if the bullies threaten violence.

You should tell victims to report their attacks to police or other authorities, to block harmful messages by blocking email accounts and cell phone numbers, to save copies of attacks and provide them to authorities. If you personally know the bully and feel safe confronting him or her, do so! As Raskaukas and Stoltz noted, bullies will ofen back down when confronted by peers. By being a good friend and by giving good advice, you can help a victim report his or her attacks from cyberbullies and take a major step toward eliminating this horrendous problem. So, you see, we are not helpless to stop the cyberbullying problem as long as we make the choice NOT to ignore it. To conclude, cyberbullying is a devastating form of abuse that must be reported to authorities.

Cyberbullying is a worldwide problem perpetuated by the silence of both victims and bystanders. By paying attention to certain warning signs, we can empower ourselves to console victims and report their abusers.

Today, I’m imploring you to do your part to help stop cyberbullying. I know that you agree that stopping cyberbullying must be a priority. First, although other states have cyberbullying laws in place, ours does not. So I’m asking you to sign this petition that I will forward to our district’s State Legislators. We need to make our voices heard that we want specifc laws passed to stop these horrifc attacks and to punish those caught doing it. Second, I’m also asking you to be vigilant in noticing signs of cyberbullying and then taking action. Look for signs that your friend, brother, sister, cousin, boyfriend, girlfriend, or loved one might be a victim of cyberbullying and then get involved to help stop it! Phoebe Prince showed the warning signs, and she did not deserve to die so senselessly. None of us would ever want to say, “I’ll miss just being around her,” “I didn’t want to believe it,” “It’s such a sad thing,” about our own friends or family members.

We must work to ensure that victims are supported and bullies are confronted nationally, locally, and personally. I know that if we stand together and refuse to be silent, we can and will stop cyberbullying. Questions for Discussion . In the introduction of his speech when Adam says, “What I know for sure is that cyberbullying is a devastating form of abuse that must be confronted on national, local, and personal levels” what aspect of argument is he presenting? . When Adam says, “According to Susan Keith and Michelle Martin’s article in Reclaiming Children and Youth, percent of American middle-school students had experienced instances of cyberbullying ranging from hurtful comments to threats of physical violence” what aspect of argument is he presenting? . When Adam says, “Perhaps the anonymous nature of cyberattacks partially explains why Li found that nearly percent of victims of cyberbullying and percent of bystanders never reported instances of bullying to adults” what aspect of argument does his evidence include? . When Adam says, “What is even more alarming is that, according to Ybarra and colleagues, victims of cyberbullying are signi cantly more likely to carry weapons to school as a result of feeling threatened. Obviously, this could lead to violent outcomes for bullies, victims, and even bystanders” what aspects of argument is he presenting? . When Adam says, “According to Susan Keith and Michelle Martin’s article in Reclaiming Children and Youth, percent of American middle-school students had experienced instances of cyberbullying ranging from hurtful comments to threats of physical violence” what type of appeal is he making? Chapter Understanding Argument . When Adam says, “As a tutor and mentor to young students, I have witnessed cyberbullying rst hand, and by examining current research, I believe I understand the problem, its causes, and how we can help end cyberbullying” what type of appeal is he making? . When Adam shares quotes from the friends and family of -year-old Phoebe Prince, who committed suicide by hanging herself, and says, “Why did this senseless act occur? The answer is simple: Phoebe Prince was bullied to death” what type of appeal is he making? . When Adam says, “Now that we know that victims of cyberbullies desperately need the help of witnesses and bystanders to report their attacks, we should arm ourselves with the information necessary to provide that assistance” what kind of reasoning is he using? IN THE WO R K PLACE E ective Communication at Work Employees try to convince bosses to support an idea they have. Coworkers keep each other happily on track by working e ectively in teams. Bosses want to motivate their employees to do their best work for the organization. No matter what our role at work, we are most likely to succeed when we communicate sensitively with our colleagues—even when we’re arguing for something important to us. The principles of e ective workplace communication resemble the basics of audience-centered public speaking: Show respect for everyone you interact with. Be aware of cultural di erences. Don’t just talk, listen attentively. Recognize e ort and achievement. Be open and honest. Allow for creativity and freedom of expression. Be positive in your approach to challenges and problems. And don’t let the convenience of text messaging and email determine your patterns of interaction with bosses, employees, and colleagues—make it a point to frequently engage others at work in a friendly way face-to-face. Can you think of any workplace situation in which you feel you could have improved communication? If you have never faced such a situation yourself, can you think of situations that came to your attention where communication could have been improved? For either case, make a note of the circumstances and what should be done di erently.

IN YO UR CO MMUNITY Arguing for Alternative Policies Because they enjoy a very high standard of living, middle class Americans have a special responsibility to contribute something positive to the global community. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) o er real opportunities to campaign for social responsibility on a range of issues. Excellent persuasive speaking is central to their success. Spokespersons for NGOs argue for instituting or changing public policy in ways that promote the interests of underserved groups and communities. For example, representatives from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) speak throughout the United States about the need to “ ght hate and bigotry and to seek justice for the most vulnerable members of our society.” To accomplish this, the SPLC monitors hate groups and other extremists throughout the United States and exposes their activities to the public, the media, and law enforcement. APPLY IT . . . PART SPEAKING SITUATIONS Chapter Use ashcards to learn key terms and take a quiz to test your knowledge. Key Terms ad hominem fallacy ad ignorantiam fallacy ad populum fallacy analogical reasoning appeal to tradition fallacy appeals to cultural beliefs (mythos ) appeals to speaker credibility (ethos ) argument begging the question causal reasoning claim comparative evidence fallacy conclusion deductive reasoning division fallacy emotional appeals (pathos(pathos( ) enthymemes evidence fallacy false dilemma fallacy guilt-by-association fallacy hasty generalization fallacy inductive reasoning loaded word fallacy logical appeals ( logos ) post hoc fallacy post hoc fallacy post hoc premise quali er reasoning red herring slippery-slope fallacy straw man fallacy syllogism weak analogy fallacy Re ecting on Understanding Argument . Choose a controversial topic you’re interested in and identify the claims each side presents. How might speakers on both sides of the issue use evidence and reasoning to make their opposing arguments? . Persuasive speakers use qualifying claims to strengthen their arguments. If qualifying claims create doubt about a conclusion, how can that “strengthen” an argument?

Can you think of an example where qualifying claims strengthen the conclusion of an argument on a controversial topic? What does the importance of qualifying claims tell us about the complexity of good thinking in general? . Excellent persuasive speaking typically involves multiple forms of evidence. How might you use logical and emotional appeals together in a speech that advocates eliminating the death penalty for violent crimes? For increasing the age for selling tobacco products to persons and over? . Can you explain the di erence between deductive and inductive reasoning? Between causal and analogical reasoning? Where do the weaknesses lie in each of these forms of reasoning and how can you avoid them? . Research has found that students who learn the fundamentals of argument are better at detecting fallacies than are students without training in argument. This is true not only of public speaking. How might knowledge of fallacies in uence the way you respond to persuasive messages in the future? Where are fallacies in argument most likely to exist? REVIEW IT Chapter Understanding Argument