There are several ways an author can get me to agree with them. It takes a little bit of everything. First, I like to know that they're qualified to be speaking on their topic. For some topics, any credentials will do. However, for most topics, notable accomplishments, professional training, and personal experience generally add credibility to the author's opinions. I don't need their life story, I just need their credentials.
Credentials, qualifications, and titles are nice, but only useful if used to support facts. It does me know good to know that an author is a credible source if they do not give logical reasons to back up their arguments. An author with special knowledge of a topic should use that knowledge and credibility to inform the public with accurate facts and statistics that will support their argument. A claim without logical reasons is just an opinion, not an argument.
Last, the icing on the cake for me is the emotional appeal behind the facts and reasons. The author needs to make me believe what they are saying in order to fully sway me to their side of an argument. The emotional appeal ties the argument together by making the facts and statistics relevant to me and the rest of their audience. I might find what they have to say interesting, but if they want me to commit and support their side of the argument, I need to feel that emotional connection.
In short, each of these elements in an argument need to be balance and build on each other in order for me to be convinced by the author. Qualifications without facts are just empty titles, facts without emotion feel irrelevant, and emotion without reason has no direction. These three elements, when in perfect harmony with each other, are what make an argument convincing for me.
Great response. I like how you are well-rounded as an audience. It doesn't take just one type of argument, or one type of author to convince you, you need the whole shabang. I think balance is a very key principle in writing (and reading), and you seem to encompass them both.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the "icing on the cake" is appealing to an audience emotionally. I always feel like if a speaker can get me to sympathize with them emotionally, then they can totally change my opinion of an issue!
ReplyDeleteTotally agree. All three aspects need to be balanced or else the argument isn't effective. Fist bump.
ReplyDeleteI loved how you said,"...facts without emotion feel irrelevant..." Emotion plays a big role in convincing people to side with the author. But, like you said, it is important that there is a balance between all these things to persuade the reader.
ReplyDelete