Sequential Problem Solving Part 8

1.

a.

b.

2.

B.

2.

3.

I.

i.

ii.

iii.

II.

III.

IV.

APPENDIX 2.

Persuasive Argument Form.

First establish topic, audience, and personal position. Then gather information and organize the argument.

1. Introduction.

Establish friendly intentions with the audience by using a sincere complement.

State the topic of the argument.

State your personal position.

State three points you intend to make in the argument. Arrange these points (A) second best point, (B) weakest point, (C) strongest point. This is known in the study of rhetoric as the Nestorian Order. It achieves interest at the beginning and finishes strong.

2. The Body.

A. The first point, but the second best argument.

1. First example ill.u.s.trating point A.

2. Example 2.

3. Example 3.

B. The second point and the weakest point 1. The first answer to the audience's antic.i.p.ated question about some weak point.

2. Answer 2 3. Answer 3 C. The third point and the strongest.

1. First example ill.u.s.trating point C 2. Example 2 3. Example 3

3. The Conclusion: Restate your position to the topic.

Restate your reasons in the same order as in the introduction and body: A, B, C.

Introduce a fourth benefit from taking the position and make it a personal, human interest benefit to leave the audience in a good frame of mind.

APPENDIX 3

Argumentative Fallacies

Deductive reasoning is stating a series of valid relationships with a reasonable conclusion.

When it rains the streets get wet.

It is raining.

Therefore the streets are wet.[1]

Several reasoning fallacies exist: (1)formal deductive fallacies, which occur because of an error in the form of the argument, and (2) informal false content fallacies.

(1) A formal deductive fallacy might switch a premise with the conclusion:

The streets are wet.

When it rains the streets get wet.

Therefore it is raining.

This conclusion is fallacious because there are other reasons that could have caused the street to be wet: snow melt, a street sweeper, etc.

(2) Several informal false content fallacies are: Logic errors:

* The "straw man" deception.

This is deceptive attack on an opponents position using a similar but different position.

"The President states that he is a 'Peace' president, but will help those in need. No doubt he will withdraw the NATO peace keeping force from Bosnia and send them to Somalia to a.s.sist with the famine relief."

What the president meant to say was that he will seek all reasonable diplomatic solutions to international aggression but will not abandon international treaties and will a.s.sist other nations with military forces.

* The "false dilemma" deception.

This deception often presents an argument so horrible that it is an unacceptable alternative, and the speaker's argument is presented as the only alternative.

"Ebola virus has been accidentally released in Merryman Corporation research facility in Maryland. One way to destroy it is to drop a nuclear bomb on the facility. Another alternative is to accept the proposal of the Paladin Corporation to take over supervision of the contract granted to the Merryman Corporation. Paladin estimates that they can decontaminate it with lethal gas for a mere ten million dollars."

* The "domino theory" deception.

The domino theory deception makes the claim that if one thing happens another will invariably follow.

"If South Vietnam falls to the Communists, every other nation in Southeast Asia will follow, including Australia."

* The "two wrongs make a right" deception.

"It is all right to execute prisoners because South Africa does it too."

Emotional tactics.

* The "attack the speaker" diversion.

This fallacy is known as the Ad Hominem fallacy.

"The mayor proposes opening a day care center for city hall employees.

The mayor was once divorced. The mayor is not competent to make family decisions."