W7 Public Speaking

 

• What types of sources are used for research?
• How will you keep track of your sources?
• How do you determine if the information is "common knowledge"?
• Why is persuasion hard?
• How do you construct a persuasive speech?
• What are Logos, Pathos, and Ethos?
• What are the three types of reasoning?
• Why should you be a critical listener of public speeches and a critical reader of source material?

Chapter 13:

Recent research, for example, in risk aversion, points to how we are more concerned about keeping from losing something than with gaining something. Change is often seen as a loss of something rather than a gain of something else.

They surveyed more than 5,000 medical patients and asked them to say whether they had experience any of a series of 43 life events in the previous two years. Each event, called a Life Change Unit (LCU), had a different “weight” for stress. The more events the pa tient added up, the higher the score. The higher the score, and the larger the weight of each event, the more likely the patient was to become ill. (The Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale, 2015)

Change is stressful. We do not generally embrace things that bring us stress. 

Selective exposure: Not only do we selectively expose ourselves to information, we selectively attend to, perceive, and recall information that supports our existing viewpoints, referred to as selective attention, selec tive perception, and selective recall

*ethos= expertise, education (aka. credibility)

*logos= logic

*pathos=  persuade through emotion

Students are often so familiar with it that they do not see its connection to real-life experiences. For example, safety and security needs, the second level on the hierarchy, is much broader than what many of us initially think. It includes:

 • supporting the military and homeland security; 

 • buying insurance for oneself and one’s family;

 • having investments and a will; 

 • personal protection such as taking self-defense classes; 

 • policies on crime and criminal justice in our communities; 

 • buying a security system for your car or home; seat belts and automotive safety; or even 

 • having the right kind of tires on one’s car (which is actually a viable topic for a speech).

 The third level up in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, love and belongingness, deals with a whole range of human experiences, such as connection with others and friendship; involvement in communities, groups, and clubs; prioritizing family time; worship and connection to a faith community; being involved in children’s lives; patriotism; loyalty; and fulfilling personal commitments.

...eliminating Facebook time, the speaker appeals to the three central levels of the hierarchy in her three points: safety and security from online threats, spending more time with family and friends in real time rather than online (love and belong ing), and having more time to devote to schoolwork rather than on Face book (esteem and achievement).

we saw that there are various ways to define words, such as by negation, operationalizing, and classification and division.

 “good,” “bad,” “best,” “worst,” “just,” “unjust,” “ethical,” “unethical,” “moral,” “immoral,” “beneficial,” “harmful,” “advantageous,” or “disadvantageous,” it is a proposition of value

 For different people, “best” might mean “safest,” “least expensive,” “most environmentally responsible,” “stylish,” “powerful,” or “prestigious.” 

>proposition policy usually uses a problem-cause-solution outline. The outline should follow: attention, need, satisfaction, visualization, action.

Research shows that people are more likely to act if they know how accessible the action can be.

CHAPTER 14:

Analogical reasoning drawing conclusions about an object or phenomenon based on its similarities to some thing else 

Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.

>inductive reasoning: a type of reasoning in which examples or specific instances are used to supply strong evidence for (though not absolute proof of) the truth of the conclusion; the scientific method.  to disprove inductive reasoning is to provide contradictory evidence or examples.

*It is the most commonly used. 

*there are four inductive reasoning types:

 *generalization, 

*casual reasoning: a form of inductive reasoning that seeks to make cause-effect connections. For example, the street is wet and you assume it's because of rain. Good inductive causal reasoning meets the tests of directness and strength.  Causal reasoning is susceptible to four fallacies: historical fallacy, slippery slope, false cause, and confusing correlation and causation.

*sign reasoning:  a form of inductive reasoning in which conclusions are drawn about phenomena based on events that precede or co-exist with (but not cause) a subsequent event

*analogical reasoning

>deductive reasoning: a type of reasoning in which a conclusion is based on the combination of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true

>syllogism: a three-sentence argument composed of a major premise (a generalization or principle that is accepted as true), a minor premise (and example of the major premise), and a conclusion

>enthymeme:  a syllogism with one of the premises missing

>false analogy: a fallacy where two things are compared that do not share enough (or key) similarities to be compared fairly

> false cause: a general fallacy involving causal reasoning, where it is assumed that something that is neither strong or direct enough has caused something else, or something that happened first in time caused something later

>slippery slope:  a fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent events that cannot be prevented

*hasty generalization has too few examples!

>straw man: a fallacy that shows only the weaker side of an opponent’s argument in order to more easily tear it down

>historical fallacy: using progression in time as the reason for causation, but nothing else

>argument from silence: Making a converse argument from lack of evidence or information about a conclusion

*statistical fallacy has three types: small sample, unrepresentative sample, and a variation of appeal to popularity

>Non sequitur a fallacy where the conclusion does not follow from its premise

> False Dilemma a fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist

> Appeal to Tradition Arguing that traditional practice and long term history is the only reason for continuing a policy

>Bandwagon a fallacy that assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable

> Red herring creating a diversion or introducing an irrelevant point to distract someone or get some one off the subject of the argument

>Ad hominem a fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute

>Ad misericordium inappropriate appeal to pity or emotions to hide lack of facts or argument

*plain folks and guilt by association are two more fallacies