Understanding Reason and Emotion
In the last lesson, we briefly discussed the two main methods of persuasion, which were reason and emotion. In this lesson, we will go over these two methods in more detail. It is important that we do this because the next several lessons deal with actually writing persuasively. So, to understand how to write good persuasion, we need to understand the concepts of reason and emotion much better. Also in this lesson, we will look briefly at the third appeal of persuasion, which is the persuasive appeal of one's character.
Aristotle felt that there were three kinds of persuasion appeals: the appeal to reason, the appeal to emotion, and the appeal to one's character. These were identified by him as logos, pathos, and ethos.
Logos is a Greek term that means many things, including reason, which is why it is associated with the appeal to reason. Aristotle felt that all communication must be done through this appeal because this was the most logical form of persuasion that there was. With this type of persuasion, there are no lies and no deceptions. Everything comes from proof, the scientific method, and logic. One of the most famous arguments done with the appeal to reason for the existence of ourselves comes from Descartes, who said "I think, therefore I am". We know that we are alive; we know that we think and therefore, we know that we exist. There is proof in that and there is no way to lie. By saying, "I think, therefore I fly." does not apply. It could be construed that thinking leads to science, which leads to flying, but that falls more into the grounds of appeal to emotion, because the links between are so vague.
The appeal to reason is appealing to the inner reason of an individual. There is no violent fight or disagreement with this. Everything within the appeal to reason is measured and presented in a logical way.
The reasoning method has two processes within it: deduction and induction.
Here is an example of an appeal to reason:
The issue is whether or not nuclear weapons are dangerous and should be banned. Your position is, yes, they should be banned. Therefore, you should ask yourself the following four questions to determine if you can make a good appeal to reason and present a persuasive essay regarding this concept:
This brings us to your deduction, which is the general principle that you will draw the conclusion from. Your deduction would be split into two premises and one conclusion.
The major premise of your argument is that nuclear weapons are dangerous due to the threat of mutually assured destruction. The minor premise is that volatile countries have nuclear weapons. Therefore, nuclear weapons will destroy the planet. That is your conclusion.
Now you need to ask yourself if that is a strong enough argument. Does it support your claims? Is there a cause-effect link between nuclear weapons being dangerous and nuclear weapons destroying the planet?