Printed Page 175-182
Crafting a Persuasive Argument
Persuasion is important, whether you wish to affect a reader’s attitude or merely present information clearly. To make a persuasive case, you must identify the elements of your argument, use the right kinds of evidence, consider opposing viewpoints, appeal to emotions responsibly, decide where to state your claim, and understand the role of culture in persuasion.
A persuasive argument has three main elements:
The claim is the conclusion you want your readers to accept. For example, your claim might be that your company should institute flextime, a scheduling approach that gives employees some flexibility in when they begin and end their workdays. You want your readers to agree with this idea and to take the next steps toward instituting flextime.
The evidence is the information you want your readers to consider. For the argument about flextime, the evidence might include the following:
The reasoning is the logic you use to connect the evidence to your claim. In the discussion of flextime, the reasoning involves three links:
For advice on evaluating information from the Internet, see Ch. 6.
People most often react favorably to four kinds of evidence: “commonsense” arguments, numerical data, examples, and expert testimony.
Flextime makes sense because it gives people more control over how they plan their schedules.
A commonsense argument says, “I don’t have hard evidence to support my conclusion, but it stands to reason that . . . .” In this case, the argument is that people like to have as much control over their time as possible. If your audience’s commonsense viewpoints match yours, your argument is likely to be persuasive.
Statistics drawn from the personnel literature (McClellan, 2013) show that, among Fortune 500 companies, flextime decreases turnover by 25 to 35 percent among employees with young children.
Notice that the writer states that the study covered many companies, not just one or a handful. If the sample size were small, the claim would be much less persuasive. (The discussion of logical fallacies later in this chapter explains such hasty generalizations.)
Mary Saunders tried for weeks to arrange for child care for her two preschoolers that would enable her to start work at 7 A.M., as required at her workplace. The best she could manage was having her children stay with a nonlicensed provider. When conditions at that provider led to ear infections in both her children, Mary decided that she could no longer continue working.
Examples are often used along with numerical data. The example above gives the problem a human dimension, but the argument also requires numerical data to show that the problem is part of a pattern, not an isolated event.
Figure 8.3, excerpts from a white paper published by McAfee, the computer-security company, shows a portion of an argument that combines several of these types of evidence. A white paper is an argument, typically 10–20 pages long, that a company’s product or service will solve a technological or business challenge in an industry. The readers of white papers are technical experts who implement technology and managers who make purchasing decisions.
This white paper was written by Dmitri Alperovitch, McAfee’s Vice President for Threat Research. A highly regarded security expert, Alperovitch has won numerous awards, including selection in 2013 as one of MIT Technology Review’s Top 35 Innovators Under 35. This first paragraph, with its use of “I” and the references to projects with which Alperovitch is associated, presents him as an expert. The logic is that if he thinks these security threats are credible, you should, too.
Paragraph 2 presents a series of examples of what the writer calls an “unprecedented transfer of wealth.”
Why haven’t we heard more about this transfer of wealth? The writer answers the question using commonsense evidence: we haven’t heard about it because victims of these security attacks keep quiet, fearing that the bad publicity will undermine the public’s trust in them.
The writer presents additional examples of the nature and scope of the attacks. In the rest of the 14-page white paper, he presents statistics and examples describing the 71 attacks that he is calling Operation Shady RAT. The evidence adds up to a compelling argument that the threat is real and serious, and McAfee is the organization you should trust to help you protect yourself from it.
Figure 8.3 Using Different Types of Evidence in an Argument
When you present an argument, you need to address opposing points of view. If you don’t, your opponents will conclude that your proposal is flawed because it doesn’t address problems that they think are important. In meeting the skeptical or hostile reader’s possible objections to your case, you can use one of three tactics, depending on the situation:
When you address an opposing argument, be gracious and understated. Focus on the argument, not on the people who oppose you. If you embarrass or humiliate them, you undermine your own credibility and motivate your opponents to continue opposing you.
There is no one best place in your document to address opposing arguments. In general, however, if you know that important readers hold opposing views, address those views relatively early. Your goal is to show all your readers that you are a fair-minded person who has thought carefully about the subject and that your argument is stronger than the opposing arguments.
Writers sometimes appeal to the emotions of their readers. Writers usually combine emotional appeals with appeals to reason. For example, an argument that we ought to increase foreign aid to drought-stricken African countries might describe (and present images of) the human plight of the victims but also include reason-based sections about the extent of the problem, the causes, the possible solutions, and the pragmatic reasons we might want to increase foreign aid.
When you use emotional appeals, do not overstate or overdramatize them, or you will risk alienating readers. Try to think of additional kinds of evidence to present that will also help support your claim. Figure 8.4 shows a brief argument that relies on an emotional appeal.
This excerpt from the Army recruitment site, GoArmy.com, describes the Drill Sergeant School.
The photo and the text present a reasonable mix of information and emotion. The site provides facts about how drill sergeants are chosen and trained and the responsibilities they carry. The lives of drill sergeants are not always heroic and romantic; they have to teach recruits how to make their beds, for instance. But the discussion is clearly meant to appeal to the emotions of people who are considering joining the Army with the goal of becoming drill sergeants. The passage repeatedly refers to drill sergeants as being “the best.” Only a select few NCOs can become drill sergeants. They become role models, carrying themselves with pride.
Everyone likes to think of himself or herself as a special person doing an important job. As long as the facts that accompany an emotional appeal are accurate and presented honestly, an emotional appeal is responsible.
Figure 8.4 An Argument Based on an Emotional Appeal
In most cases, the best place to state your claim is at the start of the argument. Then provide the evidence and, if appropriate, the reasoning. Sometimes, however, it is more effective to place the claim after the evidence and the reasoning. This indirect structure works best if a large number of readers oppose your claim. If you present your claim right away, these readers might become alienated and stop paying attention. You want a chance to present your evidence and your reasoning without causing this kind of undesirable reaction.
Read more about writing for people from other cultures in Ch. 5.
If you are making a persuasive argument to readers from another culture, keep in mind that cultures differ significantly not only in matters such as business customs but also in their most fundamental values. These differences can affect persuasive writing. Culture determines both what makes an argument persuasive and how arguments are structured:
When you write for an audience from another culture, use two techniques: