|
You have probably heard a similar comment more than once, "Sarah is simply too emotional when discussing this issue. She's got to learn to calm down and be more objective." Or you might have heard the other side of the coin, "I wish John wouldn't hide behind all his facts and figures and just tell us what he thinks. We can figure out the details ourselves. What about this, "I listened to Sam's argument but I didn't buy it. After all, you know how he tends to exaggerate. How do we know he's not doing the same in this case?" But what's wrong with being a little emotional? And why becriticized for using well-documented and reasonable arguments when backing up your claims? And what's the matter with considering a speaker's reputation when assessing their believability? According to noted Greek philosopher Aristotle, not only is nothingwrong with the above qualities, but everything is right with them. The father of modern argumentation contended that the three elements of emotion, logic, and character are the crucial requirements for successful persuasion. He believed each play a critical role in winning others over to one's way of thinking. Without getting too technical, a quick glance at the dictionary will show us not only what these terms mean but why they are absolutely fundamental in delivering and interpreting meaningful messages. Emotion is defined as "a strong surge of feeling marked by an impulse to outward expression." This is our sensitive and passionate side. Logic is "the science concerned with the principles of valid reasoning and correct inference." This is our reasonable and rational side. Character is "the combination of qualities or traits that distinguishes an individual." This is the sum total of us * who we were, who we are, and who we want to be. Think about it. Who isn't drawn to the person who exerts their passion, emotion, and heart when communicating? Everyone prefers an interested and interesting speaker to one who is monotonous and unfeeling. And what's wrong with using data and logic to back up your comments and contentions? Would you rather be discussing an important issue with someone who knows the ins and outs of a subject or someone who relies on guesswork and good intentions? And if we've learned anything from the past few decades of the circus we call politics, it's that not only does character count, but it can add to a message's credibility or subtract from its effectiveness. A message is gauged not only by its words and their delivery but by the credibility of their messenger. Problems occur, however, when one of the three persuasion essentials is either overused, lacking, or out of balance. It's the overemotional, lackadaisical, or non-emotional messengers who concern us. It's the overly informed, ill-informed, or clueless communicators that make us nervous. And it's the person who sounds too good to be true, too bad to be false, or those we know nothing about that are most worrisome. As it's been wisely said, "Truth out of balance is error." And communication lacking the correct persuasive balance can be equally erroneous and unlikely to be very effective. Should anyone think Aristotle's observations have little bearing on the present day, you need only look to the last few presidential elections for evidence. If you recall, each candidate's pitch aimed to gain support for a specific position or piece of legislation byemploying one of these tactics: Appealing to reason, a politician might argue, "Here are the facts, voters." Appealing to emotions, you may hear it said, "Let metell you about a man I met in Dallas who is out of work and has no health-care insurance." Appeals based on character sound like this, "Do you respect and trust me? A look at my voting record will show you that you can, much more so than my opponent." Let's get a bit more personal. Do you have a cause to which you'd like your friends to donate time or money? Using the three persuasive elements, you'll have to make your friends feel compassion for the group in need (appeal to emotion), show them exactly where and how their money and time will be used (appeal to logic), and then demonstrate your own integrity, concern, and commitment toward seeing the effort succeed (appeal to character). You may want your boss to fund health-club memberships for employees at work. If so, you'll first have to create a fear of heart attacks among employees and supervisors to make them feel the potential loss (appeal to emotions). You'll have to convince the executive who holds the purse strings that wellness reduces absenteeism and increases productivity by supplying statistics (appeal to logic). Finally, you'll have to demonstrate that your interest is not for selfish reasons but for the well-being of the entire organization (appeal to character). Emotion, logic, and character are the three legs of the persuasion table. If all legs are solidly planted, the table will stand properly and effective persuasion will result. But it the legs are poorly set or imbalanced, all will come crashing down and so will yourcommunication. Realize the power and significance of emotion, logic, and character and blend them into your conversations. You'll be highly successful in your persuasions. And Aristotle will be proud. |
