A good example of an effective persuasion tool is the use of real solid examples to support an argument. This implies that the author does not only have examples to illustrate, but also a strong knowledge of what he is talking about. As a matter of fact, the more one knows about a subject, the more real-life examples he can provide to support his claim, thus helping in his persuasion process, because, when it comes to examples, people are more likely to accept a real-life fact than a fiction, because the said fact did happen. For instance, when I read about the Bonobo & the broken myth of his “make love, not war” on the March issue of National Geographic, I easily accepted the fact that the ape is, after all, not as friendly as it was supposed to be, because the author supported his arguments with real-life events that he encountered during his journey in a remote forest sector of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. If that author used fictive or imaginary facts, his article wouldn’t have had the same impact on me.
The main differences between fallacious and reasonable argumentative tactics are the structure, & the way used to make an argument. Usually, a fallacious argument looks illogical, and irrational, while a reasonable one will be smoother, and would not need many efforts to reach its goal. Real arguments are also always supported by strong evidence and examples that erase doubt, on the other hand, an invalid argumentation will more likely be made out. The argument will, in this case, try to force its way to the recipient, and will more likely fail. To avoid such fallacious argumentative tactics, it’s mandatory to master the subject you’re discussing, to be able to use strong arguments and evidence to back up the persuasion, and more importantly, avoid making arguments up, as it will lead you nowhere, and wouldn’t help making a point.
-An effective persuasion tool I have always used is simply facts. I try not to persuade things that don't have a basis in reality, because there is no realistic case you can present.
In the books I read, fiction becomes partly non-fiction when the author uses fats in their books. A good example of this is Dan Brown in his books that make historical references. Some of the story is false, yet some is true.
- (Reply) You are partly right, but facts aren’t always the key to a good persuasion, as a matter of fact, authors may invent fictional facts and make them seem real, and this will just mislead you into thinking what the author wants you to think.
- A couple of good persuasion tools that I have found to be effective are to not only be consistent throughout your argument and make sure that it has substance, but also to be persistent. Remaining consistent with your stance is an important tool because if you contradict yourself throughout your argument, you lose your credibility and therefore your argument not only loses it's substance, but loses it's purpose. If you seem like you don't know what your point is, the audience no longer has a reason to listen and take what you have to say into consideration. Persistence is an essential argumentative tool, but you have to go about this in the right way. If you become rude or obnoxious while trying to prove your point, you will more than likely turn your audience against whatever it is that you have to say, regardless of the point. To acceptably be persistent you must continue to support your point in a very respective manner towards the audience. If they have something to say about your topic, rebuttal them in a way that doesn't put their comment down, but makes your point more appealing.
- (Reply) I agree with what you say, but some points you have may not be true, and being persistent by supporting it wouldn’t make it any true. Most of the time, we have to check the origin of the argument, and make sure it’s not fallacious before trying to prove the point.
- Reasonable argumentative tactics consist of delivering valid facts and having logical supporting evidence to help the audience further learn about real issues, while fallacious argumentative tactics consist of being very deceiving, irrational, and illogical in order to lead the audience towards believe something that isn't entirely true. I feel like avoiding fallacious argumentative tactics in writing isn't an overly difficult task. Making sure that you validate all off your sources is a good place to start so that you know the information that you are presenting them is accurate so that you don't unintentionally mislead them. Avoiding Wikipedia is also a good thing to do, since the articles that you find can be edited by the public. I feel like if you stick to factual arguments rather than relying on a lot of opinion that it would make your argument a lot less likely to be fallacious or misleading.
- (Reply) You are absolutely right, before discussing a point; it should be verified so it won’t mislead the audience. As you mentioned Wikipedia, nobody can confirm the accuracy of the information listed on that website, making it useless.
- The main thing that distinguishes reasonable versus fallacious tactics is the statistics or source to back it up. I was talking to my employer yesterday and he was telling me about his son who did his dissertation and it was over 500 pages and almost every other sentence had something cited as a source. There are many things that can be reasonable in our minds, but it doesn't make it a fact. Take justification of taking pens home from work. We think it is reasonable and an honest mistake and it is only a few pennies to replace, but over time and multiplying it times the number of employees, the loss to a company can be outrageous. I know this is an extreme example, but we all try to reason to justify our actions. Another example is when Obamacare was first introduced. It came out that the AMA was in support of the plan and that all sounded reasonable and great. If the AMA (American Medical Association) supported it, it must be a good thing. Unfortunately what the American people did not realize is that only approximately 18% of doctors are a part of the AMA and a majority of these doctors are "required" to be a part of the AMA when they are employed by a hospital. Those are the types of things that people need to know to make better decisions. You should never just write based on opinions or even one fact. You should utilize several sources and use factcheckers or snopes to verify any information you may hear.
- (Reply) I totally agree with you, a single fact or opinion is never enough; the argument should be thoroughly checked, and should also be used in conjunction with other sources so that the argument can be more credible.