Becoming a Persuader

Commandments of Persuasion

I. Know Thy Audience

II. Organize Thy Message

• by topic
• by space
• by chronology
• by stock issues
• by the motivated sequence

III. Prove Thy Point

• Statistical Evidence
• Narratives and Anecdotes
• Testimony
• Visual Evidence
• Compare and Contrast

IV. Build Thy Credibility

• Trust - Character
• Expertise - Competency
• Dynamism - Charisma

V. Word Thy Message

• Vocabulary
• Figures of Speech, Alliteration and Assonance
• Vivid language
• Concise language
• Parallel Structure
• Imagery
• Humor

VI. Deliver Thy Message

• The transaction

This Is Not An Invitation to Rape Me

Launched by Rape Crisis Scotland and the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, this campaign uses striking imagery to challenge women-blaming attitudes toward rape and to tackle the assumptions people make about women who are raped.

Although incidents of rape recorded by the police in Scotland have decreased slightly to 908 in 2007/08, only 2.9 percent of rapes currently lead to conviction. The attitudes of society continue to play a significant role in limiting justice for women who have experienced rape with careless judgments made based on style of dress, behavior and alcohol intake. Current research shows that a staggering 27 percent of Scots believe that women who are dressed in revealing clothing are at least partly responsible for being raped; a further 24 percent believe a woman was in some way responsible for being raped if she was drunk; almost 29 percent think the woman contributed to her rape if she was flirting; and another 15 percent believe a woman is responsible for being raped if she’s had multiple sexual partners. These myths are tackled using distinctive images which feature women in everyday settings to prompt people to keep their judgements in check.

The campaign, is based on creative work by professor Charles Hall, a professor at the VCU Brandcenter in Richmond, Virginia, who devised and created the original groundbreaking advertising campaign in Los Angeles. The revised executions are based on a simple insight and design by Hall and Graham Clifford of Graham Clifford Design.

Outdoor advertising appeared across Scotland for two weeks in October. In addition, over 1,000 campaign packs—postcards, posters and fact sheets—will be distributed across Scotland via regional rape crisis centers, to roll out the campaign locally.

Karen Pfaff/Adrian Hilton/Jennifer Maravillas/Karen Land/Dan Case/Jillian Dresser, art directors; Graham Clifford, design director; Charles Hall, creative director; Julie Cerisse, photographer; Aynsley Law/1 Step 2 Productions/Julie Sanders, Martin Agency, agencies (Scotland campaign).

www.thisisnotaninv ...

Campaign Persuasion

Goals, Strategies and Tactics?


Yale's Five Stage Developmental Model of Campaigns

1. Identification
2. Legitimacy
3. Participation (Recruitment)
4. Penetration
5. Distribution

Nonverbal Messages in Persuasion

The Channels

• Haptics
• Kinesics
• Chronemics
• Paralinguistics
• Proxemics - orientation
  

Eye Behavior
Business Gaze v. Social Gaze
Neutralize Head tilting
Mirroring

Gender Appeals

Cultural Images and Myths

More to perpetuate a shift.

The Wisdom of the Rustic

Much like The Triumphant Individual, the Wisdom of the Rustic relies on identifying with one who has risen from their humble beginnings. Here the intellectual becomes the brunt of jokes, and the rustic wins over the smart guy. Remember John McCain?


The Possibility of Success



The Coming of a Messiah



The Presence of Conspiracy



The Value of Challenge



The Eternal Return

Reich's Cultural Parables

 The Mob at the Gates
This depicts America as a beacon light of virtue in a world of darkness, a small island of freedom and democracy in a perilous sea. We are uniquely blessed, the proper model for other peoples' aspirations, the hope of the world's poor and oppressed. The parable gives voice to a corresponding fear: we must beware, lest the forces of darkness overwhelm us. Our liberties are fragile; our openness renders us vulnerable to exploitation or infection from beyond.

The Triumphant Individual
It's the little guy who works hard, takes risks, believes in himself, and eventually earns wealth, fame, and honor. It's the parable of the self-made man (or, more recently, woman) who bucks the odds, spurns the naysayers, and shows what can be done with enough drive and guts. He's a loner and a maverick, true to himself, plain speaking, self-reliant, uncompromising in his ideals. He gets the job done, not unlike Sergey Bin. 

 The Benevolent Community
It's neighbors and friends rolling up their sleeves and pitching in to help one another, of self-sacrifice, community pride, and patriotism. It is about Americans' essential generosity and compassion toward those in need.

The Rot at the Top
The fourth parable is about the malevolence If powerful elites, be they wealthy aristocrats, rapacious business leaders, or imperious government officials. The American parable differs subtly but profoundly from a superficially similar European mythology.

Additional Fallacies

1. Hasty/ Sweeping Generalization
Absolute situations are rare. Reality is in degrees.
Avoid: "Everyone has fond memories of high school." "Men are better at sports than women." "All advertising is lies." Be careful with terms like "all", "always", "everybody", "nobody", "none".

2. False Extremes--Either/Or Position
Don't reduce a complex issue to only two possibilities.
Things are seldom black or white. eg. "The department must either raise its grading standards or bury forever the ideal of academic excellence." This is misleading because it ignores the existence of other less extreme possibilities.

3. Straw Man
A straw man argument occurs when you misrepresent an opposing view to make it seem weaker than it is. eg. "Opposition to nuclear weapons testing in Canada is simple anti-Americanism."

4. Circular Reasoning/Vicious Circle
This error occurs when a person restates a generalization as a reason for accepting the same proposition. eg. "Exercise is healthy because your body needs exercise." "The play was popular because the audience liked it"

5. Post Hoc Arguments/Unfounded assumption of cause
This error occurs when a person assumes that because one thing followed another thing the first item caused the second item. or Since 'B' followed 'A', 'A' caused 'B'. eg. "I broke my leg because it was Friday the 13th." "Some students who work part-time fail a course; therefore, working part-time causes students to fail." These are not logical consequences.

6. Two Wrongs
A bad action is not justified by another wrong action. eg. "That chemical company pollutes the river; therefore, we were right to blow it up." "He was a creep, so I will be a creep too."

7. False Analogies
May make strong emotional appeals, but their logic may be weak. Analogy is effective only when there is a basic similarity between compared terms. eg. "University administration argues for new rules because it should be run like a business" But University is not equal to a business.

8. Prediction of Consequences
Be careful when predicting that an act will have positive or negative consequences. ex. 'If you take our course, you too will become rich."

9. False Assumptions
One false assumption can cause all of your arguments following to be invalid. eg. "Without advertising, no cities could exist."

10. Faulty Evidence, Misuse of Authority
Beware or incomplete quotations. eg. The critic said, "Most of the movie was unbelievably bad, but there were a few moments of high comedy." The ad the next day read, "High Comedy"...The Toronto Dispatch.
Watch also for misuse of statistics, skewed samples, and anecdotal information.

11. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Eg. If a famous actress uses Crest toothpaste that has no relation to the quality of the toothpaste. eg. "A man does not beat his wife; therefore, he is a good husband."

12. Begging the Question
When you beg the question you assume the truth of what needs to be proven. eg. A politician says, "Our feeble government, greatly in need of reform must be placed in new hands." eg. A student challenges a "C" grade on the grounds that she is an "A" student. The premise in both of these is what is under question.

13. Ignoring the Question
Sometimes in arguing people raise irrelevant points that distract from the real issue.
A) Red Herring eg. A government defends itself on a charge of corruption by saying that the budget is balanced.
B) Attack The Man/Woman eg. "I'm a liar...so are you." "I'm a crook, well you're a racist." "Your mother wears army boots."

14. Stereotypes
Watch out for any stereotypes. eg. "People such a you..." Ex. "A nurse must check her patients."

15. Argument to Ignorance
Watch out for these types of claims:
It must be true if it hasn't been proven false.
It must be false it hasn't been proven true.

16. Loaded, Leading Question/Fallacy of the Complex
"Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" This demands a yes or no answer and both are answers may be wrong. Lawyers sometimes try to use these questions.

17. Gambler's Fallacy
"It hasn't happened for a long time; therefore it's bound to happen." or "It keeps happening ; therefore, it will keep happening."

Logical Appeals in Persuasion

Review: Warrants

• They explain why the grounds prove the point and analyze and summarize the grounds.
• The warrant is the "because" statement.
• When it is evident that the evidence proves the point, it's called the implied warrant.
• Inductive reasoning - working from specific evidence to a general understanding.
• Deductive reasoning - working from a generalized body of evidence to reach a specific example or understanding.
• An error in reasoning is called a fallacy.

Reasoning and their Fallacies
Parallel Reasoning - More often called an analogy, it's used for comparison. Since similar circumstances may have similar outcomes, parallel reasoning leads one to assume or predict outcomes.

• This is used to compare and contrast as well, using what we know to help others understand what they don't
• Parallel reasoning uses literal analogies and figurative analogies.
• Syntax may include like, as, similar, resembles, compared to, by contrast...
• This becomes fallacious reasoning when the analogy is false (false analogy), the apples to oranges mistake.

Examples:

• Employees are like nails. Just as nails must be hit in the head in order to make them work, so must employees.
• Government is like business, so just as business must be sensitive primarily to the bottom line, so also must government. (But the objectives of government and business are completely different, so probably they will have to meet different criteria.)
• Construction workers use blueprints to guide them as they build. Doctors use X-rays and MRI images as diagnostic aids. Therefore, presenters should use PowerPoint slides as teleprompters during live-audience presentations. This argument, of course, is the fallacy of "False Analogy". Why? Blueprints and MRIs are created as visual aids for the construction worker and doctor. A presenter's visual aids are intended for the audience. The comparison, therefore, is invalid.
• Subsidized healthcare is socialism.
  

Generalization - Sometimes drawn from extended parallel reasoning, generalizations involve making predictions, classifications and descriptions. It's also called reasoning by example.

• Generalization is indiscriminitive, reasoning that what is true about one member of a group is true about the rest.
• Syntax includes we have concluded, it is generally so, usually so, normally so...
• This becomes a hasty generalization when there are too few cases counted toward the generalization, so one jumps to conclusions.

Examples:

• All Mormons are polygamists.
• All men are pigs.
• All democrats are tree-huggers.
  

Reasoning by Definition - Breaking down something by what it means, a deductive process.

• Syntax includes it follows that, its necessarily so, so by definition...
• This becomes a sweeping generalization when the definition is too rigid in include relevant exceptions.
• fallacious syntax includes always, never, in every case, certainly, necessarily, categorically...

So, if all men are pigs, and Chris is a man, therefore he must also be a pig.
By that definition that would make me a tree-hugging, post-polygamous swine.


Reasoning by Sign - what I call symptomatic reasoning. Recognizing how artifacts or actions are associate with related events. Summativity v. nonsummativity. Inductive reasoning, very close to causal reasoning.

• Sytnax includes language that deals with factors.
• This becomes a false sign when the link between the indications and the correlating events fails. Supersititions are typical false signs.

Causal or Cause to Effect Reasoning - leads to . Much can go wrong with this type of reasoning.

• A causal link has to be proved with a specific agent of cause.
• Syntax includes causes, leads to, produces, activates, provokes, geneerates, brings about, results in...
• There could be mulitple causation, where the arguer has to sort and prioritize most influential causes.
• However, there can also be unrelated events that contribute to the issue.

There are a number of fallacies related to causal resoning:

• This becomes oversimplification where one ignores other causes, eliminating others to promote their own agenda of cause.
• Correlation v. Causation - connecting two events due to proximity.
• Post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning, meaning before , therefore because of , just because somehting happened before something else does not mean it is the casue of the outcome.

Example: "I can't help but think that you are the cause of this problem; we never had any problem with the furnace until you moved into the apartment." The manager of the apartment house, on no stated grounds other than the temporal priority of the new tenant's occupancy, has assumed that the tenant's presence has some causal relationship to the furnace's becoming faulty.

• Slippery Slope propses a series of events was caused by one event (the Butterfly effect) without ever showing how it's linked. I had two debaters that no matter what the resolution linked their warrant to total mutual nuclear destruction.

Reasoning from a Dillema - It's the either/or position of reasoning. If you're not for us, you're against us.

• Syntax includes either, or, must choose betwee, pros/cons, costs/gains...
• The fallacy is in forcing the dichotomy, not everything is for or against the proposition. When you make it seem there are only two choices when in fact there are more to consider, you are guilty of forcing the dichotomy.
• The complex question is an example of this when there is a major hidden presumption - Have you stopped beating your wife?

Arguing from Authority - takes an authority's opinion, states their qulifications and then states what the authority said.
Syntax includes in the words of, as was established by, according to, research shows, studies show...
Not all sources are valid authorities.
There's always room to question even the brightrest in the field - QUESTION AUTHORITY
Blind obedience to authority is not cirtical thinking - don't get me started on this.
The fallacy is the appeal to authority, using celebrity to persuade is an example of this - take John Voight for example.

Motivational Appeals

The Tools of Motivation and Emotion

Process premises target the psychological process that provide impetus for most people, from the most basic to the most sophisticated. 

Needs - The First Process Premise
Packard's "Compelling Needs"

• Emotional Security
• Reassurance of Worth
• Ego-Gratification
• Creative Outlets
• Love Objects
• Sense of Power
• Sense of Roots
• Immortality

Maslow's Hierarchy

• Self-actualization
• Esteem
• Belonging
• Safety
• Physiologitcal

Emotions - The Second Process Premise

• Fear
• Guilt
• Anger
• Pride
• Happiness/Joy

Attitudes - The Third Process Premise
Attitudes, Beliefs and Opinions

The Functions of Attitudes

• Cognitive influences
• Emotional influences
• Behavioral influences

Consistency - The Fourth Process Premise
Cognitive Dissonance Theory





Sources of Dissonance

• Loss of Group Prestige
• Economic Loss
• Loss of Personal Prestige
• Uncertainty of Prediction

Sources of Consonance

• Reassurance of Security
• Demonstration of Predictability
• The Use of Rewards

The Semantics of Torture

Semiotics

Sign Processes, Signification and Communication

Compliance Gaining

Marwell & Schmitt's Taxonomy of 16 Influence Tactics

Reward

I'll reward you if you do it. "I'll throw in a pair of speakers if you buy it today." "Thanks! I'll make certain your manager knows how helpful you were."

Punishment

I'll punish you if you don't do it. "If you don't buy it today, I won't be able to offer you this special incentive price again." "If I can't get it at that price tomorrow, then I'll take my business elsewhere."

Positive Expertise

Speaking as an authority on the subject, I can tell you that rewards will occur if you do X, because of the nature of reality. "If you start working out at our gym regularly, you'll find that people are more attracted to you physically."

Negative Expertise

Speaking as an authority on the subject, I can tell you that punishments will occur if you do Y, because of the nature of reality. "If you don't buy it today, you may never get another chance--our stock is almost sold out."

Liking, Ingratiation

Getting the prospect into a good frame of mind ­ "Gosh you look nice today. I just love that hat you're wearing! Should we order dessert before we look over the contracts?"

Gifting, Pre-giving

Giving something as a gift, before requesting compliance. The idea is that the target will feel the need to reciprocate later. "Here's a little something we thought you'd like. Now about those contracts . . ."

Debt

Calling in past favors. "After all I've done for you! Come on--this time it's me who needs the favor."

Aversive Stimulation

Continuous punishment, and the cessation of punishment is contingent on compliance. "I'm going to play my classical music at full volume if you insist on playing your rock music at full volume. When you turn yours down, I'll turn mine down."

Moral Appeal

This tactic entails finding moral common ground, and then using the moral commitments of a person to obtain compliance. "You believe that women should get equal pay for equal work, don't you? You don't believe that men are better than women, do you? Then you ought to sign this petition! It's the right thing to do."

Positive Self-feeling

You'll feel better if you . "If you join our club today, you'll feel better about yourself because you'll know that you're improving every day."

Negative Self-feeling

You'll feel bad if you . "If you don't return it to him and apologize, you'll find it hard to live with yourself."

Positive Altercasting

Good people do . "Smart people tend to sign up for the year in advance, because that's how they can get the best weekly rate."

Negative Altercasting

Only a bad person would do . "You're not like those bad sports that whine and complain when they lose a game."

Altruism

Do-Me-A-Favor. "I really need this photocopied right away, can you help me out?" (An extremely common influence tactic and in wide use among friends and acquaintances).

Positive Esteem of Others

Other people will think more highly of you if you . "People respect a man who drives a Mercedes."

Negative Esteem of Others

Other people will think worse of you if you . "You don't want people thinking that you're a drug-head loser, do you?"

Audience and Proof

No message can be considered and produced without regard to the audience, not a new idea, it's one whose truth was comprehensively brought to light by Aristotle. "The orator has therefore to guess the subjects on which the hearers really hold views already, and what those views are, and then must express, as general truths, these same views on these same subjects."

No small task. This is where it comes in handy to do two things; find your own standpoint, and be open to others, seemingly a juxtaposition in task.

That's why so many resources are devoted to market research, demographic study, opinion polls, even swiping your Albertson's card. This data provide paradigms by which advertisers, evangelists and politicians can craft their messages.

Feeling vulnerable? If you're using Google's Gmail for instance, watch the relevance of the ads posted alongside the messages in your in box. Watch how these ads change in relevancy and content while you compose your next message, or open a new message. Audience analysis on a virtual intelligent level, though it's just matching terms and proper nouns, though it's working well enough to make Google billions.

Aristotle held that there are common ideas, values that give us motivation, impetus to respond based on how we feel, how strongly we're connected, how thoroughly we're convicted. Family, security, wealth, health, sex, wisdom, longevity, properity...

What are yours? What is your standpoint?


Proofs
Pathos, Logos and Ethos

Persuasion and Political Rhetoric

Hijacking Catastrophe
Part One


Part Two


Part Three


Part Four


Part Five


Part Six


Part Seven


Part Eight


Part Nine


Part Ten

Dual Process

Many in this discipline and associated disciplines such as sociology and psychology speak to the dual process nature of assimilating meaning. Some describe it as hot/cold, explicit/implicit, controlled/automatic responses to stimuli. In any form, they mean that we experience meaning on two different levels; a surface and a deeper lever. I see it as experiencing it with the head and with the heart.

These commercials for Lexus exploit this process. For the head they speak to the sum of the technology of this automobile. For the heart, its aesthetics thrum the strings (in theory at least, this car doesn't turn me on).






Dual Process Theories

The Elaboration Likelihood Method is a model of how attitudes are formed and changed. Central to this model is the "elaboration continuum", which ranges from low elaboration (low thought) to high elaboration (high thought). The ELM distinguishes between two routes to persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route.

Central route processes are those that require a great deal of thought, and therefore are likely to predominate under conditions that promote high elaboration. Central route processes involve careful scrutiny of a persuasive communication (e.g., a speech, an advertisement, etc.) to determine the merits of the arguments.

Under these conditions, a person’s unique cognitive responses to the message determine the persuasive outcome (i.e., the direction and magnitude of attitude change). So, if favorable thoughts are a result of the elaboration process, the message will most likely be accepted (i.e., an attitude congruent with the messages position will emerge), and if unfavorable thoughts are generated while considering the merits of presented arguments, the message will most likely be rejected (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). In order for the message to be centrally processed, a person must have the ability and motivation to do so.




Peripheral route processes do not involve elaboration of the message through extensive cognitive processing of the merits of the actual argument presented. These processes often rely on environmental characteristics of the message, like the perceived credibility of the source, quality of the way in which it is presented, the attractiveness of the source, or the catchy slogan that contains the message. (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986).




Attitudes formed under high elaboration are stronger (more predictive of behavior and information processing, more stable over time, more resistant to persuasion) than those formed under low elaboration.

Variables can serve multiple roles in a persuasive setting depending on other contextual factors:

• Under high elaboration, a given variable (e.g., source expertise) can either serve as an argument (“If Einstein agrees with the theory of relativity, then this is a strong reason for me to as well”) or as a biasing factor (“if an expert agrees with this position it is probably good, so let me see what else agrees with this conclusion” (at the expense of information that disagrees with it).
  

• Under conditions of low elaboration, a given variable can act as a peripheral cue (e.g., through the use of an “experts are always right” heuristic – note that while this is similar to the case presented above, this is a simple shortcut, and does not require the careful thought as in the Einstein example above).
  

• Under conditions of moderate elaboration, a given variable can serve to direct the extent of information processing (“Well, if an expert agrees with this position, I should really listen to what (s)he has to say”). Interestingly, when a variable affects elaboration, this can increase or decrease persuasion, depending on the strength of the arguments presented. If the arguments are strong, enhancing elaboration will enhance persuasion. If the arguments are weak, however, more thought will undermine persuasion.
  

• More recent adaptations of the ELM have added an additional role that variables can serve. They can affect the extent to which a person has confidence in, and thus trusts, their own thoughts in response to a message (self-validation role). Keeping with our source expertise example, a person may feel that “if an expert presented this information, it is probably correct, and thus I can trust that my reactions to it are informative with respect to my attitude”. Note that this role, because of its metacognitive nature, only occurs under conditions that promote high elaboration.

The Heuristic-Systematic Model specifies two routes to persuasion: systematic processing - an analytic orientation to information processing, and heuristic processing - a more restricted mode of information processing that makes fewer demands on cognitive resources.

Systematic processing is believed to be determined by the ability and motivation of respondents to process message content.

Heuristic processing is triggered by features of the available information that enable the use of cognitive heuristics to form judgments and decisions. An example of such a heuristic is “experts can be trusted,” leading those using this processing mode to agree more with positions advocated by experts.

The HSM assumes that both modes of processing can occur simultaneously, such that when weak arguments are presented by expert sources, systematic processing will attenuate the heuristic tendency to agree with positions espoused by experts. Likewise, systematic processing can be biased by heuristic processing, in that the perceived expertise of a source may establish expectations about the validity of the arguments from this source which then bias the evaluation of those arguments.

The Automatic Activation of Attitudes is the notion that attitudes can be triggered automatically without the deliberation of the HLM or HSM. This activation is founded within one's frame of reference and cemented in their convictions. Instrumental in resisting persuasive attempts.


Source Effects
The sleeper effect works against the speaker's credibility when it's established as high since it diminishes over time. If the credbility is medium to low to begin with, as stroger arguments are offered the audience remembers the more powerful points over the previous weaker ones.

Affinity scams occur when the speaker poses as a group member to create unwarranted trust. Ponzi (pyrmaid) schemes are often very persuasive through associating the scam with credible participants.

The Pelz effect suggests that people like to be associated with those who have power or influence at high levels becasue it enhances esteem to be associated.


Message Effects
Primacy-Recency deals temporally with the timeliness of the message, what comes first and what comes last.

Message sidedness plays into predispositions on topics and then arguing away from what may have been commonly held.

Ideological Appeal

As we discussed in class, there is an ideological persuade lodged in just about any persuasive appeal involving logic - the attempt to change the way one thinks is inherent to outcomes ranging from getting people to buy laundry detergent to changing the way one thinks about socialized medicine. Couple that with emotion; passion, fear, anger, and the appeal has more efficacy, it's the reason why rhetorical prowess appeals to both hearts and minds.

The Epistemic Approach - Patronized Forbearance

From my blog, Thursday, September 4, 2008

One of my most common complaints from students is that they wish I wouldn't bring up religion in class discussion. I can see it in their faces and the hair on the backs of their necks any time I broach the subject. Figurative dukes up, ready to defend. My retort for years has been if they (those who find offense, it's certainly not everyone) can divorce their religion, the foundation of their values from the way they treat people, the way they communicate, I'll gladly skirt religion.

As I write this there are nineteen countries involved in religious conflict. According to the Center for Reduction of Religious-Based Conflict, these countries include:

The Balkans - Eastern Orthodox v. Muslims
Brazil - internal Roman Catholic conflict
The Caucasus - Christian v. Muslim, Orthodox v. a breakaway faction
China - the government v. Buddhism, Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, and Taoists
Egypt - Muslims v. Christians
Ethiopia - Muslims v. Christians
India and Pakistan - Hindus v. Muslims
Indonesia - Christians v. Muslims
Iran - the persecution of the Baha'is
Iraq - Shiites v. Sunnis
Malaysia - Hindus v. Muslims v. Christians
The Middle East - Judaism v. Islam
Myanmar - Buddhists v. Christians
Nigeria - Christians v. Muslims
Northern Ireland - Roman Catholics v. Protestants
The Philippines – Muslim v. Roman Catholics
Sri Lanka – Hindus v. Buddhists
The Sudan – Christians v. Muslims
The United States – Muslims v. Christians

Historic conflicts have been more ideological rooted in theology, a breakaway in thinking condemned by a ruling religious order. These ideologies include concepts such as the solar system, the properties of light, lightning, mathematics, interest on money, anesthetics during childbirth, birth control, inoculation, and the shape of the earth. Lives have been taken over these.

More recently, theology was used to justify slavery, genocide, and racism.

Today we're fighting about gay marriage, unwanted pregnancies, capital punishment, sex education, polygamy, evolution, and the list goes on. These are quieter conflicts, though polarizing. What I'm not seeing is the amelioration of the human condition, a tide of compassion transcending tolerance. Instead there is division with patronized forbearance. For example, if while reading the list of countries above the thought crossed your mind that the reason these nations are warring is because they don't have the truth that you enjoy, I'd bet that you'd complain about my class discussions as well.

Christ, Hillel, and Confucius held a common tenet, one that either exacerbates the nature of the crimes listed above or justifies their impetus. For Jesus it was treat others as you want to be treated. The great Rabbi taught, “What thou thyself hatest, do not to thy neighbor.” Confucius taught it with one word, reciprocity. Granted, the Koran is bereft of such an idea, though it does state, “No one of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.”

Each of the above is a variation of a theme, love one another or at least hate not one another, what one may consider an epistemic truth. Oddly, it is a premise dropped in order to defend it. This scene from the film, Enemy Mine is a great example of this:

So when I get comments like, “I go to Church on Sunday, I don't need to hear Eric talk about it on Monday,” or “I don't like it when Eric talks about religion,” or “Eric Young is the anti-Christ,” I get a bit blue, because I'm not getting through. And I realize I won't with everybody, I know, but the authors of these comments are the ones who had the most to learn.

Like it or not, the way we treat people is inextricably linked to the way we value them and that value is drawn from an emotion of love or an emotion of fear fueled by what we think we know to be true. The nineteen examples above illustrate the power of fear.

If love prevailed, we'd have much less conflict over religion. If love prevailed, the differentiation between sects would be obscured, the colors of skin would integrate, and tongues would wag between smiles regardless of language. If love prevailed ire would sleep in my classes and I could entertain more useful feedback from my students.

Until then I'll talk about religion in my classes and how it impacts the way we communicate.

Dialectical Perspectives

What if communication did not envision sending messages or persuading people about adopting our ideas or proposals? What if communication were no longer about transmitting information, but about generating information?
Such an approach would have a number of implications, including the way communication would be used in development projects and programs, not to communicate activities and results, but to engage stakeholders in addressing problems and defining objectives. This in turn would affect the whole communication learning approach, which should be no longer based on media and messages, but should include the use of two-way communication to engage stakeholders, prevent conflicts and address key issues leading to change.
Such an approach, even if widely advocated, is rarely implemented. Why? In many cases it is due to the OAMS factor, that is Only Apparently Making Sense. Experience teaches that often it is more convenient to adopt what is easier to use and understand, even at the risk of oversimplifying reality, than engaging with more complex models that, even though they are more effective in reflecting and addressing the challenges of the social reality, require a higher degree of complexity and risk.
Let me give you an example from the real world, which is also mentioned in the Development Communication Sourcebook. It is about a group of experts who witness the women of a certain village having to walk a long distance to fetch water. They quickly decide that a well is needed and proceed to provide the funds for such a well. The well is built and the problem is solved. Or so it seems. When another group of experts goes back to the village, they realize that the well is not being used. Why? Because that walk to fetch water was one of the rare moments, if not the only moment, that women had to socialize among themselves. If the "experts" had not returned to the village, the solution would have been perceived as a success, even if in reality it was a solution that only apparently made sense -- an OAMS.
The same often occurs in communication applications and capacity building where linear approaches which make sense in certain situations, such as media campaigns, are applied as a sort of one-size-fits-all. Naturally these approaches are easier to define and apply since they basically require a broader understanding of the behavior to be changed and often assume that information will be enough to bring that change. However, such approaches often make sense only apparently, because reality is more complex and change requires a higher level of stakeholders’ engagement than what is assumed in traditional, linear communication models. That is why I invite you to try ‘to invert the pyramid’, exploring what happens when communication is conceived and applied as a bottom-up process aimed at engaging and empowering stakeholders seeking a sustainable and meaningful change.

From A Major Challenge in Good Governance: The End of Communication as We Know It.
Photo Credit: Flickr user wallyg

Appeals Research Posts Rubric

Specified Objectives for Activity

• Transfer an understanding of communication fundamentals to the social contexts experienced in everyday life.
• Recognize the important, meaningful roles that non-spoken behaviors fulfill during our communication interactions.
• Understand the axioms of persuasive communication and its principles and ethics.
• Evaluate the interplay between the persuasive source and the responsive audience.
• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the perceptual process of communication.

Point Value: 300 - 100 each post

Activity Description
Demonstrate your intuitive and applied research of topics relating to persuasive appeals in political, theological, or psychological rhetoric. To reach this end you will research, write and post three artifacts on your blog for this class, one for political, one for theological, and one for psychological appeals.
Be sure to:

• Apply the persuasive approaches to each; the dialectical for politics, the epistemic for religion, and the narrative for the psychological context, and then find an artifact to analyze within these contexts.  
• Look at motivational and/or ideological appeals used to persuade within these contexts. 
• Feel free to use existing artifacts, interpersonal experiences, public messages, any message type wherein a persuasive appeal is proffered.
• Document your findings, being certain to link your claims to your supporting evidence of breadth and depth.
• Submit your findings on your blog you've created for this class, making sure all your posts are completed by July 9. Be sure to link your claims to your sources.

Activity Rubric
The learner demonstrates their intuitive and applied research of topics relating to persuasive appeals in political, theological, or psychological rhetoric. 40 points

The learner examines motivational and/or ideological appeals used to persuade within their chosen rhetorical context. 30 points

The learner shows breadth and depth in their scope of research. 20 points

The learner posts their best work on their blog, three separate posts, one for each context, with sources linked within the body of their text. 10 points