Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
What different persuasive approaches would you use on the following audiences: a boss, a peer, a challenging person, or an open-minded person?
I believe the approaches will and must differ if you want to be successful. Persuasion is meant to win others over, not to defeat them. Therefore, it is important to be able to see the topic from different angles in order to anticipate the reaction others have to a proposal. Since individuals in each of the roles you have listed are typically going to have their own biases and priorities, the message approach needs to be tailored to best win them over. Boss: this is who is prominent in a department or organization to accomplish company goals and objectives. Therefore, the approach should be to establish how your proposal ties in with the accomplishment of those goals .Peer – any persuasions that work on you should work on your peer, since you share similar viewpoints and roles. Typically persuasion between peers can be less structured and more informal since you already have shared experience. Challenging person – the most difficult spectators, the key here is preparation. The challenging person is typically trying to poke holes and arguing against your ideas. The approach you need to take is think through all the possible objections that could be raised against your suggestion. Then develop and prepare the counter-arguments. If you’ve done your work thoroughly, you can win over the challenging person by demonstrating how you’ve thought through and come up with solutions for all possible flaws in your argument. Open-minded – this audience needs preparation as well, but from a different perspective than the challenging. Instead of trying to anticipate every possible objection and how to mitigate it, the open-minded approach is to lay out the facts in a rational manner that persuades to what you want to accomplish. With a focus on logic, an open-minded person will be persuaded.
• Consider the list titled “In Depth: Critical Thinking, The Long Version” in Ch.1 of Critical Thinking. What do you consider to be the most important points? Why do you think this?
I would consider the following to be the most important points: Distinguish between rational claims and emotional ones, separate fact from opinion, recognize logical flaws in the argument, and spot deception and holes in the arguments of others. I think these points are the most important when it comes to decisive whether or not a claim is true. If I can distinct fact from opinion this will help one to determine the relevant information in a claim. Recognizing flaws and spotting deception and holes in the argument of others will further allow me to use proper reasoning when interpreting a claim and deciding whether or not it is valid, sound, or both. There are many critical think skills that a person needs to develop in order to become shrewder. These skills applied to everyday decisions and they can be also be applied to world-wide issues. Every day we talk to somebody or read the local newspaper, we are using critical thinking skills.
• What is the difference between persuasion and manipulation? How do arguments and language affect the difference? Persuasion is leading someone in a certain way. For example, logical argument might be more persuasive than screaming fits, the smell of chocolate cake might persuade you to eat it. So it is neutral. Manipulation is getting a person to do something for your purposes. You could use logic to persuade someone that something was right, hence manipulating them into doing something you want them to do.
• What keys or tips can raise suspicion about the validity of arguments, presented verbally and in writing?
The validity of the argument can raise suspicion if the source is an unknown source. When presented verbally the validity of the argument can also raise suspicion with the origination of the source and if the person verbally expressing the information will change the information in anyway.