2.  Writers DO certain things to convince us.  What convinces you to do something or changes your mind?

3.  Ethos  Logos  Pathos  Any guesses what they are?

4.  How an author builds credibility and trustworthiness.  Think “ETHICAL”.  Why should the reader trust author???  Background  Education  Likeable

5.  The reasoning/ argument itself  Think “LOGIC”  Theories/scientific facts  Logical thoughts/conclusions  Data/ statistics  Citing experts  Examples

6.  The EMOTIONAL appeal.  Think of R/S/P- emPATHy, symPATHy  Language that is emotionally loaded ex. “poor and down-trodden” not “economically disadvantaged”  Emotional examples  Testimonies, stories, experiences

7.  The next slides will talk about what the author does with their words to accomplish the persuasion of ethos, logos, and pathos.  Some of these are part of an author’s style that contributes to the persuasiveness of their writing.

8.  Use of a word, phrase, or clause more than once for emphasis.  An essay or speech trying to change a law the speaker feels is unjust may use the words just and unjust to emphasize the point.

9.  These are the questions that are supposed to make you think, and are not really meant to be answered.  Is it ever right to take away the personal rights guaranteed in the Constitution?

10.  Compares the current situation/ event to one that seems different to prove a point.

11.  The structure of the sentence stays the same to express equal ideas, or help the reader focus on the central ideas.  A government of the people, by the people, for the people.

12.  These are short stories, usually personal that prove a point.  They can be done for proof or to gain emotional support.

13.  This is when the author states their opponent's argument, then explains it away.  This “steals their thunder” by disproving their claims.

14.  Overgeneralization  False causality  False analogy  Red herring  Attack ad hominem  Bandwagon effect Your paper/ persuasion is stronger without these.

15.  A statement/ argument based on too little evidence or one that ignores exceptions. › “Adults just want to deny teenagers their rights. Otherwise the curfew law would not have been approved.”

16.  This statement/ argument assumes one event caused another because one happened before the other. › “Councilman Jay Jones proposed the curfew after his store was robbed. The robbery is the reason he proposed it.”

17.  This statement/ argument draws and invalid (not correct/true) conclusion from a comparison that is weak or unreasonable. › “The city council understands modern teenagers about as well as most people understand the theory of relativity.”

18.  This is something that takes a listener’s attention away from the real issue or point. › “The curfew law is the city council’s attempt to usurp parents’ authority.

19.  This is when the argument attacks a person associated with the issue instead of the issue itself. › “ Mr. Lee, a longtime member of the city council, is well known for his dislike of children in general and teenagers in particular.”

20.  This technique encourages listeners to act or think a certain way because everyone else is. › “The student council, the football and basketball teams, and the entire cheerleading squad oppose the curfew. So should you.”