[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":2103},["ShallowReactive",2],{"i-kinnu:logo":3,"i-kinnu:origami-folding":8,"pathway-lifestyle-the-art-of-persuasion":12,"i-lucide:chevron-right":2098,"i-lucide:tag":2101},{"left":4,"top":4,"width":5,"height":5,"rotate":4,"vFlip":6,"hFlip":6,"body":7},0,27,false,"\u003Cg fill=\"none\">\u003Cpath d=\"M0.046875 1.05555C0.046875 1.03541 0.048197 1.01579 0.0507438 0.996728C0.0987149 0.438619 0.586845 0 1.18194 0H25.4398C26.451 0 26.9575 1.171 26.2424 1.85585L15.7301 11.9243L1.31574 0.903476C1.17475 0.79568 1.01137 0.761884 0.859586 0.784111L26.2936 25.1441C27.0086 25.829 26.5022 27 25.4909 27H1.18194C0.555061 27 0.046875 26.5133 0.046875 25.9129V1.05555Z\" fill=\"currentColor\"/>\u003C/g>",{"left":4,"top":4,"width":9,"height":10,"rotate":4,"vFlip":6,"hFlip":6,"body":11},1000,236,"\u003Cg fill=\"none\">\u003Cpath fill-rule=\"evenodd\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\n    d=\"M193.68 38.2238C195.994 38.2238 197.87 40.0989 197.87 42.412V231.812C197.87 234.125 195.994 236 193.68 236H4.19013C1.87603 236 2.02305e-07 234.125 0 231.812V42.412C-2.02305e-07 40.0989 1.87603 38.2238 4.19013 38.2238H193.68ZM111.76 89.0072C111.685 87.9474 110.572 87.2905 109.608 87.7376L96.8872 93.641C95.7786 94.1554 95.702 95.7016 96.7545 96.3225L101.579 99.167C94.7045 109.365 90.5733 122.892 90.5732 137.642C90.5733 154.323 95.8569 169.439 104.416 179.945C105.301 181.032 106.9 181.196 107.987 180.311C109.075 179.426 109.238 177.828 108.353 176.741C100.621 167.25 95.6522 153.305 95.6521 137.642C95.6522 123.661 99.6138 111.051 105.963 101.754L110.456 104.403C111.508 105.024 112.826 104.21 112.74 102.991L111.76 89.0072ZM9.63194 136.286C9.14864 136.286 8.75684 136.678 8.75684 137.161C8.7569 137.644 9.14868 138.035 9.63194 138.035H17.2161C17.6993 138.035 18.0912 137.644 18.0912 137.161C18.0912 136.678 17.6994 136.286 17.2161 136.286H9.63194ZM22.6813 136.286C22.198 136.286 21.8062 136.678 21.8062 137.161C21.8063 137.644 22.1981 138.035 22.6813 138.035H30.2655C30.7487 138.035 31.1406 137.644 31.1406 137.161C31.1406 136.678 30.7488 136.286 30.2655 136.286H22.6813ZM35.7464 136.286C35.2631 136.286 34.8713 136.678 34.8713 137.161C34.8713 137.644 35.2631 138.035 35.7464 138.035H44.4973C44.9805 138.035 45.3724 137.644 45.3724 137.161C45.3724 136.678 44.9806 136.286 44.4973 136.286H35.7464ZM49.9977 136.286C49.5144 136.286 49.1226 136.678 49.1226 137.161C49.1226 137.644 49.5144 138.035 49.9977 138.035H57.5819C58.0651 138.035 58.4569 137.644 58.457 137.161C58.457 136.678 58.0651 136.286 57.5819 136.286H49.9977ZM63.0783 136.286C62.595 136.286 62.2032 136.678 62.2032 137.161C62.2033 137.644 62.5951 138.035 63.0783 138.035H70.6625C71.1457 138.035 71.5375 137.644 71.5376 137.161C71.5376 136.678 71.1457 136.286 70.6625 136.286H63.0783ZM76.1277 136.286C75.6444 136.286 75.2526 136.678 75.2526 137.161C75.2527 137.644 75.6445 138.035 76.1277 138.035H83.7119C84.1951 138.035 84.5869 137.644 84.587 137.161C84.587 136.678 84.1951 136.286 83.7119 136.286H76.1277ZM102.266 136.286C101.782 136.286 101.39 136.678 101.39 137.161C101.391 137.644 101.782 138.035 102.266 138.035H109.85C110.333 138.035 110.725 137.644 110.725 137.161C110.725 136.678 110.333 136.286 109.85 136.286H102.266ZM115.338 136.286C114.855 136.286 114.463 136.678 114.463 137.161C114.463 137.644 114.855 138.035 115.338 138.035H122.923C123.406 138.035 123.798 137.644 123.798 137.161C123.798 136.678 123.406 136.286 122.923 136.286H115.338ZM128.403 136.286C127.92 136.286 127.528 136.678 127.528 137.161C127.528 137.644 127.92 138.035 128.403 138.035H135.988C136.471 138.035 136.863 137.644 136.863 137.161C136.863 136.678 136.471 136.286 135.988 136.286H128.403ZM141.468 136.286C140.985 136.286 140.593 136.678 140.593 137.161C140.593 137.644 140.985 138.035 141.468 138.035H149.053C149.536 138.035 149.928 137.644 149.928 137.161C149.928 136.678 149.536 136.286 149.053 136.286H141.468ZM154.541 136.286C154.058 136.286 153.666 136.678 153.666 137.161C153.666 137.644 154.058 138.035 154.541 138.035H162.125C162.609 138.035 163 137.644 163.001 137.161C163.001 136.678 162.609 136.286 162.125 136.286H154.541ZM167.614 136.286C167.131 136.286 166.739 136.678 166.739 137.161C166.739 137.644 167.131 138.035 167.614 138.035H175.198C175.681 138.035 176.073 137.644 176.073 137.161C176.073 136.678 175.681 136.286 175.198 136.286H167.614ZM180.671 136.286C180.188 136.286 179.796 136.678 179.796 137.161C179.796 137.644 180.188 138.035 180.671 138.035H188.255C188.739 138.035 189.13 137.644 189.131 137.161C189.131 136.678 188.739 136.286 188.255 136.286H180.671Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath fill-rule=\"evenodd\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\n    d=\"M444.85 38.2277C447.164 38.2277 449.04 40.1028 449.04 42.4159V132.928C449.04 135.241 447.164 137.116 444.85 137.116H255.36C253.046 137.116 251.17 135.241 251.17 132.928V42.4159C251.17 40.1028 253.046 38.2277 255.36 38.2277H444.85ZM361.96 125.388C361.618 125.046 361.064 125.046 360.722 125.388L354.534 131.572C354.192 131.914 354.192 132.468 354.534 132.81C354.876 133.151 355.43 133.151 355.772 132.81L361.96 126.624C362.301 126.283 362.301 125.73 361.96 125.388ZM371.047 116.311C370.705 115.969 370.15 115.969 369.809 116.311L364.446 121.671C364.104 122.012 364.104 122.567 364.446 122.908C364.788 123.249 365.342 123.25 365.684 122.908L371.047 117.548C371.388 117.207 371.388 116.652 371.047 116.311ZM380.124 107.246C379.782 106.904 379.227 106.904 378.885 107.246L373.523 112.606C373.181 112.948 373.181 113.502 373.523 113.844C373.864 114.185 374.419 114.185 374.761 113.844L380.124 108.483C380.465 108.142 380.465 107.587 380.124 107.246ZM385.736 65.8841C385.891 64.6727 384.622 63.7845 383.536 64.3434L371.069 70.7636C370.124 71.2504 369.96 72.5334 370.752 73.2424L381.2 82.5938C382.11 83.4081 383.561 82.8672 383.717 81.6557L384.393 76.3725C391.143 77.1933 398.567 80.7709 404.771 86.9711C411.124 93.3213 414.726 100.952 415.43 107.827C415.573 109.221 416.819 110.236 418.214 110.093C419.609 109.95 420.624 108.703 420.481 107.309C419.644 99.1317 415.435 90.4514 408.362 83.3817C401.466 76.489 393.038 72.3185 385.038 71.338L385.736 65.8841ZM389.2 98.1733C388.859 97.8319 388.304 97.8318 387.962 98.1733L382.6 103.534C382.258 103.875 382.258 104.429 382.6 104.771C382.941 105.112 383.496 105.112 383.838 104.771L389.2 99.4108C389.542 99.0693 389.542 98.5149 389.2 98.1733ZM398.262 89.1047C397.92 88.7633 397.365 88.7632 397.024 89.1047L391.661 94.4649C391.319 94.8065 391.319 95.3608 391.661 95.7024C392.002 96.0436 392.557 96.0438 392.899 95.7024L398.262 90.3421C398.603 90.0007 398.603 89.4463 398.262 89.1047ZM416.431 70.9616C416.089 70.6202 415.534 70.6201 415.193 70.9616L409.83 76.3218C409.488 76.6634 409.488 77.2177 409.83 77.5592C410.172 77.9005 410.726 77.9007 411.068 77.5592L416.431 72.199C416.772 71.8575 416.772 71.3032 416.431 70.9616ZM425.508 61.891C425.166 61.5496 424.611 61.5495 424.27 61.891L418.907 67.2512C418.565 67.5928 418.565 68.1471 418.907 68.4887C419.249 68.8299 419.803 68.8301 420.145 68.4887L425.508 63.1284C425.849 62.787 425.849 62.2326 425.508 61.891ZM434.569 52.8146C434.227 52.4731 433.673 52.4731 433.331 52.8146L427.968 58.1748C427.626 58.5163 427.627 59.0706 427.968 59.4122C428.31 59.7534 428.864 59.7537 429.206 59.4122L434.569 54.052C434.91 53.7105 434.91 53.1562 434.569 52.8146ZM443.638 43.7479C443.296 43.4065 442.742 43.4064 442.4 43.7479L437.037 49.1081C436.695 49.4496 436.696 50.004 437.037 50.3455C437.379 50.6868 437.933 50.687 438.275 50.3455L443.638 44.9853C443.98 44.6438 443.979 44.0895 443.638 43.7479Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath fill-rule=\"evenodd\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\n    d=\"M684.066 38.2277C687.798 38.2281 689.667 42.7391 687.027 45.3773L596.473 135.889C595.687 136.675 594.621 137.116 593.51 137.116H506.335C504.021 137.116 502.145 135.241 502.145 132.928V42.4159C502.145 40.1028 504.021 38.2277 506.335 38.2277H684.066ZM514.603 124.566C514.261 124.224 513.707 124.224 513.365 124.566L507.178 130.751C506.836 131.093 506.836 131.646 507.178 131.988C507.519 132.329 508.073 132.329 508.415 131.988L514.603 125.803C514.945 125.462 514.945 124.908 514.603 124.566ZM523.689 115.491C523.348 115.15 522.794 115.15 522.452 115.491L517.09 120.852C516.748 121.193 516.748 121.747 517.09 122.088C517.431 122.43 517.985 122.43 518.327 122.088L523.689 116.728C524.031 116.386 524.031 115.833 523.689 115.491ZM532.102 65.8295C530.707 65.6872 529.46 66.7017 529.318 68.0957C529.175 69.4896 530.189 70.7355 531.584 70.8787C538.463 71.5825 546.096 75.1826 552.45 81.5329C558.723 87.8037 562.312 95.3226 563.079 102.13L557.738 102.392C556.518 102.452 555.865 103.855 556.607 104.827L565.115 115.969C565.76 116.814 567.051 116.751 567.611 115.847L574.992 103.928C575.635 102.889 574.848 101.555 573.628 101.615L568.161 101.882C568.161 101.878 568.162 101.874 568.161 101.871C567.324 93.6931 563.114 85.0124 556.041 77.9425C548.968 70.873 540.283 66.6668 532.102 65.8295ZM532.766 106.421C532.425 106.079 531.871 106.079 531.529 106.421L526.166 111.781C525.825 112.123 525.825 112.676 526.166 113.018C526.508 113.359 527.062 113.359 527.403 113.018L532.766 107.657C533.108 107.316 533.108 106.762 532.766 106.421ZM541.843 97.3445C541.501 97.003 540.948 97.003 540.606 97.3445L535.243 102.705C534.901 103.046 534.902 103.6 535.243 103.941C535.585 104.283 536.139 104.283 536.48 103.941L541.843 98.5809C542.185 98.2393 542.185 97.686 541.843 97.3445ZM550.92 88.2778C550.578 87.9363 550.025 87.9363 549.683 88.2778L544.32 93.638C543.978 93.9796 543.978 94.5329 544.32 94.8745C544.662 95.2161 545.215 95.2161 545.557 94.8745L550.92 89.5142C551.262 89.1727 551.262 88.6193 550.92 88.2778ZM569.066 70.1405C568.724 69.799 568.17 69.7991 567.829 70.1405L562.466 75.5008C562.124 75.8423 562.124 76.3956 562.466 76.7372C562.808 77.0788 563.361 77.0788 563.703 76.7372L569.066 71.377C569.407 71.0354 569.407 70.4821 569.066 70.1405ZM578.143 61.0699C577.801 60.7284 577.247 60.7285 576.906 61.0699L571.543 66.4302C571.201 66.7717 571.201 67.3251 571.543 67.6666C571.885 68.0082 572.438 68.0082 572.78 67.6666L578.143 62.3064C578.484 61.9648 578.484 61.4115 578.143 61.0699ZM587.219 51.9896C586.878 51.6481 586.324 51.6481 585.982 51.9896L580.62 57.3498C580.278 57.6914 580.278 58.2447 580.62 58.5863C580.961 58.9279 581.515 58.9279 581.857 58.5863L587.219 53.2261C587.561 52.8845 587.561 52.3312 587.219 51.9896ZM596.288 42.9249C595.947 42.5833 595.392 42.5833 595.05 42.9249L589.689 48.2851C589.347 48.6267 589.347 49.18 589.689 49.5216C590.03 49.863 590.584 49.8631 590.926 49.5216L596.288 44.1613C596.63 43.8198 596.63 43.2664 596.288 42.9249Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath fill-rule=\"evenodd\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\n    d=\"M850.814 38.2277C854.547 38.2281 856.416 42.739 853.777 45.3773L763.223 135.889C762.437 136.674 761.371 137.116 760.26 137.116H673.176C669.443 137.116 667.574 132.605 670.213 129.966L760.768 39.4544C761.554 38.6692 762.62 38.2277 763.731 38.2277H850.814ZM761.338 121.8C760.855 121.8 760.463 122.191 760.463 122.674V131.13H762.213V122.674C762.213 122.191 761.821 121.8 761.338 121.8ZM761.338 108.971C760.855 108.971 760.463 109.363 760.463 109.846V118.301H762.213V109.846C762.213 109.363 761.821 108.971 761.338 108.971ZM761.338 96.1402C760.855 96.1406 760.463 96.5321 760.463 97.0149V105.47H762.213V97.0149C762.213 96.532 761.821 96.1404 761.338 96.1402ZM782.263 71.887C781.043 71.951 780.395 73.3571 781.139 74.3257L784.474 78.6631C779.115 82.951 771.242 85.7443 762.35 85.7444C753.366 85.7442 745.421 82.8944 740.059 78.5305C738.972 77.6461 737.373 77.8099 736.488 78.8961C735.602 79.983 735.766 81.582 736.853 82.467C743.231 87.6574 752.348 90.8207 762.35 90.8209C772.209 90.8208 781.205 87.746 787.568 82.6884L790.833 86.9341C791.577 87.9025 793.103 87.6391 793.479 86.4767L797.791 73.138C798.118 72.127 797.33 71.1017 796.268 71.1566L782.263 71.887ZM761.338 70.4847C760.855 70.4851 760.463 70.8767 760.463 71.3594V79.8147H762.213V71.3594C762.213 70.8766 761.821 70.485 761.338 70.4847ZM761.338 57.656C760.855 57.6564 760.463 58.048 760.463 58.5307V66.986H762.213V58.5307C762.213 58.0479 761.821 57.6563 761.338 57.656ZM761.338 44.8293C760.855 44.8297 760.463 45.2212 760.463 45.704V54.1592H762.213V45.704C762.213 45.2211 761.821 44.8295 761.338 44.8293Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath\n    d=\"M995.759 38.2277C999.53 38.228 1001.42 42.5171 998.752 45.0253L959.55 81.9005L905.796 41.5363C905.271 41.1418 904.662 41.0182 904.096 41.0994L997.485 130.319C1000.15 132.828 998.262 137.116 994.491 137.116H905.298C902.96 137.116 901.065 135.333 901.065 133.134V42.0941C901.065 42.0204 901.07 41.9483 901.079 41.8786C901.258 39.8345 903.079 38.2277 905.298 38.2277H995.759Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath\n    d=\"M505.873 0C506.657 4.57042e-05 507.307 0.195499 507.823 0.587023C508.338 0.969046 508.596 1.53802 508.596 2.29251C508.596 2.76034 508.467 3.19015 508.209 3.58162C507.951 3.96344 507.497 4.26401 506.848 4.48361V4.54114C507.65 4.67487 508.205 4.96191 508.51 5.4012C508.816 5.83087 508.969 6.31772 508.969 6.86193C508.969 7.74056 508.672 8.41851 508.08 8.89604C507.497 9.38304 506.733 9.62731 505.787 9.62738C504.861 9.62738 504.158 9.42172 503.68 9.0111C503.212 8.60054 502.935 8.08005 502.849 7.44993L503.881 7.10571L503.924 7.24028C504.035 7.54934 504.211 7.82925 504.454 8.07986C504.731 8.36635 505.166 8.50986 505.758 8.50989C506.465 8.50989 506.943 8.32772 507.191 7.9648C507.449 7.6019 507.579 7.20078 507.579 6.7615C507.579 6.2173 507.378 5.80683 506.977 5.52992C506.585 5.25295 505.93 5.10026 505.013 5.07161V4.15402C505.901 4.12537 506.489 3.92484 506.776 3.55237C507.062 3.18009 507.206 2.82242 507.206 2.47876C507.206 1.62801 506.752 1.17539 505.845 1.12237L505.658 1.11749C505.467 1.11752 505.242 1.14605 504.985 1.2033C504.736 1.25105 504.511 1.3274 504.31 1.43245L504.081 2.56457L503.05 2.44951L503.322 0.687461C503.666 0.49653 504.068 0.33454 504.526 0.200875C504.985 0.0671945 505.434 0 505.873 0Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath\n    d=\"M905.727 2.30616L904.638 2.4066L904.466 1.26083H901.428V3.72497C901.533 3.71544 901.643 3.71034 901.757 3.71034H902.086C902.755 3.71034 903.386 3.78668 903.979 3.93949C904.58 4.09229 905.068 4.38363 905.44 4.8132C905.822 5.23335 906.014 5.84949 906.014 6.66106C906.014 7.64468 905.722 8.38068 905.14 8.86776C904.557 9.36434 903.783 9.6127 902.818 9.61275C901.91 9.61275 901.213 9.40711 900.725 8.99648C900.248 8.59544 899.96 8.08007 899.865 7.44993L900.911 7.10571C901.007 7.49723 901.203 7.8271 901.499 8.09449C901.795 8.37131 902.211 8.50985 902.746 8.50989C903.395 8.50989 903.869 8.33787 904.165 7.99405C904.461 7.65981 904.609 7.22507 904.609 6.69031C904.609 5.87861 904.337 5.3625 903.792 5.14279C903.248 4.91361 902.612 4.79958 901.886 4.79955C901.695 4.79955 901.489 4.80365 901.27 4.8132C901.059 4.82275 900.854 4.83701 900.653 4.85611L900.224 4.44071V0.143343H905.569L905.727 2.30616Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath fill-rule=\"evenodd\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\n    d=\"M765.49 6.04576H766.966L766.837 7.14862H765.49V9.48404H764.185V7.14862H759.857L759.713 6.04576L762.909 0.143343H765.49V6.04576ZM760.96 6.04576H764.185V1.26083H763.541L760.96 6.04576Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath d=\"M4.80573 6.47481H6.41154V7.60693H1.81068V6.47481H3.50235V1.27546H1.81068V0.143343H4.80573V6.47481Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\n  \u003Cpath\n    d=\"M254.359 0C255.353 0 256.055 0.239186 256.466 0.716715C256.877 1.18447 257.083 1.68072 257.083 2.20573C257.083 2.85516 256.849 3.44346 256.38 3.96875C255.912 4.49397 255.348 4.96638 254.689 5.38657C254.039 5.79717 253.437 6.15968 252.883 6.47481H256.423L256.538 5.42948L257.599 5.51529L257.426 7.60693H251.407L251.292 6.58987C252.582 5.73032 253.638 4.98523 254.46 4.35489C255.281 3.71509 255.693 3.05632 255.693 2.37832C255.693 1.53787 255.166 1.11749 254.115 1.12237L254.115 1.11749C253.924 1.11754 253.695 1.14604 253.427 1.2033C253.16 1.25104 252.916 1.32238 252.697 1.41783L252.467 2.47876L251.45 2.3637L251.707 0.60165C252.118 0.401088 252.563 0.253475 253.041 0.15797C253.519 0.0529708 253.958 1.99446e-05 254.359 0Z\"\n    fill=\"currentColor\" />\u003C/g>",{"id":13,"data":14,"type":15,"maxContentLevel":29,"version":30,"tiles":31},"840d9938-68c1-4d9a-8728-af169d2f0449",{"type":15,"title":16,"tagline":17,"description":17,"featureImageSquare":18,"baseColor":19,"emoji":20,"shapePreference":4,"allowContentSuspension":21,"allowContentEdits":21,"editorsChoice":21,"accreditations":22,"certificatePriceLevel":27,"certificationTitle":28},8,"The Art of Persuasion","Learn how to get what you want in life, all through some well-said words","eea3dae7-f3e8-4b1e-b0e6-8021c0cf4ecb","#46ACAC","🗣️",true,[23],{"authority":24,"wasCpdTill":25,"previousCpdCreditMinutes":26},1,"2025-12-31T00:00:00Z",120,3,"Principles of Persuasion",9,12,[32,105,321,530,894,1223,1392,1642,1884],{"id":33,"data":34,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"orbs":37},"aad51fc6-72d1-45c7-aafe-40f25480669c",{"type":29,"title":35,"tagline":36},"Why Persuasion Matters","Discover the core principles of rhetoric, learn the techniques for making your communication memorable, and your arguments sound",[38],{"id":39,"data":40,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":43,"introPage":51,"pages":58},"e0477115-c7b8-470e-bb8c-04fa30ed6421",{"type":41,"title":42},2,"Understanding the Importance of Rhetoric",{"id":44,"data":45,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"e7cea656-796a-4029-b21b-f6432ffc233e",{"type":27,"summary":46},[47,48,49,50],"Rhetoric is the art of speaking and writing to persuade","Rhetoric helps messages stand out in a world full of distractions","Engaging communication and solid logic make messages persuasive","Studying rhetoric sharpens your critical thinking and persuasive skills",{"id":52,"data":53,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"786f2833-c00e-4ec8-afd8-3bd280b2e109",{"type":54,"intro":55},10,[56,57],"How does rhetoric shape opinions on social media?","Why is understanding rhetoric crucial in an age of information overload?",[59,64,88],{"id":60,"data":61,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"d0de970c-9454-45d7-be88-6ccde439f231",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":62,"audioMediaId":63},"When was the last time you needed to persuade someone? Perhaps you pitched a new idea to your boss, wrote a cover letter for a new job, or just tried to get your child to finish their breakfast before school. What techniques did you use to persuade?\n\n![Graph](image://21606c67-ae19-4718-96b2-18da6c6278f8 \"Mother trying to persuade her child to eat. Image: Lance Cpl. Jackeline Perez Rivera, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nMost of us have figured out a few tricks over the years - very few have taken time to study the art of changing people’s minds. But this art form exists, and can be practiced and perfected like any other. It’s called **rhetoric**.","4b3d83fd-8980-45ce-86a8-3ed5401ff3db",{"id":65,"data":66,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":69},"d4b581bc-79ac-4931-a406-1d562f7a649f",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":67,"audioMediaId":68},"Rhetoric is the art of speaking and writing as convincingly as possible. Rhetoric is one of the oldest academic disciplines, dating right back to Plato. But it couldn’t be more relevant in today’s world, where any message has to fight fiercely for people’s attention.\n\n![Graph](image://1cc639c9-5697-4437-b446-04cabdb923f3 \"Plato. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nWhen we check our Instagram, Twitter or TikTok first thing in the morning, we’re allowing advertisers and online commentators to try to change our minds before we’re even out of bed. As a result, most of us have put up barriers. **Only the most persuasive messages grab our attention**. A huge part of being persuasive is being engaging - and rhetoric aims to create messages that are just that.","a955da5f-9be1-4290-96d0-9a83e6c81306",[70,79],{"id":71,"data":72,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"12042958-a6ff-402b-bd37-aab3b29099db",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":75,"clozeWords":77},11,4,[76],"Rhetoric is the art of speaking and writing as convincingly as possible",[78],"Rhetoric",{"id":80,"data":81,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"8018d0e0-868f-432b-882e-38e9ee211dc4",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":82,"binaryCorrect":84,"binaryIncorrect":86},[83],"Rhetoric is about creating messages that are persuasive and ...",[85],"Engaging",[87],"Factual",{"id":89,"data":90,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":93},"a8c80e10-0f8d-4320-a974-948875a2b35f",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":91,"audioMediaId":92},"Rhetoric is a framework for constructing messages that truly speak to people - appealing to their emotions while retaining logic and clarity. As such, rhetoric covers two main areas: making your communication **engaging**, and making your **arguments sound**. The most persuasive messages show a combination of engaging communication with solid logical reasoning.\n\nBy studying rhetoric, you’ll improve both your ability to think critically about attempts to persuade you, and your ability to get people to pay attention to your point of view. This pathway will cover the **core principles of rhetoric**. We’ll discuss techniques for making your verbal communication appealing and memorable, as well as for making your arguments logically sound. Both of these principles will help you to communicate persuasively.\n\nWe’ll also cover the **history of rhetoric**, which stretches back to ancient Greece. Understanding how the art of persuasion has changed over the centuries will help us to think critically about the best ways to persuade people in the present day.","ea36e482-e790-4fe6-925e-b92608c0f1f5",[94],{"id":95,"data":96,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"f825a715-fca8-40da-a374-9e594b90705f",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":97,"multiChoiceCorrect":99,"multiChoiceIncorrect":101,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[98],"From which civilization did the study of rhetoric originate?",[100],"Ancient Greece",[102,103,104],"Ancient Mesopotamia","Ancient Babylon","Ancient Egypt",{"id":106,"data":107,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":110,"version":111,"orbs":112},"a0efa81d-095f-4078-9a78-aedf92d72bc6",{"type":29,"title":108,"tagline":109},"What is Rhetoric?","Learn about the definition of rhetoric and when it might come into our daily lives",7,5,[113,167,249],{"id":114,"data":115,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":117,"introPage":125,"pages":131},"b032fd95-59cc-4180-954f-0368df336744",{"type":41,"title":116},"Understanding Rhetoric",{"id":118,"data":119,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"ad02f629-77c8-468b-a49e-d56c08b26608",{"type":27,"summary":120},[121,122,123,124],"Persuasion is key for getting what you want, from birthday gifts to job offers","Rhetoric helps you build logical arguments and use stylistic tricks to persuade","Rhetoric isn't just for politicians; it's useful in everyday life and work","Understanding rhetoric helps you spot persuasion tactics used by others",{"id":126,"data":127,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"ba619e8b-7b47-46e7-b10a-98d2437b46b4",{"type":54,"intro":128},[129,130],"What's the main goal of using rhetoric in everyday conversations?","How does rhetoric influence our decision-making?",[132,137,162],{"id":133,"data":134,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"cc052627-a011-4e28-9f66-19ac85308ed4",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":135,"audioMediaId":136},"As children, we often have to convince our parents to buy us what we want for our birthdays. As we go through our teenage years, we might have to write an application to persuade a university of our merit.\n\nThen, as we get older, we’ll have to persuade someone to give us a job or get an investor to give money to our company. In business we might try to get people to buy our product, or attract new clients for our services. All of these scenarios will require the **power of persuasion**.\n\n![Graph](image://7349f0f0-2556-4440-9134-81f4c42f24c3 \"Entrepreneur pitching to investors. Image: קובי קואנקס, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","b3efb19f-49ad-4ade-a070-3189e7dd340b",{"id":138,"data":139,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":142},"7455bdf1-ae12-4418-bb29-ffdd01cabe89",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":140,"audioMediaId":141},"The study of **rhetoric** aims to help us in all of these situations. Some elements of rhetoric might involve how you construct the logic behind what you are saying, while others might focus more on the stylistic devices you can employ to make it more likely that people will agree with you.\n\n![Graph](image://2eed2f53-abfb-488a-b497-a40587c4e63c \"A depiction of the preacher Ezra delivering a speech. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nIn the modern world, the term ‘rhetoric’ has come to be associated with wordiness and obfuscation – using too much language instead of just saying what you mean. You might associate it with dodgy politicians trying to avoid answering a question. However, the practical utility of rhetoric can occur simply when we’re doing our jobs, interacting with our friends and living our lives.","da9047c3-3d69-4bdf-9ec4-03061278e53e",[143,155],{"id":144,"data":145,"type":73,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27},"10bac0a9-69a0-465f-b95e-e5c33b19be49",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":146,"multiChoiceCorrect":148,"multiChoiceIncorrect":151,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[147],"Which of these are aspects of rhetoric?",[149,150],"Stylistic devices","The logic behind what you're saying",[152,153,154],"Understanding spelling","Speaking a second language","Strong reading skills",{"id":156,"data":157,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"ee7906b6-48c9-442d-8d8a-4b153e22c4bf",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":158,"clozeWords":160},[159],"Rhetoric is useful for helping us try to sell things",[161],"sell",{"id":163,"data":164,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"8d540cfe-65e2-4e46-9d06-6e51bd2d60a3",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":165,"audioMediaId":166},"Have you ever had an argument with your spouse about where to go to dinner or on vacation? Have you ever applied for a promotion at work? Have you ever tried to weasel your way out of trouble when you’ve done something wrong? **Everyone uses rhetoric all the time**.\n\nIn today’s world, we are constantly trying to sell things, whether they are ourselves or our ideas. As a result, whatever you do for a living or wherever you live, rhetoric is going to be useful for you.\n\n![Graph](image://af2396c6-9de6-46a3-a1c0-5dcb9cf1b8fe \"A television commercial being filmed in 1948. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nMoreover, other people, whether they’re politicians or advertisers, are using rhetoric to persuade you of things. Having a proper understanding of rhetoric can allow you to spot their tricks and cut through to get the understanding that can have the best impact on your life.","043e4618-c5fa-454f-9fff-7a7facd1e78e",{"id":168,"data":169,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":171,"introPage":179,"pages":185},"dd17928b-1e50-4f84-bff9-85480a6bed4b",{"type":41,"title":170},"Rhetoric in Drama and Politics",{"id":172,"data":173,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"50fc2cc3-1ad4-4009-9e27-4441c6ad0bcc",{"type":27,"summary":174},[175,176,177,178],"In *Romeo & Juliet*, Romeo's question \"What’s in a name?\" invites the audience to think about family feuds","In *A Few Good Men*, Kaffee's repeated question \"did you order the code red?\" forces a binary answer","Kennedy's \"our last best hope\" in his 1961 inaugural address is an example of hyperbole","Kinnock's \"first Kinnock in a thousand generations\" speech uses hyperbole to emphasize educational inequality",{"id":180,"data":181,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"88be2716-e096-442d-8a6c-7bd114baa05c",{"type":54,"intro":182},[183,184],"How does Shakespeare use rhetoric in Julius Caesar?","What rhetorical technique did Kennedy use in his \"Ich bin ein Berliner\" speech?",[186,208,244],{"id":187,"data":188,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":191},"a89607be-27cd-4569-893a-11b0ef19e8ae",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":189,"audioMediaId":190},"One instance where rhetoric is often used is in drama. For example, in William Shakespeare’s *Romeo & Juliet*, Romeo asks the question “What’s in a name?”. He asks it because he is pointing out how ridiculous it is that he should be unable to marry someone just because she is from the wrong family. But rather than making it a statement, he makes it a question – even though he’s on his own, and is not expecting an answer. Shakespeare invites his audience to consider that question themselves.\n\n![Graph](image://9dcb922f-08eb-4134-b000-228738588d62 \"Scene from A Few Good Men at Haymarket Theatre, London. Image: Nitin Parmar from Bath, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nBy contrast, in American Playwright Aaron Sorkin’s *A Few Good Men*, Lieutenant Kaffee, a prosecuting lawyer, repeatedly asks the question “did you order the code red?” Despite his witness’ attempts to obfuscate and avoid the question, Kaffee’s persistence in asking a closed question forces the audience to accept that a binary answer is required. In drama, **the framing of questions allows for the audience’s perspective to be widened or narrowed**.","3ad2aa13-6418-49db-a694-42fef4206d19",[192,199],{"id":193,"data":194,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"7583c61e-0d7e-4019-8ca6-519f9be7cc81",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":195,"clozeWords":197},[196],"A closed rhetorical question is one where there is a restricted, finite number of options",[198],"closed",{"id":200,"data":201,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"075e7732-b337-43a9-bff1-5c366d9455dd",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":202,"binaryCorrect":204,"binaryIncorrect":206},[203],"Which type of rhetorical question do you use to put an audience in an expansive mindset?",[205],"Open",[207],"Closed",{"id":209,"data":210,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":213},"eb223a61-4172-4ec4-b1c8-2d30ec4d14e9",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":211,"audioMediaId":212},"The way a question is phrased can be important in determining what people will think when they hear it. Another avenue for use of rhetoric is politics. In the 1961 inaugural address, to highlight the importance of peace with the USSR, President John F. Kennedy referred to the United Nations as “our last best hope.”\n\nHowever, he couldn't have known whether or not the world would have another hope of peace. In fact, nobody could. However, his use of an **exaggerated statement, not intended to be taken literally**, was done for effect. It highlighted the urgency behind Kennedy’s speech. This technique is called **hyperbole**.\n\n![Graph](image://e0ef29c9-a77b-4bcd-b392-178392805d4b \"A photograph of American President John F Kennedy. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")","2a4f29f7-9a92-4cd8-8380-7ef77c21c566",[214,234],{"id":215,"data":216,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"56958c9c-e6a8-4db9-bc21-a785a1831171",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":217,"multiChoiceQuestion":221,"multiChoiceCorrect":223,"multiChoiceIncorrect":225,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":229,"matchPairsPairs":231},[218,219,220],"bbdd6187-a644-4948-bec5-49b4ef849826","fd5518eb-76ce-4580-99c7-fec132513868","23109f8c-44d2-4128-b4e8-ff2afb96c4e4",[222],"Which of the following best describes hyperbole?",[224],"Exaggerated statements not meant to be taken literally",[226,227,228],"Argument where conclusion logically follows from premises","Argument where conclusion is inferred from specific instances","One of the three ancient arts of discourse.",[230],"Match the pairs below:",[232],{"left":233,"right":224,"direction":27},"Hyperbole",{"id":235,"data":236,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5d54f5f4-5024-4983-96db-32910082fbab",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":237,"multiChoiceCorrect":239,"multiChoiceIncorrect":240,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[238],"What rhetorical technique involves an exaggerated statement that isn't intended to be taken literally?",[233],[241,242,243],"Anaphora","Epistrophe","Litotes",{"id":245,"data":246,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"dee74aae-5b57-4732-922e-f4004fd773d6",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":247,"audioMediaId":248},"Let’s give you another example. As a protest against the educational inequalities in Britain, Neil Kinnock, a political leader, made a speech to the Labour party conference. He asked “why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to go to university?”\n\n![Graph](image://c32338b9-a03b-4633-9192-310d73ce3fe7 \"Portrait of Neil Kinnock. Image: \n© European Union, 2025, CC BY 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nHowever, obviously, he didn’t literally mean that university existed for a thousand generations. **By using the rhetorical device of hyperbole, Kinnock was able to make the span of time feel more eternal**. He made it feel like the problem has lasted for a thousand generations.","838293b2-90b8-4b59-971c-109e03abf9ac",{"id":250,"data":251,"type":41,"version":111,"maxContentLevel":110,"summaryPage":253,"introPage":261,"pages":267},"ef53e752-0146-4b2f-bcf8-fa32549f317a",{"type":41,"title":252},"Understanding Arguments",{"id":254,"data":255,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"48ea04d6-ffdb-4c0c-985d-bdb6c38d86a8",{"type":27,"summary":256},[257,258,259,260],"Deductive arguments are based on premises that guarantee the conclusion","If the premises are true, a deductive argument's conclusion is proven","Inductive arguments draw conclusions from personal experience","Inductive arguments aren't certain because they rely on trust in your story",{"id":262,"data":263,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"9bcbec97-37a7-4a15-a62a-86f028bfd27d",{"type":54,"intro":264},[265,266],"What makes an argument deductive?","How do inductive arguments differ from deductive ones?",[268,285],{"id":269,"data":270,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":273},"21f1b1b6-9b5d-40e2-ad23-d838c20c4a8c",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":271,"audioMediaId":272},"At the centre of rhetoric is the concept of making an argument. An argument is a logical chain of reasoning that follows naturally and allows someone to accept your conclusions. There are **2 types of argument** and it's useful to understand which you are making.\n\nA **deductive argument** is one that will have to be necessarily definitionally true. In a deductive argument, **the conclusion must necessarily stem from the premises**. Typically, we set out a deductive argument with two things that we already know to be true, often because they are defined as such, and then present the conclusion in relation to it.\n\nLet’s look at an example of a deductive argument. Imagine that we all knew and accepted that ‘all cats drink milk’ and ‘Whisker is a cat.’ Knowing both these things, it would be logical to conclude that “Whisker drinks milk.’ **Provided that the premises are true, your conclusion is proven**.\n\n![Graph](image://c181f24a-375d-45f4-8669-f0cb6362725f \"Cat drinking milk. Image: Kengee8, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","f55ffe1d-0eaf-4ddf-89df-0a49f7f4ddab",[274],{"id":218,"data":275,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":276,"multiChoiceQuestion":277,"multiChoiceCorrect":279,"multiChoiceIncorrect":280,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":281,"matchPairsPairs":282},[215,219,220],[278],"Which of the following best describes a deductive argument?",[226],[224,227,228],[230],[283],{"left":284,"right":226,"direction":27},"Deductive argument",{"id":286,"data":287,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":110,"version":111,"reviews":290},"ca88e546-c9b4-466e-a1e1-4b1ef3845f59",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":288,"audioMediaId":289},"The other type of argument is an inductive argument. **Inductive arguments involve drawing a conclusion from our experience**. However, they are reliant on the person you’re trying to convince trusting in your explanation of your experience. If they don’t believe that your story is true, they won’t accept the conclusion of an inductive argument.\n\nFor example, imagine that you have a dog called Buddy and he’s never bitten you before. You could inductively conclude that Buddy is unlikely to bite you now because that’s not what Buddy does. However, **this isn’t a proof - you don’t know it for certain**.\n\n![Graph](image://b6ea45e9-c46e-4e9f-9b8b-d0f9b96ab09e \"Dog biting a bone. Image: kallerna, CC BY-SA 3.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","34a38d7c-49f9-470e-88ef-d66ebe21a447",[291,303,314],{"id":292,"data":293,"type":73,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":110},"70296760-0d2e-42f2-bf5d-34151bed0e89",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"evolvingBehavior":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":294,"multiChoiceCorrect":296,"multiChoiceIncorrect":299,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[295],"What are the two types of logical argument?",[297,298],"Deductive","Inductive",[300,301,302],"Reductive","Conductive","Productive",{"id":219,"data":304,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":305,"multiChoiceQuestion":306,"multiChoiceCorrect":308,"multiChoiceIncorrect":309,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":310,"matchPairsPairs":311},[215,218,220],[307],"Which of the following best describes an inductive argument?",[227],[224,226,228],[230],[312],{"left":313,"right":227,"direction":27},"Inductive argument",{"id":315,"data":316,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"3e04d86c-1594-453d-a617-64174891e153",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":317,"binaryCorrect":319,"binaryIncorrect":320},[318],"Which type of argument is definitionally true if it is predicated upon two true premises?",[297],[298],{"id":322,"data":323,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"orbs":326},"80542121-6772-4ccc-821d-9f65978b88ec",{"type":29,"title":324,"tagline":325},"Origins of Rhetoric","Discover the origins of rhetorical theory as well as the conventions of writing and speaking that come from the classical world",[327,418],{"id":328,"data":329,"type":41,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":330,"introPage":338,"pages":344},"0021ba1f-0003-4fab-b4ea-f0b031fd2d39",{"type":41,"title":116},{"id":331,"data":332,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"8c90417f-ad68-4421-834b-3fd201b21912",{"type":27,"summary":333},[334,335,336,337],"Plato identified three key arts of discourse: logic, grammar, and rhetoric","Logic is about creating arguments that make sense and are based on evidence","Grammar ensures everyone understands the terms used for effective communication","Rhetoric is the art of persuading others, while dialectic is about exploring ideas through discussion",{"id":339,"data":340,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"b25b15b5-061c-42b6-8b1f-b260eaeaee78",{"type":54,"intro":341},[342,343],"How did Plato view the purpose of rhetoric?","What was Aristotle's main contribution to the evolution of rhetoric?",[345,362,376,401],{"id":346,"data":347,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":350},"9f42e3a1-17aa-4700-9c6d-6fa197f8e380",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":348,"audioMediaId":349},"According to Plato, there were **3 ancient arts** that were integral to understanding discourse.\n\nThe first of these was **logic**, which describes the process of developing an argument that fundamentally makes sense and is founded upon evidence.\n\nThe second ancient art was **grammar**, which rather than just encompassing rules for phrasing, also included the fact that everyone must have an equal understanding of the terms used in order to communicate effectively.\n\nFor example, you would struggle to explain how the internet works to someone who grew up in 1000 BCE because it would be hard to explain the concept of the internet without someone first understanding the concept of the computer.","99dfcf94-0d11-44fb-90ee-2189874e7b7b",[351],{"id":352,"data":353,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"1bcdca90-cb60-4265-b47c-9e2f2747ca35",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":354,"multiChoiceCorrect":356,"multiChoiceIncorrect":358,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[355],"Which Greek philosopher theorised that there were three main arts of discourse?",[357],"Plato",[359,360,361],"Socrates","Aristotle","Diogenes",{"id":363,"data":364,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":367},"60aadc7a-5d5a-46e1-bbca-dbccc6285b89",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":365,"audioMediaId":366},"The third of the ancient arts is **rhetoric**, which Aristotle defines as the power of individuals to convey their thoughts in a way which is persuasive.\n\nAristotle also took his analysis of language one step further when it came to rhetoric. According to him, **every attempt to persuade another person could be categorized into 2 different forms**.\n\n![Graph](image://1ff0cec2-1295-4707-abe5-337fcd8d5664 \"Aristotle, who proposed that there are two forms of persuasive conversation. Sergey Sosnovskiy, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","dac8d5fc-0ed5-47a9-a202-1c59b21fc138",[368],{"id":369,"data":370,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"c17b43bd-c826-434e-9bf4-9b2e2c92b7dc",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":371,"activeRecallAnswers":373},[372],"What are the three ancient arts of discourse?",[374,375,78],"Logic","Grammar",{"id":377,"data":378,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":381},"9efdfc3a-b9cc-4121-a9ef-7627f679efcd",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":379,"audioMediaId":380},"The first of these forms is rhetoric. Aristotle says that **rhetoric is an attempt to persuade an individual or crowd of your point of view**. The second form, however, is dialectic. **A dialectic occurs when you are not necessarily sure of your point of view but wish to cultivate one through discussion**.\n\nWith rhetoric, you are simply broadcasting your opinion and attempting to change someone’s mind. While you might engage with an opponent, the purpose of doing so is to change their opinion. However, with dialectic, you are willing to have your own mind changed.\n\nFor the purposes of this Pathway, we are going to focus on rhetorical techniques.","f98154b2-4071-4c2c-a583-7c5b48c76550",[382],{"id":383,"data":384,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"8f73b75a-f46f-45c6-a5be-3fcb08b34ca4",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":385,"multiChoiceQuestion":389,"multiChoiceCorrect":391,"multiChoiceIncorrect":393,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":397,"matchPairsPairs":398},[386,387,388],"ae18c0e2-65a5-4c3a-a443-6e5a6109018a","ab765539-70fc-4871-b940-6f5d242db0ee","1f7ade55-8d5c-4fa2-8a4b-a93e81f3576e",[390],"Which of the following best describes dialectic?",[392],"The art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions.",[394,395,396],"A method of convincing people with an argument drawn from a passionate delivery","A means of convincing others through the character or credibility of the persuader","A way of persuading an audience with reason, using facts and figures",[230],[399],{"left":400,"right":392,"direction":27},"Dialectic",{"id":402,"data":403,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":406},"6909deef-7657-4214-80ad-01e42734a514",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":404,"audioMediaId":405},"Initially, Greek Philosophers like **Plato** were highly suspicious of rhetoric. In fact, Plato described it in his book *Gorgias* as **immoral and highly dangerous**. However, by the end of his life, he was more willing to acknowledge the utility of the art, saying that it was a potential “midwife for the soul.”\n\nThis means that he believed that, just like how a midwife delivers a baby, **rhetoric could help deliver your inner thoughts, feelings, and ideas for the enjoyment of the world**.\n\nBy the time of Aristotle, rhetoric was beginning to become viewed far more favorably. Aristotle was, in fact, one of the first people to study rhetoric. His treatise, entitled *On Rhetoric* in about 300 BCE is now widely regarded as one of the most important foundational texts in linguistics.","ec950c61-cd9a-4535-9211-7402087a4c6d",[407],{"id":220,"data":408,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":409,"multiChoiceQuestion":410,"multiChoiceCorrect":412,"multiChoiceIncorrect":414,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":415,"matchPairsPairs":416},[215,218,219],[411],"Which of the following best describes the concept of logic?",[413],"One of the three ancient arts of discourse",[224,226,227],[230],[417],{"left":374,"right":413,"direction":27},{"id":419,"data":420,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":422,"introPage":430,"pages":436},"1ed15765-625b-4fd3-93ec-2483a62da304",{"type":41,"title":421},"Ancient Rhetoric",{"id":423,"data":424,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"767410a8-63be-4f72-ad50-a8fb86e7c4a3",{"type":27,"summary":425},[426,427,428,429],"Pathos tugs at emotions through stories and passionate delivery","Ethos boosts credibility by showing the speaker is trustworthy","Logos convinces with logic, facts, and statistics","Cicero's 5 Roman canons include invention, arrangement, style, memorization, and delivery",{"id":431,"data":432,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"991eb57d-4d41-4fc0-80eb-23ba2f634bcc",{"type":54,"intro":433},[434,435],"What are Cicero's 5 Roman canons of rhetoric?","How did Cicero's canons shape Roman rhetoric?",[437,454,471,488],{"id":438,"data":439,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":442},"6da5e307-f00e-4a67-8042-2cc3bbf3f572",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":440,"audioMediaId":441},"There are three main features of good rhetoric. The first of these is ‘**pathos**.’ Pathos is defined as an appeal to the emotions of a speaker. Pathos can, therefore, be delivered through stories, anecdotes, and a passionate delivery.\n\nOne example of pathos comes in Martin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech in which he directly contrasts the actions of “vicious racists” with those of “little black boys and girls.” Here, King is attempting to pull on the emotional heartstrings of his audience in order to persuade them.\n\n![Graph](image://7a234f4b-6c37-4303-8198-62a4beb391f1 \"Martin Luther King. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nKing’s argument is made effective through the emotional impact that he is able to have on his audience.","6403a8e3-1039-43ae-bc60-032ced6908ba",[443],{"id":386,"data":444,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":445,"multiChoiceQuestion":446,"multiChoiceCorrect":448,"multiChoiceIncorrect":449,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":450,"matchPairsPairs":451},[383,387,388],[447],"Which of the following best describes Pathos?",[394],[392,395,396],[230],[452],{"left":453,"right":394,"direction":27},"Pathos",{"id":455,"data":456,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":459},"3ab2c296-1080-476a-99e9-3b3a9e4b54d7",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":457,"audioMediaId":458},"Another element of rhetoric identified by Aristotle is **Ethos**, which is any attempt to appeal to the authority and credibility of a speaker. By establishing that the speaker is trustworthy and reasonable, they are able to increase the probability that their audience will listen to and internalize what they have to say.\n\nOne example of this is evident in advertising in the aftermath of the Second World War. The American Tobacco company Camel ran a campaign which stated that “More Doctors Smoke Camels than Any Other Cigarette.” Here, the use of doctors, who are usually trustworthy figures in society, meant that they were able to overcome contemporary fears of health risks. In fact, this campaign was so dangerously effective that it led to regulation changes in the United States.\n\n![Graph](image://58f10d2f-e4fa-4fcc-b456-050a61ce18db \"The Famous Camels advert. Image: CC BY-SA 2.0\")\n\n**An argument is made more effective when the mouth it comes from appears credible**.","758e4bdb-71ba-4cb4-b80d-6b4ab187f049",[460],{"id":387,"data":461,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":462,"multiChoiceQuestion":463,"multiChoiceCorrect":465,"multiChoiceIncorrect":466,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":467,"matchPairsPairs":468},[383,386,388],[464],"Which of the following best describes ethos?",[395],[392,394,396],[230],[469],{"left":470,"right":395,"direction":27},"Ethos",{"id":472,"data":473,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":476},"d935130d-3804-43fd-85c2-bfcad2cf3b42",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":474,"audioMediaId":475},"A final element of rhetoric identified by Aristotle is **Logos** - the ability to appeal to the logical side of people.\n\nOne simple example of this is the deductive argument, which Aristotle presents himself. His first premise, which is likely to be universally accepted, is that “all men are mortal.” His second premise, also appearing reasonable, is “Socrates is a man.” He then concludes “Therefore, Socrates is mortal'. Because the first two premises are universally reasonable, an audience member, by accepting the first two, must, therefore, accept the third.\n\n![Graph](image://ce85536f-dcec-4ad9-a5cf-86f20e37289a \"Marble head of Socrates. Image: Louvre Museum, see page for license, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nAs well as establishing chains of events, logos can be established through the use of facts and statistics. This helps establish the basis of your argument in a way that your audience will have to accept.\n\nBy combining the three elements of **pathos, ethos and logos**, you can create an effective message that will convince your audience.","68b7af40-436d-4d74-b0e0-a949922da0b3",[477],{"id":388,"data":478,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":479,"multiChoiceQuestion":480,"multiChoiceCorrect":482,"multiChoiceIncorrect":483,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":484,"matchPairsPairs":485},[383,386,387],[481],"Which of the following best describes Logos?",[396],[392,394,395],[230],[486],{"left":487,"right":396,"direction":27},"Logos",{"id":489,"data":490,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":493},"59ce2294-5fd1-4f58-9cb0-25b801191278",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":491,"audioMediaId":492},"By 100 BCE, the art of rhetoric had undergone even further study. The Roman philosopher Cicero posited that spoken rhetoric can be generated through 5 easy steps, which he called the **5 Roman canons**.\n\n![Graph](image://d9cd5620-afb0-4310-bfc0-633550fdc907 \"Cicero. Image: José Luiz Bernardes Ribeiro, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\")\n\nThe first of these steps is **‘invention,’** which is when you come up with the core principles of your idea or argument. The second step is ‘**arrangement**,’ when you put your inventions in order. The third step is ‘**style**,’ where you come up with the actual words you are going to use to present it. These 3 steps apply to making an argument or presenting an idea, whether it is spoken or written.\n\nCicero then argues that there are 2 additional steps for creating rhetoric when it is being delivered audibly. The fourth step is ‘**memorization**,’ which involves committing your major points to memory. Though you don’t need to have your argument or idea word perfect, it is often a good idea to understand its general direction. Finally, there is ‘**delivery**,’ which is the manner in which you present your argument. This might include **the tone of your voice, your posture and the way you use hand gestures to physically communicate**.","0542a709-8c49-4287-a45a-d74e35787804",[494,501,508,519],{"id":495,"data":496,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"2cec4a85-d16e-47c5-ace6-9d1eea6fe727",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":497,"binaryCorrect":499,"binaryIncorrect":500},[498],"If I was attempting to establish my own credibility, which of the three Aristotelian pillars of rhetoric would I be using?",[470],[453],{"id":502,"data":503,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5bd4dbc0-d317-4b47-8b08-da908a5874b2",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":504,"multiChoiceCorrect":506,"multiChoiceIncorrect":507,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[505],"All cats have whiskers. Jamie is a cat. Therefore Jamie has whiskers. This is an example of which type of Aristotelian rhetoric?",[487],[453,470,400],{"id":509,"data":510,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5bba63c9-2b89-4685-b060-a4ce69521521",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":511,"multiChoiceCorrect":513,"multiChoiceIncorrect":515,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[512],"Who invented the 5 Roman canons of spoken rhetoric?",[514],"Cicero",[516,517,518],"Caesar","Augustus","Catiline",{"id":520,"data":521,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"b6f2c0b8-cf79-43bb-8868-26c2dd902280",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":522,"activeRecallAnswers":524},[523],"What are the 5 Roman Canons of Rhetoric?",[525,526,527,528,529],"Invention","Arrangement","Style","Memorization","Delivery",{"id":531,"data":532,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"orbs":535},"cfbac5a0-4af6-4d27-9099-8208491cf165",{"type":29,"title":533,"tagline":534},"Making Things Memorable","An introduction to why memorability matters, and how great people achieve it",[536,578,688,781],{"id":537,"data":538,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":540,"introPage":548,"pages":554},"d567308e-c1f8-42a8-a7c1-046b45bf2cab",{"type":41,"title":539},"The Power of Memorability",{"id":541,"data":542,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"caf1d96d-b8a4-4289-8db3-a53dd9171e7f",{"type":27,"summary":543},[544,545,546,547],"Memorability is crucial for persuasion; if people can't remember your argument, they can't be fully persuaded","Repetition makes arguments stick; Churchill's \"we will fight them on\" speech is a prime example","The Illusory Truth Effect shows that repeated statements are more likely to be believed, even if they're false","Studies show that even outlandish facts can be believed after enough repetition, like \"a sari is a plaid skirt worn by the Scots\"",{"id":549,"data":550,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"12ed9611-b396-41c0-ae69-f251ceb3c0e6",{"type":54,"intro":551},[552,553],"What makes an argument stick in someone's mind?","Which technique can turn a boring fact into a memorable point?",[555,560,573],{"id":556,"data":557,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"c7431683-a2b2-4b3f-b757-3c5d11cb9786",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":558,"audioMediaId":559},"One thing that is really important when attempting to persuade someone of something is **memorability**. If you don’t make your argument memorable, your audience is going to struggle to attribute importance to it, particularly when they hear counter-arguments or alternative opinions. It is impossible to be fully persuaded of an idea if you can’t remember it.\n\nHave you ever gotten an advertisement stuck in your head? Perhaps it is a jingle or something really unusual - like a dancing meerkat. The reason why advertising companies do that is because you will continue to think of their product. Even if you don’t need a pizza or car insurance, if Dominos’ or Geico is stuck in people’s heads, when you eventually do, they’ll be the first ones to come to mind.\n\n![Graph](image://e5804abd-4b71-4c53-b909-8ad0dadc8703 \"Dominos Pizza store. Image: EPIC, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","28c9eca9-242b-4041-bbc4-1033d95b98dc",{"id":561,"data":562,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":565},"fdcc2a23-bdcf-42ee-afa2-2b2dfd14d14c",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":563,"audioMediaId":564},"Although some of what we remember differs from person to person, **there are also proven psychological methods for making something memorable**. For example, the human brain is better geared to remembering things that have been reinforced several times.\n\nThink back to some of the greatest speeches. Can you identify any instances where they have reiterated the same point repeatedly, either with the same or different phrasing?\n\nOne example of this comes in Winston Churchill’s June 1940 speech to the House of Commons. In that speech, he repeatedly uses the phrase “we will fight them on.” The effect of this is that, when you finish listening to the speech, the message continues to ring in your ears. Even after you are no longer listening to Churchill’s speech, you are still being persuaded of wartime Britain’s desire to fight.\n\n![Graph](image://41dddad7-74e3-45af-984d-9ed0a0c3872d \"Portrait of Winston Churchill. Image: J. Russell and Sons, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","8bfe9369-bb26-4e9a-9bc5-fef600bc1f33",[566],{"id":567,"data":568,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"285a2115-1401-4599-8710-bc3ff91a0c37",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":569,"activeRecallAnswers":571},[570],"What effect did Winston Churchill employ in his famous speech to the House of Commons in June 1940?",[572],"Repetition",{"id":574,"data":575,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"0bfddd5a-a536-454e-b733-c363526733fd",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":576,"audioMediaId":577},"**By using repetition, you are not just able to persuade people that you are right in the moment**, you’re also able to keep persuading them even after you have finished speaking. In fact, Napoleon said that repetition was the most important element of rhetoric.\n\nHowever, memorability is not just an empirical concept: it has science behind it too. In 1977, psychologists from Villanova studied what is known as the **Illusory Truth Effect** which stated that, if you repeat something enough times, people will think it is true.\n\nIn their experiment, they repeatedly showed statements to subjects, who were then asked whether or not they thought they were true. For example, they might have told people that Britain uses 20 million rolls of toilet paper a week. The more often individuals had been exposed to an idea, the more likely they were to believe it.\n\n![Graph](image://a081b468-5bc5-412e-acef-c7429b20398b \"Shelves filled with toilet paper. Image: Mwinog2777, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nSurprisingly, **this study has also since been proven with outlandish facts**. In 2015, researchers in the *Journal of Experimental Psychology* found that, after repetition, subjects would instinctively believe repeated statements that they knew to be false. For example, test subjects were told that “a sari is a plaid skirt worn by the Scots.” Even the subjects who were able to correctly state that saris are not traditionally from Scotland before the start of the test would believe that it was true after they’d heard it enough times.","bd444c05-4969-4715-9a5e-1fcce042d076",{"id":579,"data":580,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":582,"introPage":590,"pages":596},"bd79d634-e200-440d-a5f5-1ffd57aa46cb",{"type":41,"title":581},"The Art of Repetition",{"id":583,"data":584,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"5090743d-a20d-4e6c-82e6-182a565496bb",{"type":27,"summary":585},[586,587,588,589],"A tricolon uses a list of 3 elements to make ideas memorable","Anaphora repeats words at the start of sentences to create rhythm","Antimetabole flips phrases to show contrast or deeper meaning","Repetition techniques like these make messages stick",{"id":591,"data":592,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"9b864708-60d6-45d3-96af-35d144deb429",{"type":54,"intro":593},[594,595],"How does repetition make things stick in your memory?","What scientific principle explains why repetition works?",[597,640,665],{"id":598,"data":599,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":602},"093e34dd-770b-4d8e-980c-64e10c1f17a9",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":600,"audioMediaId":601},"There are different ways of repeating content. One key way of repeating an idea is through the tricolon. A tricolon is when you are using a list of exactly 3 elements to express your point - statistical analysis suggests that the human mind chunks lists into groups of 3. In giving advice to his son, the US President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, famously said “be brief, be sincere, be seated.” Here the grouping of ideas into 3 makes them memorable in relation to each other.\n\n![Graph](image://03bb4b46-66fd-4063-88a9-ae59d4484017 \"Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Pharaoh Hound, CC BY-SA 3.0 \u003Chttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nSimilarly, Julius Caesar famously said 'veni, vidi, vici' (“I came, I saw, I conquered”) in a letter back to the Roman Senate. The purpose of this tricolon was to definitively cement Caesar’s reputation as a successful military general. By getting people to remember his singularity of purpose, he was able to reinforce his political status. When trying to persuade someone of something, attempt to point ideas into threes.","3605c16f-66bf-4834-b125-7bf9ff9bc232",[603,622,629],{"id":604,"data":605,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"e1a5377b-4f73-4607-96c2-14fa05445ced",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":606,"multiChoiceQuestion":610,"multiChoiceCorrect":612,"multiChoiceIncorrect":614,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":618,"matchPairsPairs":619},[607,608,609],"4b347eb8-e789-4ca3-8108-dfb4c700d909","8724de18-bada-476e-ad2f-a3162f88ee02","b40cf559-fb3e-44d1-a56d-042609969c6e",[611],"Which of the following is an accurate description of tricolon?",[613],"Involves repeating an idea using a list of three elements",[615,616,617],"Involves repetition at the beginning of multiple clauses","Involves repetition of a word or phrase but with an inverted order","Involves finishing a passage with the same phrase as you started",[230],[620],{"left":621,"right":613,"direction":27},"Tricolon",{"id":623,"data":624,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"ec2ec205-1830-4b9b-9221-a3021e58b5d7",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":625,"clozeWords":627},[626],"A tricolon is when you use a list of exactly 3 items to make your ideas more memorable",[628],"tricolon",{"id":630,"data":631,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"7dc9f8fa-6356-4953-a9cd-8e01c7f0fdc1",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":632,"multiChoiceCorrect":634,"multiChoiceIncorrect":636,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[633],"In good rhetoric, what number of items should be in a list to make it more memorable?",[635],"3",[637,638,639],"1","2","4",{"id":641,"data":642,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":645},"9d30f510-7286-4aec-98e7-779733cb13b7",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":643,"audioMediaId":644},"Another rhetorical technique that can aid memorability is anaphora. This involves repetition, always at the beginning of multiple clauses in a row, and is effective because it creates a rhythmic impact when read aloud, which leads to it becoming more effectively stuck in the part of your brain that responds to rhythm.\n\nOne great example of anaphora in action is Martin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech. Amidst a background of hostility toward the civil rights movement, King’s speech managed to turn civil rights from an issue of fear to one of hope.\n\n![Graph](image://e13ac126-383d-431a-b42e-10382f8bd400 \"Martin Luther King Jr after delivering his speech. Image: National Park Service, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nIn that speech, the repetition of “I have a dream” at the start of each sentence allows him to push home to his audience that his core idea is one of hope because the word ‘dream’ draws connotations of optimism and idealism. In addition, the fact that the sentence simply begins with the phrase rather than being encompassed entirely by it allows him to refine and modify his dream. Through anaphora, King is able to paint a compelling picture.","5f329a5f-195d-489e-a481-a8c15a92d0af",[646,656],{"id":607,"data":647,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":648,"multiChoiceQuestion":649,"multiChoiceCorrect":651,"multiChoiceIncorrect":652,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":653,"matchPairsPairs":654},[604,608,609],[650],"Which of the following is an accurate description of anaphora?",[615],[613,616,617],[230],[655],{"left":241,"right":615,"direction":27},{"id":657,"data":658,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5854b817-27b1-4826-a21d-687edc742ef4",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":659,"binaryCorrect":661,"binaryIncorrect":663},[660],"Which of these is an example of anaphora?",[662],"The \"I have a dream\" speech",[664],"The \"Military Industrial Complex\" speech",{"id":666,"data":667,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":670},"f9d08ca8-1bcd-4ae0-b1e2-dcf095786cf8",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":668,"audioMediaId":669},"Another key technique used to make things memorable is antimetabole. This is the repetition of a word or phrase but with an inverted order. This often creates a direct contrast between an unfavorable option and its antithesis, which is more favorable. One example of this comes from the 3 musketeers, who have the motto “all for one, and one for all.”\n\nHere, the inversion demonstratively shows that this is a 2-way relationship. Rather than just giving to each other, the musketeers also receive. Similarly, St. Francis of Assisi, who was a prominent Christian orator, said that “it is in giving that we receive, in pardoning that we are pardoned.” In using antimetabole, St. Francis is showing the 2-directional nature of his transaction.\n\n![Graph](image://4311b06d-85ba-4624-ba15-654aacbf0be3 \"Francis of Assisi. Image: Philip Fruytiers, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nA more recent example of antimetabole as an appendage of rhetoric comes from the inauguration of President Biden. He said “we’ll lead not merely by the example of our power, but by the power of our example.” Unlike the above examples, this is not simply transactional. It teases the expected trope, but instead then pulls it away to reveal a better alternative.","6b5aa24d-bff9-4a23-a2bc-638e2c6905d3",[671,682],{"id":608,"data":672,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":673,"multiChoiceQuestion":674,"multiChoiceCorrect":676,"multiChoiceIncorrect":677,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":678,"matchPairsPairs":679},[604,607,609],[675],"Which of the following is an accurate description of antimetabole?",[616],[613,615,617],[230],[680],{"left":681,"right":616,"direction":27},"Antimetabole",{"id":683,"data":684,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"54784bb6-c7d1-488d-9fe4-bd9842ba16b0",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":685,"clozeWords":687},[686],"Antimetabole is a rhetorical technique that involves repeating a phrase with an inverted word order. For example, this technique is used in the motto \"all for one and one for all\"",[681],{"id":689,"data":690,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":692,"introPage":700,"pages":706},"e9fe6f74-ca65-4664-817e-ac06b2ac9a5b",{"type":41,"title":691},"Mastering Rhetorical Techniques",{"id":693,"data":694,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"becdaf18-ea37-437a-bb95-e60e00ba464a",{"type":27,"summary":695},[696,697,698,699],"Epanalepsis repeats the same phrase at the start and end of a passage to emphasize the main message","Epistrophe repeats a phrase at the end of clauses to show inevitability","Epizeuxis repeats a word or phrase in direct succession to ensure it stands out","The phrase 'location, location, location' is a classic example of epizeuxis in real estate",{"id":701,"data":702,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"6a4be4f6-e737-4aba-9f15-b146b5816db6",{"type":54,"intro":703},[704,705],"What makes an analogy memorable?","How does repetition enhance a speech?",[707,733,738,752,776],{"id":708,"data":709,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":712},"cd7ae0b4-a4bb-4e00-943f-970de746a66c",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":710,"audioMediaId":711},"While antimetabole occurs when you end a phrase with the opposite of what you started it with, **epanalepsis is when you finish a passage with the same phrase as you started**. This allows for you to repeat it, but also for that to appear as the foregrounded message.\n\nThink back to any time you’ve read an article. Did it begin with an introduction and end with a conclusion? The reason it does this is so it can put the main message, the most important content, in the foreground. Epanalepsis does this, but on a much smaller scale.","c3732833-3b17-4635-8fd3-88d7a62852f3",[713,724],{"id":609,"data":714,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":715,"multiChoiceQuestion":716,"multiChoiceCorrect":718,"multiChoiceIncorrect":719,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":720,"matchPairsPairs":721},[604,607,608],[717],"Which of the following is an accurate description of epanalepsis?",[617],[613,615,616],[230],[722],{"left":723,"right":617,"direction":27},"Epanalepsis",{"id":725,"data":726,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"90b0ceef-abee-4e25-bd34-7012c3cec07c",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":727,"binaryCorrect":729,"binaryIncorrect":731},[728],"Which of these is an example of epanalepsis?",[730],"The King is Dead. Long Live the King",[732],"Let us lead not by the example of our power but by the power of our example",{"id":734,"data":735,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"a73892be-c518-43e4-9cf3-eeb43ed46361",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":736,"audioMediaId":737},"One example of epinalepsis comes in the traditional monarchical coronation rites. When the monarch dies, the pronouncement is typically ‘**The King** is dead. Long live **the King**.’ Here, the repetition of the phrase ‘the King’ serves to exemplify the continuity that exists.\n\nAnother way in which epanalepsis can be used is to emphasize the meaning of a phrase. For example, the activist Ralph Nader famously stated that “a **minimum wage** that is not a livable wage can never be a **minimum wage**.”\n\n![Graph](image://50eb7734-69c3-45e7-8c8f-f30f8092d677 \"A photograph of the activist Ralph Nader. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/wickenden/ Don LaVange, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","3309295f-3c16-4a2b-9652-103acb4dacb1",{"id":739,"data":740,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":743},"72b8032d-0bf7-46c8-8479-1320c4bc9d56",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":741,"audioMediaId":742},"Another rhetorical technique that can be used is **epistrophe**. This is when the same phrase is repeated, but it is always used at the end of the clause. This is effective because it shows an inevitability to the sentence.\n\n![Graph](image://d68e9a94-ab57-4212-ae11-ea6af05e9bc3 \"Robert F. Kennedy (left) and President Lyndon B. Johnson (right). Image: Yoichi Okamoto, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nOne example of this comes in a speech from the American President Lyndon B Johnson. He said that “there is no Southern **problem**. There is no Northern **problem**. There is only an American **problem**.” Here, the repetition of the word ‘problem’ at the end of each sentence shows it to be an inevitable product of the words before it. In doing so, he is pushing for unity by stating that it is impossible to blame any one group for its foundation.","16d1a5d7-ae26-42e5-b370-7ce0b9a01a5a",[744],{"id":745,"data":746,"type":73,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27},"2af5540f-1c78-4329-91e7-e5f559ed39f7",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":747,"multiChoiceCorrect":749,"multiChoiceIncorrect":750,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[748],"What is it called when identical phrases are repeated at the end of multiple clauses?",[242],[681,723,751],"Epizeuxis",{"id":753,"data":754,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":757},"bedc6e83-98a0-4832-b7c6-144cd65fc850",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":755,"audioMediaId":756},"Similarly, in a speech campaigning for an end to the apartheid in South Africa, Nelson Mandela states that “the time for the healing of the wounds **has come**. The moment to bridge the chasms that divide us **has come**.” Here, the repetition of the phrase ‘has come’ shows that change is inevitable and, therefore, should not be resisted.\n\n![Graph](image://5a188491-9b5f-428c-8050-30b16a5ef101 \"Nelson Mandela. Image: Library of the London School of Economics and Political Science, No restrictions, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nEpizeuxis is perhaps the most obvious example of rhetorical usage. This is when **a word or phrase is repeated in direct succession**. The impact of this is that, **even if an audience member is distracted in their listening or reading, it is impossible to miss** because it is so unusual.","c725e83a-0fb0-4a3a-aabb-33e99adad40d",[758],{"id":759,"data":760,"type":73,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27},"1929b284-4e9b-4afb-86b6-c54e29ee5aef",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":761,"multiChoiceQuestion":765,"multiChoiceCorrect":767,"multiChoiceIncorrect":769,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":773,"matchPairsPairs":774},[762,763,764],"c9fdbd5d-2519-48cd-9232-318c6c4a431d","1133eb3c-9d28-4077-a62c-b6b3289cf436","cb1052ca-0a3d-422c-a1be-cdccde7ae8c6",[766],"Which of the following best describes epizeuxis?",[768],"Repeating a word or phrase in direct succession",[770,771,772],"A rhetorical technique where a speaker corrects themselves to make a point","A trick or device intended to attract attention or publicity","A rhetorical technique where the main point is initially hidden",[230],[775],{"left":751,"right":768,"direction":27},{"id":777,"data":778,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"6641e371-a14b-4641-ba27-f53cd584dc6d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":779,"audioMediaId":780},"One example of epizeuxis comes from the British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who stated that “our top priority was, is, and always will be **education, education, education**.” This draws attention unequivocally and attempts to show that Blair’s focus is undivided.\n\n![Graph](image://25048676-8f01-4d99-b643-f476e5056715 \"A photograph of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, during another speech on the importance of education. Image: Center for American Progress, CC BY-ND 2.0 via Flickr, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/\")\n\nAnother example of this comes from the real estate industry. As early as 1926, real estate agents said that the top priority when buying a house was ‘**location, location, location**.’ This serves to get that key concept stuck in the minds of the buyers so that they attach importance to it.","a0c4f12f-fd59-4074-aca1-592d56289b85",{"id":782,"data":783,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":785,"introPage":793,"pages":799},"eb28480c-18b1-4bb2-b791-fe42ac7d23f1",{"type":41,"title":784},"Exploring Advanced Techniques",{"id":786,"data":787,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"bc14be0a-dc2f-4002-a2a9-98d44d488d9f",{"type":27,"summary":788},[789,790,791,792],"Asyndetic lists remove the final 'and' to make lists seem endless","Polysyndetic lists use 'and' between each item to make lists feel longer","Metanoia corrects a statement to make the final idea seem bigger","Concealed premises hide the main point until a dramatic reveal",{"id":794,"data":795,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"14dce48f-e54c-4a74-b640-5aae746fde14",{"type":54,"intro":796},[797,798],"What makes a memory technique unforgettable?","How do advanced techniques impact memory retention?",[800,814,829,846,863,889],{"id":801,"data":802,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":805},"2beace62-84b1-4af0-a71c-fca1e269b500",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":803,"audioMediaId":804},"Although it is the repetition of a grammatical feature rather than a single word, concept or idea, **repetition can also appear through lists**. There are 2 types of list that we are going to look at as rhetorical features: **asyndetic lists and polysyndetic lists**.\n\nAsyndeton is when you remove the final ‘and’ from a list so that each individual element, including the last one, is simply separated by commas.\n\n![Graph](image://1af8fa2e-9b41-4cb7-863c-7d5afade8ef3 \"American President, Dwight D. Eisenhower. Image: White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nOne example of this comes from the American President Dwight D Eisenhower. In his speech criticizing the Military-Industrial complex, he referenced “every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired.” Here, the impact of using an asyndetic list is that it makes it seem like there is no final weapon, making it seem endless.","e8ec1660-99bc-4ba1-9467-3900d390d347",[806],{"id":807,"data":808,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"e4c7b6f2-f540-44af-868d-66d948e655ea",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":809,"activeRecallAnswers":811},[810],"In rhetoric, what are the two types of list?",[812,813],"Asyndetic","Polysyndetic",{"id":815,"data":816,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":819},"aefba7a9-f2d8-47d0-b187-41ee3d5b080e",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":817,"audioMediaId":818},"The other type of list that can be used is a **polysyndetic list**. This is when **each individual element of a list is separated by an ‘and’** in order to make the list seem longer than it is.\n\nOne example of this comes from the American author William F Buckley, who wrote that “in the years gone by, there was in every community men and women who spoke the language of duty **and** morality **and** loyalty **and** obligation.” Here, the impact of the polysyndeton is that **it truncates the rhythm** when reading the sentence, **making an audible reader breathless or a visual reader tired**. As a result, **the list appears longer** than it actually is.\n\n![Graph](image://fb3799cf-5d20-45bf-99ac-bbd0acaefded \"William F. Buckley, Jr. Image: SPC 5 Bert Goulait, US Military, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nA common use of this technique is to make lists of reasons for supporting an idea or belief longer than it actually is.","b6ce816e-8a6e-47bc-84f4-636ef2aff81a",[820],{"id":821,"data":822,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"10c7bd61-d51a-4bec-b2a5-f49b33458247",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":823,"binaryCorrect":825,"binaryIncorrect":827},[824],"What type of list is \"duty and morality and loyalty and obligation\"?",[826],"Polysyndeton",[828],"Asyndeton",{"id":830,"data":831,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":834},"04224b10-8ec0-465f-911e-e16b4b40fcc5",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":832,"audioMediaId":833},"Have you ever heard someone slip up in a speech and then correct themselves? Have you ever considered that they might have done it on purpose?\n\nSometimes, when giving speeches, someone might correct themselves. This is because they want to plant an idea in your head and then surplant it. For example, if the CEO of a banana growing company told you that they were the greatest farmers in the world, you might think that it’s pretty cool. However, if he says “we’re the greatest farmers in Brazil, nay, the world,” it seems even more impressive because he’s given you something to compare it to. The world is made to seem bigger by the fact that Brazil was the initial expectation set in your mind.\n\n![Graph](image://7f4194d4-6383-49e1-be7d-71ce3ceca1d3 \"Banana farm in Brazil. Image: ABHIJEET, CC BY-SA 3.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**This technique is called metanoia**, and it can be a powerful way of showing things to be big or important.","35ac4825-36b8-4575-80a2-6a93547f52a3",[835],{"id":762,"data":836,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":837,"multiChoiceQuestion":838,"multiChoiceCorrect":840,"multiChoiceIncorrect":841,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":842,"matchPairsPairs":843},[759,763,764],[839],"Which of the following best describes metanoia?",[770],[768,771,772],[230],[844],{"left":845,"right":770,"direction":27},"Metanoia",{"id":847,"data":848,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":851},"dd34d838-eca2-4548-8166-41b36df40fb8",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":849,"audioMediaId":850},"A slightly more difficult to define rhetorical technique is that of the gimmick. **This is when a speaker attempts to become memorable simply by their plea toward absurdity**. Because what they are doing is so highly irregular, it will stick into people’s brains.\n\nFor example, when Sacha Baron Cohen was invited to give a commencement speech at Harvard University in 2004, he did so entirely in character as ‘Ali G.’ Moreover, he opened the speech by saying that university was a complete waste of money. Since this was so unusual, he was able to be remembered because of it.\n\n![Graph](image://b38da6ad-bd33-4f73-bd0b-9b931c4002fe \"A photograph of Sacha Baron Cohen's speech at Harvard University in 2004. Image: Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","b58fb310-09fe-46b2-bdb1-80a1dbaf28f0",[852],{"id":763,"data":853,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":854,"multiChoiceQuestion":855,"multiChoiceCorrect":857,"multiChoiceIncorrect":858,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":859,"matchPairsPairs":860},[759,762,764],[856],"Which of the following best describes a gimmick?",[771],[768,770,772],[230],[861],{"left":862,"right":771,"direction":27},"Gimmick",{"id":864,"data":865,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":868},"f1691ea5-2261-45f2-a6a2-e5ed89b516d6",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":866,"audioMediaId":867},"However, it is important to note that **the gimmick is not always the correct feature for usage in a public speech**. Sometimes, gimmicks undermine the credibility of the presenter or the seriousness of your point. There is, therefore, always a difficult assessment to make about your audience and the context of your communication.\n\nOne gimmick that is particularly popular is that of the **concealed premise**. This occurs when, rather than outlining the purpose of a speech or piece of writing at its beginning, it is hidden and then revealed, like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat.\n\n![Graph](image://3b24d6e2-7c2e-47fe-bf48-e0f49e2990b5 \"Poster of a magician holding a rabbit and flowers. Image: Strobridge Litho. Co., Cincinnati & New York, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","d0432a21-a58a-4328-a71a-88db42dedc38",[869,880],{"id":764,"data":870,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"collapsingSiblings":871,"multiChoiceQuestion":872,"multiChoiceCorrect":874,"multiChoiceIncorrect":875,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6,"matchPairsQuestion":876,"matchPairsPairs":877},[759,762,763],[873],"Which of the following best describes a concealed premise?",[772],[768,770,771],[230],[878],{"left":879,"right":772,"direction":27},"Concealed premise",{"id":881,"data":882,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"519d2e05-9bc5-4c48-a3d8-c77347b70810",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":883,"binaryCorrect":885,"binaryIncorrect":887},[884],"In rhetoric, what tends to be more memorable?",[886],"Irregular Behaviour",[888],"Expected Behaviour",{"id":890,"data":891,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"187da836-4248-47d6-aa23-aef5aa108f9d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":892,"audioMediaId":893},"One famous example of this occurred in Steve Jobs’ 2007 launch of the Apple iPhone, to which reporters were invited without being told its purpose. For the first three minutes of his presentation, he didn’t mention to the audience what device they were presenting. Instead, he told them that they were launching three different devices: a web browser, a communications device and a music player. However, after three minutes, Jobs revealed that these three devices were in fact a single device.\n\n![Graph](image://06c95d33-c041-4df6-9f04-348e3b8c2948 \"Steve Jobs launching the iPhone. Image: Ben Stanfield, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**The shock of this moment allowed for his message to be singularly memorable**. As a result, the rhetoric he used in attempting to persuade people to buy an iPhone was even more effective. Even though he didn’t use repetition, which is the primary method of making a speech memorable, he was able to achieve his goal using a concealed premise.","a5bc3b58-4875-4da0-8373-9757b95744fe",{"id":895,"data":896,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"orbs":899},"cd787c6b-1c41-4469-a80e-a2fb55873251",{"type":29,"title":897,"tagline":898},"Framing Through The Established","How to use things people already know to your advantage",[900,979,1048,1132],{"id":901,"data":902,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":904,"introPage":912,"pages":918},"46824c5b-eb1a-4a29-9d8a-062e06bb45fc",{"type":41,"title":903},"Understanding and Leveraging Preconceptions",{"id":905,"data":906,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"8ac1f858-5c64-40e2-aaa9-d2a0a8634ffb",{"type":27,"summary":907},[908,909,910,911],"Preconceptions come from logic, experience, or prejudice","Use emotions by putting yourself in the audience's shoes","Build credibility by referencing your own past","Twist common phrases to leverage existing associations",{"id":913,"data":914,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"2714ad89-9823-458b-bedf-545d71857be8",{"type":54,"intro":915},[916,917],"How can idiomatic phrases be twisted to influence beliefs?","What makes corrupted idioms so persuasive?",[919,924,942],{"id":920,"data":921,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"ba07d804-e627-4a0d-a704-0fc89388e3ab",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":922,"audioMediaId":923},"Usually, when you’re trying to persuade someone of something, you are not doing so in a vacuum. **By the time you come to persuade someone of something they might already have formed an opinion**. These pre-existing opinions can stem from different sources.\n\nSome will be based on **logical reasons**, some of them will be based on **empirical evidence**, meaning people's individual experiences, and some of them will be **prejudices**.\n\nA smart rhetorician will not only create an argument that stands firm in a vacuum but **they’ll create one which uses people’s established preconceptions and cognitive biases**. The theory of framing does not exist in a rhetorical vacuum: it is tied to **Aristotle’s 3 elements of rhetoric**.","ac9e2575-e322-456f-bb87-22d6f88421ec",{"id":925,"data":926,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":929},"e4e0584b-eb2f-4f6d-a74f-9df89629937c",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":927,"audioMediaId":928},"**Pathos is an appeal to the emotions of an audience, with a particular focus on their experience**. In simple terms, this means putting yourself in the audience's shoes. For example, a climate campaigner, rather than focusing on abstract numbers, might find it more effective to say 'imagine how your life would be changed if a third of your city was underwater.' It's about getting your audience to feel directly the effects of your argument.\n\n**Ethos is appealing to the credibility of a speaker and is often built through referencing your own past**. For example, in General Douglas MacArthur’s speech to Congress in 1951 in defense of the military, he mentioned his service record, saying that joining the army was “the fulfillment of all my boyish hopes and dreams.”\n\n![Graph](image://00c9768e-4e43-4fd9-800c-cae39bf8f585 \"General Douglas MacArthur. Public domain image, via Wikimedia Commons.\")\n\nFinally, **Logos is appealing to the logical side of people, typically through building off what people already think are good ideas**. President Jimmy Carter mentioned the well-known economic miracle of World War II when calling for an energy revolution, saying “a similar synthetic rubber corporation helped us win World War II, so will we mobilize American determination … to win the energy war.”","0a6c1cdf-c1fc-40d5-8b6d-3074bdaf6b5e",[930],{"id":931,"data":932,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"9435163c-87bc-4de0-9bfb-91d20312e9d6",{"type":73,"reviewType":110,"spacingBehaviour":24,"matchPairsRecallQuestion":933,"matchPairsRecallPairs":935},[934],"Match the element of classical rhetoric to its definition:",[936,938,940],{"left":453,"right":937,"direction":27},"An appeal to the emotions",{"left":470,"right":939,"direction":27},"An appeal to the credibility of the speaker",{"left":487,"right":941,"direction":27},"An appeal to what people think are good ideas",{"id":943,"data":944,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":947},"1beee7f0-40ec-44d7-afdf-52bf6a77d114",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":945,"audioMediaId":946},"One of the common ways of using preconceptions is **by corrupting common phrases to take advantage of what people already associate with those phrases**. For example, in AMC’s dramatic series about Madison Avenue advertising firms entitled *Mad Men*, the lead character, Donald Draper, is trying to come up with a tagline to sell cereal.\n\n![Graph](image://08ab9396-3bab-4c24-9f41-109d4294b516 \"That's life cereal, referenced by Donald Draper. Image: wsilver, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nHe is looking for something that will both intrigue consumers and associate with health. In the end, he stumbles on ‘the cure for the common breakfast,’ a parody of the well-known phrase ‘the cure for the common cold.’\n\nPeople will then associate normal breakfasts with illness, making Draper’s cereal even more attractive. Think of common phrases (also known as 'idioms\") that we use that have their own associations.\n\nWe use idiomatic expressions all the time, whether talking about it ‘raining cats and dogs’ or someone ‘kicking the bucket.’ **By altering them slightly, you can memorably use emotional responses people already have**.","b1895b90-ad78-4d42-a68d-6275ba9831f4",[948,959,968],{"id":949,"data":950,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"53c43757-947f-4e03-bcc1-7571fbe397cb",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":951,"multiChoiceCorrect":953,"multiChoiceIncorrect":955,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[952],"Which of these is an example of a corruption of an idiomatic phrase?",[954],"Cure for the Common Breakfast",[956,957,958],"Fight them on the beaches","\"I have a dream\"","\"You're no Jack Kennedy\"",{"id":960,"data":961,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"a812b727-f5a0-4635-8fe4-c33d945d721b",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":962,"binaryCorrect":964,"binaryIncorrect":966},[963],"What is the technical term for a common phrase which has a different meaning based on cutural association?",[965],"Idiom",[967],"Epithet",{"id":969,"data":970,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"f05848c2-6d34-4a31-b8c9-4ed50c72b873",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":971,"multiChoiceCorrect":973,"multiChoiceIncorrect":975,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[972],"Which of these is an example of an idiom?",[974],"He kicked the bucket",[976,977,978],"He kicked the football","He kicked a tin can","He kicked a dustbin",{"id":980,"data":981,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":983,"introPage":991,"pages":997},"adaa73a4-b131-4a09-8e01-0c145a7c07f4",{"type":41,"title":982},"Understanding and Addressing Burdens",{"id":984,"data":985,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"5bf83a6c-6f62-4ceb-972c-be6ddca868b9",{"type":27,"summary":986},[987,988,989,990],"Burdens are the key points you need to prove in an argument","Substituent burdens are the foundational points you must prove first","Choose burdens that are easy to prove and relevant to your audience","Use accessible reasons to persuade, even if they aren't your main reasons",{"id":992,"data":993,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"7aa3b5c2-caed-4974-9a34-f1551991ccca",{"type":54,"intro":994},[995,996],"What makes a burden effective in persuasion?","How do you choose the right burden for your audience?",[998,1003,1043],{"id":999,"data":1000,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"ebeb6dc4-c32e-4740-9394-14a6147016a9",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1001,"audioMediaId":1002},"Imagine that you are trying to sell someone a new jacket. Your argument is that they should buy it because you only need one jacket for multiple purposes: it's good both for playing soccer and for sitting on the beach. In your sales pitch, there are two different things you have to prove.\n\nFirstly, you have to prove that the jacket is good for playing soccer. Secondly, you need to prove that it's good for sitting on the beach. Only if you prove both of these things will your customer be persuaded that it’s a good multipurpose jacket.","d55ae9cf-0c7c-4408-9964-3a2569f106f0",{"id":1004,"data":1005,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1008},"f28bee2e-0ac3-4ee3-919f-ea85df094670",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1006,"audioMediaId":1007},"These things, which you need to prove, are called your burdens. It is important to understand what your burdens are so you don’t forget to prove them and so you can use the time you have to persuade someone as efficiently as possible. There is also the concept of the ‘substituent burden.’ These are things that you need to prove first for the rest of your argument to be relevant.\n\nImagine instead that you are selling the jacket to someone going on vacation to Utah, and your argument is that it will protect them from the rain. Obviously, you’re going to have to persuade them that the jacket will indeed protect them from the rain. However, that still won’t persuade them to buy the jacket unless you can also convince them that it will rain in Utah.\n\nIn fact, simply proving to them that the jacket is waterproof won’t help you at all at selling it to them. Your primary burden is to prove that the jacket will protect them from rain. However, your substituent burden is to prove that it will rain in Utah.","36476463-77c0-408d-9598-ca7dfd60eaea",[1009,1016,1025,1034],{"id":1010,"data":1011,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"9c857014-64e5-404e-8d24-a73086dacfee",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1012,"clozeWords":1014},[1013],"A burden is something that you need to prove in order for your argument to appear valid",[1015],"valid",{"id":1017,"data":1018,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"ee52031e-9a06-4a12-8006-0595b842699e",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1019,"binaryCorrect":1021,"binaryIncorrect":1023},[1020],"What are things that you need to prove to ensure the rest of your argument is relevant?",[1022],"Substituent Burden",[1024],"Primary Burden",{"id":1026,"data":1027,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"784dfeb9-bfaa-40c4-a8d5-b32ab79afbd4",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1028,"binaryCorrect":1030,"binaryIncorrect":1032},[1029],"If you prove your primary burden but not your substituent burden, is your argument relevant?",[1031],"No",[1033],"Yes",{"id":1035,"data":1036,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"4a0c44f5-d77d-411b-86be-cf10a850f759",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1037,"binaryCorrect":1039,"binaryIncorrect":1041},[1038],"What is the substituent burden in the statement: 'You should bring suncream to Spain, because it protects you from the sun, and Spain's a sunny place'?",[1040],"Spain's a sunny place",[1042],"Suncream protects you from the sun",{"id":1044,"data":1045,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"bb26575e-6c6b-446d-8258-3e43fb9f1bf8",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1046,"audioMediaId":1047},"When evaluating which argument to make, one of the key things you have to consider is how many burdens, and what difficulty of burden, you want to take on. You always want to pick accessible burdens.\n\nThat all sounds good in the abstract, but what does it look like in a real world argument? Well, imagine that you want to order pizza for dinner but your friend wants tacos. Your real reason for wanting that might be because you always grew up having pizza on Thursdays. However, it might be hard to persuade your friend that your traditions are enough of a reason to go for pizza instead of tacos.\n\n![Graph](image://60a6fea0-d01c-4516-82c6-4f9218699841 \"Pizza and Tacos. Image: jeff~, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nBut, as luck would have it, the pizza place is also running a 2-for-1 deal that night. Even if you don’t care about the cost of the meal, it might be easier to convince your friend to go because of the deal than for your own real reason. Convincing them that price is important might be an easier burden than convincing them that sentiment is important.","1fbdfe17-3d13-4d2b-afcf-f31fb1b6932f",{"id":1049,"data":1050,"type":41,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1052,"introPage":1060,"pages":1066},"77bf9ef9-f0a1-47bf-85b3-97c80175d7b3",{"type":41,"title":1051},"Leveraging Consensus and Precedence",{"id":1053,"data":1054,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"deae0aea-476c-4449-98ca-8f19701e7514",{"type":27,"summary":1055},[1056,1057,1058,1059],"Consensus lets you skip proving widely accepted ideas","Consensus arguments only work if everyone agrees on the idea","Precedence uses past examples to show an idea is possible","Precedence is evidence-based, not universally accepted like consensus",{"id":1061,"data":1062,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"99943c5b-478d-4313-b93f-b62a65c07e3d",{"type":54,"intro":1063},[1064,1065],"What's the key difference between precedence and consensus in persuasion?","How does consensus influence decision-making differently than precedence?",[1067,1080,1097,1102],{"id":1068,"data":1069,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1072},"376b6c1f-e450-4af5-b521-e3cf60c50291",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1070,"audioMediaId":1071},"In society, **there are ideas that are almost universally accepted: we call these consensuses**. For example, almost everyone believes that the sun will rise in the morning or that murder is bad. As a result, you can save yourself from proving certain burdens using established ideas.\n\nOne key consensus is that almost everyone believes that people should be rewarded for exceptional work. Imagine that you’re trying to convince the finance director at your company that Martin, who works for you, is worthy of a reward. The two burdens are that ‘Martin’s work is exceptional’ and ‘exceptional work should lead to a reward.’ However, since most people already accept the second burden to be true, you don’t need to prove it. **This allows you to concentrate all your time and energy into proving the first burden**.\n\n![Graph](image://fb69c903-853e-4341-8efc-edc6caf05031 \"Man convincing his director. Image: AJurno (WMB), CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","5aa5cd56-e6bf-46b4-8ecc-6618578fd2e1",[1073],{"id":1074,"data":1075,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"8369fa73-201a-47a0-8833-156b0c4e447a",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1076,"clozeWords":1078},[1077],"Arguing from a consensus enables you to bypass proving a burden by assuming agreement to a basic principle",[1079],"consensus",{"id":1081,"data":1082,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1085},"5ed7232b-2a77-44e0-b0cb-6cd5acf86638",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1083,"audioMediaId":1084},"\nA big problem with **consensus arguments** is that they **only work when a concept or ethical ideal has near universal support**.\n\nTake, for instance, the argument made in the United States that people should be allowed to bear arms because the constitution says so. If you’re arguing with someone who believes that the constitution should be revoked, there is no point in trying to convince them that gun rights are constitutionally guaranteed.\n\nAs a result, it is important to be careful when you frame your argument to understand the consensus viewpoints of the people you are trying to convince. A consensus basis shouldn’t just be something you should be fairly sure about - you’ve got to be confident your opponent will accept it.\n","251f4d98-293a-495c-b211-5032189000bd",[1086],{"id":1087,"data":1088,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"2647010c-d38c-49cc-a2d3-8a434e5ef259",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1089,"multiChoiceCorrect":1091,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1093,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1090],"What is the technical term for a widely held belief?",[1092],"Consensus",[1094,1095,1096],"Precedent","Burden","Clashpoint",{"id":1098,"data":1099,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"ac0f6260-7084-4274-a485-0c6e646dfa89",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1100,"audioMediaId":1101},"In cases where no consensus can be identified, often people will attempt to prove all burdens, even the most obvious ones. These are called **‘first principles arguments’** because they dial back to the first principles that define their burdens.\n\nIn legal cases, we often hear about someone bringing up a **precedent**. This is bringing up a **past example of something being done, or something similar being done**. For example, the US Supreme Court heard the case of ‘Brown vs The Board of Education’ in 1954, which led to the outlawing of segregation. Subsequent cases about race relations cite the case to show what preceded their idea.\n\nThe importance of precedence is twofold. **Many people fear new ideas that might challenge a functional established world order**. They believe that ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’ By citing a precedent, you can explain to them that your idea isn’t that new or outlandish. For example, a child who wants candy might be told by his mother that it will ‘make your teeth fall out.’ However, the child could reply ‘but my grandma told me she ate candy all the time when she was my age and her teeth didn’t fall out. **Precedence shows that an idea is neither radical nor wildly dangerous.**\n\n![Graph](image://ad3a599c-58c8-4b18-8793-07de06b0ccb1 \"Old woman eating sweets. Image: Karen Apricot, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","31ec8e7d-316c-4d00-8aca-d5d60f5e19a4",{"id":1103,"data":1104,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1107},"5c6b141c-dd4d-4116-9178-46e4aadd4f05",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1105,"audioMediaId":1106},"**Precedence can show that an idea is possible**. For example, imagine an editor is arguing with his writer about a work deadline. The writer says it's impossible to write the article in 2 days. Well, if the editor then says ‘your colleague did it in 1,' that is being given as proof that it's possible.\n\n![Graph](image://c47505ac-cb44-4139-9380-a9384c9df876 \"Editor discussing deadlines with a writer. Image: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nOne thing that’s incredibly important to understand is that **precedence is not the same thing as consensus**. While precedence is simply existing case studies of what has happened before, **a consensus must be something that everyone agrees on**. As a result, although we can use consensus to bypass proving burdens, precedent should only be used in an evidential way.","81c8346f-4ba1-4d5b-af3a-1bfc36c677c3",[1108,1115,1122],{"id":1109,"data":1110,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"a540d377-6941-4183-8fa3-fa648469944f",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1111,"activeRecallAnswers":1113},[1112],"What kind of argument involves proving every burden and using no consensus?",[1114],"A 'first principles' argument",{"id":1116,"data":1117,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"9e6740d0-5caa-43a6-aefa-228b62648e19",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1118,"clozeWords":1120},[1119],"Precedents are examples of prior events that are used to prove that an idea is neither radical nor dangerous",[1121],"Precedents",{"id":1123,"data":1124,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"622411fe-8616-41e7-8b6b-96aaf8361e0c",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1125,"multiChoiceCorrect":1127,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1128,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1126],"Which of these things can't be proven by a precedent?",[1092],[1129,1130,1131],"Feasibility","Affordability","Utility",{"id":1133,"data":1134,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1136,"introPage":1144,"pages":1150},"d5b0b1da-425d-496b-bdc7-b691920f12cc",{"type":41,"title":1135},"Understanding Cognitive Biases and Consensus",{"id":1137,"data":1138,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"0cfd63ae-7baf-4e5f-bcc3-9c1ca7eb3518",{"type":27,"summary":1139},[1140,1141,1142,1143],"The sunk cost fallacy makes people stick with bad decisions because they've already invested in them","Consensus can be borrowed from old ideas to support new arguments","Attacking the link to a consensus is a way to counter it","Socratic questioning can disprove a consensus by challenging its basis",{"id":1145,"data":1146,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"2238a1c8-cc83-4024-a06f-275f22bbcc7a",{"type":54,"intro":1147},[1148,1149],"What is a common cognitive bias that can lead to rejecting a consensus?","How can understanding groupthink help in rejecting a consensus?",[1151,1168,1173,1178,1191,1204,1218],{"id":1152,"data":1153,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1156},"df87757f-e336-4897-a0de-57687932d523",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1154,"audioMediaId":1155},"One of the cognitive biases that precedence can take advantage of is called the **‘sunk cost fallacy.’** This is the notion that you should carry on doing something because you’ve already invested so much into it, **even if it’s obvious that it's doomed**.\n\nFor example, imagine that the nearest ice cream shop is 3 miles from your house. You set out to walk the distance and walk 2 of the miles. However, your friend then texts you to say they don’t have the flavor you want. Here, you have a choice. Either you could turn back, walk 2 miles and cut your losses or you could walk 4 more miles, including the walk home, for your ice cream. Surprisingly, most people would double down on their initial choice and go get the ice cream, even if they no longer want it.\n\n![Graph](image://3ac2c9dc-89e5-46c7-8bf7-8577251a6ffe \"People queue at a popular ice cream shop. Image: Stephen McKay / Queueing for ice cream - Princes Street Gardens\")","b84d0a80-7a6c-492d-ac7a-ae0d769eef9d",[1157],{"id":1158,"data":1159,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"d2986027-ba8d-49c9-83e0-e2a8de5999c9",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1160,"multiChoiceCorrect":1162,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1164,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1161],"What cognitive bias can precedence take advantage of when trying to convince someone to invest more into a doomed project?",[1163],"The sunk cost fallacy",[1165,1166,1167],"The straw man fallacy","The 'No True Scotsman' fallacy","The fundamental attribution error",{"id":1169,"data":1170,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"18eadd28-4980-41cd-9d07-cc4fbb8ff555",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1171,"audioMediaId":1172},"**You can also use the sunk cost fallacy when looking at framing through what has already been established**. For example, one of the arguments for a continued American intervention in Vietnam was the amount of money and lives that had already been spent on it. If we spent $500 million on it last year, what’s another $100 million? In fact, even people who ordinarily would disagree with $100 million of military spending are often more receptive to it if other money has already been spent.\n\n![Graph](image://a010d9c6-1768-4c69-a97c-532a600d8f1a \"US planes in Vietnam. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nAs a result, even if your case looks doomed, you still might be able to convince someone to give you more money, simply by highlighting how much has already been spent. **By citing past costs, whether material or time-based, you can often persuade someone to stick with something that’s already started**, even if they think it's a bad idea.","b4dd1004-50d7-4398-8650-70ea0c5c7630",{"id":1174,"data":1175,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"4351eec3-f0e9-4010-904d-a11ea3d1d33b",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1176,"audioMediaId":1177},"**Consensus is a convenient shortcut for making arguments when it comes to things where there is an already strongly established understanding**. However, what happens when there is no established understanding? What happens when we get to new ideas that haven’t been explored before?\n\nWell, **a good example of this comes when we look at emerging technologies**. An argument that has come up recently is that of net neutrality - basically whether broadband companies should be allowed to restrict what people do on the internet.\n\n![Graph](image://b30d8406-dbbb-4cc5-a36a-388dd4f5d112 \"Website restricting content. Image: mikemacmarketing, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nAlthough there is no existing framework relating to internet rights, proponents for net neutrality rights have cited existing consensus viewpoints about the importance of free markets and the dangers of political censorship to defend their case. In short, they’ve taken existing consensus, extrapolated it and expanded it to new frames of reference.\n\nSo, **even when debating entirely new ideas, consensus can be borrowed from other old ideas** in order to strengthen your point.","51fc316c-abae-4da4-99a9-4f588e419198",{"id":1179,"data":1180,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1183},"67241b04-9a54-41a1-9512-3775750f4af7",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1181,"audioMediaId":1182},"One of the most interesting aspects of political situations is the concept of **collective emotion**. While we’re all aware of our individual emotions, there is also the concept that people feel things together.\n\nFor example, in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, most Americans reported a desire for something to be done. President Bush channeled these emotions - which can be thought of as a kind of abstract consensus - to push the war in Iraq.\n\n![Graph](image://ab6eae96-1ba5-464e-93d2-68bbc7ffa587 \"The 9/11 terrorist attacks. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nBy arguing that America should invade on the premise that ‘we have to do something,' **Bush wasn’t arguing using a logical consensus but a thoughts-based one**.","5ed31637-b6db-4ab4-a8dc-1a0659d545a4",[1184],{"id":1185,"data":1186,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"3a13aebc-06f4-451b-a2ca-9428b7810b4c",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1187,"activeRecallAnswers":1189},[1188],"What is it called when you use comparable consensuses in absence of directly applicable ones?",[1190],"Stretching the consensus",{"id":1192,"data":1193,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1196},"4c1a712c-ba67-42c1-a17d-0953e950d255",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1194,"audioMediaId":1195},"By **channeling widely held thoughts**, you can take a shortcut away from the necessity of heavy logical thinking.\n\nObviously, **arguing from consensus can be incredibly strong**. So what are the ways to counter it?\n\nWell, the most obvious way of attacking a consensus argument is to attack the link to the consensus. Let’s go back for a minute to the argument that Martin deserves a bonus. It’s not that hard to convince people that exceptional work deserves a reward. However, we can convince people that Martin’s work isn’t exceptional, perhaps by arguing that he turned it in 3 months late. **One way of arguing against consensus is to accept the consensus but to attack the link to it**.\n\n![Graph](image://ea995191-5820-4187-853e-ad2136e7d14e \"Team discussing deadlines. Image: AJurno (WMB), CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","87b938f8-e538-4109-86ff-d070251bb2a1",[1197],{"id":1198,"data":1199,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"93a6b444-7a0c-45e2-bde2-21ae073c1ed3",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1200,"binaryCorrect":1202,"binaryIncorrect":1203},[1201],"Can a consensus be based on thought as well as logic?",[1033],[1031],{"id":1205,"data":1206,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1209},"24e92307-99de-4a1b-8b61-f3c24777de6d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1207,"audioMediaId":1208},"A more nuanced way of combating consensus is **to try to find exceptions to it**. With the Martin example, we might look at his colleague, Martha. If Martha does even better work than Martin but you didn’t recommend her for a bonus, then why Martin? Is it possible that you have an unfair preference for Martin? **Counter-examples can serve to create a moralistic gray area**, which can defend against the consensus.\n\n![Graph](image://024ac373-2cd8-44b4-813b-8391ec8f9e0b \"Martha engaged in work. Image: AJurno (WMB), CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nAccepting a consensus and then showing that it doesn’t link is a good way of invalidating the argument. But what if you can’t do that?","ea3dc971-12bd-4771-aae1-d07baaf7c710",[1210],{"id":1211,"data":1212,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"c7a483e4-742f-4c3f-8d85-d67339000777",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1213,"activeRecallAnswers":1215},[1214],"What are two ways of defending against an accepted consensus?",[1216,1217],"Attacking the link","Finding exceptions to it",{"id":1219,"data":1220,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"e14cdba3-53f8-4292-9cc5-f0fc485ce24e",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1221,"audioMediaId":1222},"**Perhaps the boldest way of challenging a consensus is by disproving it**. This is often done using Socratic questioning. This technique, developed by the philosopher Socrates, encourages you to ask questions about a consensus, inviting consideration of its ethical or philosophical basis.\n\nFor example, let’s delve deeper into Martin’s work. What if Martin’s work is more exceptional because the people who work for him are better? What if exceptional work is never down to individual efforts?\n\n**If that’s the case, then** maybe we shouldn’t reward people for exceptional work.","f9a45f2b-a6c4-4220-8e22-8001639fdca8",{"id":1224,"data":1225,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"orbs":1228},"6e57f043-f6cb-4775-a09f-e42a2ccced52",{"type":29,"title":1226,"tagline":1227},"Gimme An Example","How can we prove that something is true and the importance of telling your story the right way?",[1229,1278,1330],{"id":1230,"data":1231,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1232,"introPage":1240,"pages":1246},"d22adbf2-e6bf-4f12-b868-3644686689a7",{"type":41,"title":252},{"id":1233,"data":1234,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"229bfc68-1caf-40c0-a9f2-2a0d430baaa6",{"type":27,"summary":1235},[1236,1237,1238,1239],"Assertions need evidence to be convincing","Use examples with just enough detail to keep interest","Threaded examples help maintain a connection throughout an argument","Balance your examples with two non-relevant details for each important one",{"id":1241,"data":1242,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"98026ea6-8e76-4dba-9f1d-2afff24d2129",{"type":54,"intro":1243},[1244,1245],"What makes an assertion different from an opinion?","Why is evidence crucial in backing up an assertion?",[1247,1252,1265],{"id":1248,"data":1249,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"b9223de4-e247-415e-9c4e-b2cb00d1c6a1",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1250,"audioMediaId":1251},"When you make an argument, there is an important question that naturally stems from it. People will ask themselves ‘is this true.’ For example, if someone said that we should keep our cats indoors to protect the cerulean warbler bird, we have to prove keeping their cats indoors would actually have an effect on the bird population.\n\nTypically, when we say something it is an assertion. For example, me saying that ‘keeping Bobby, your cat, indoors would save the birds’ is an assertion. However, to prove that it is true, I would need to provide evidence, either in an exemplar or a statistical form. For example, if I then said that 2.4 billion birds were killed by free roaming cats alone in the US last year and Bobby snacked on my canary, I could prove that my argument is true.\n\n![Graph](image://21caeae4-e51d-4692-afe4-89231f714ca9 \"Cat staring at a bird. Image: W.carter, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","0057fe46-0995-4e19-af0b-3aa0a7b60e4b",{"id":1253,"data":1254,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1257},"a27d4d99-df6b-49e4-b6ea-31625e25c695",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1255,"audioMediaId":1256},"Fundamentally, when you’re giving an example, you are telling a story. One of the things that’s important to think about when it comes to examples is your level of detail. If you use too little detail, your audience won’t have an emotional attachment to the unfortunate soul of the story or the story might not seem credible. However, if you use too much detail, the person you’re trying to convince might lose interest.\n\n![Graph](image://db18d599-f837-458d-b9e4-d023b552b343 \"Student disinterested in class. Image: Love Krittaya, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nYou want to balance your examples to make them both credible and compelling. A good rule of thumb on this is to include two non-relevant details along with each important one. At the beginning of Martin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech, King says “five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.”\n\nThe same thing would be achieved by the simple sentence that ‘a great American signed the Emancipation Proclamation.’ However, the two tangential details, namely that it happened “five score years ago” and that the speech is happening in the shadow of the great man’s statue make the fact seem more authentic and personable.","305c40c1-61d4-46d5-8e70-04b1a4735fc2",[1258],{"id":1259,"data":1260,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"94f16eb4-cafe-43fa-8461-f172c8bc4893",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1261,"multiChoiceCorrect":1263,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1264,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1262],"When using stories rhetorically, what is a good number of non-relevant detail to include alongside each relevant one?",[638],[637,635,639],{"id":1266,"data":1267,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1270},"d7f306a2-e11f-4005-8586-e0c34fdce652",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1268,"audioMediaId":1269},"If you’re telling multiple different stories across an argument to prove your points, it can be hard to find the time to introduce each character individually. As a result, many strong orators will use a threaded example throughout their argument.\n\nThis is something we try to do at Kinnu too. For example, if you take our Macroeconomics Pathway, you might be able to learn about Jimmy, who eats pies. Throughout different teaching points about Aggregate Supply and Demand, Jimmy is continuously referred to. Perhaps Jimmy has won the lottery and it will mean that he can buy more pies. Or, alternatively, if Jimmy has fallen into poverty then the pie industry might take a dip. As a result, the connection you make to Jimmy can be successfully sustained. You don’t need to reintroduce a character every time you’re adding a layer of complexity to the same generic idea.\n\n![Graph](image://e6a69bb4-51a3-43fe-b4a9-59f04cafe489 \"A half eaten pie. Image: MarchOfTheGreyhounds, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","6de1117c-26f1-400b-92e2-ee0b772d0bdf",[1271],{"id":1272,"data":1273,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"a63e6d4f-b094-48e8-b0ed-405eacebf72c",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1274,"clozeWords":1276},[1275],"Using a threaded example allows you to save time that would otherwise be spent reintroducing characters",[1277],"threaded",{"id":1279,"data":1280,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1282,"introPage":1290,"pages":1296},"5ade33aa-61ef-4df3-9f36-eeabb54cd1a5",{"type":41,"title":1281},"Using Personal Anecdotes",{"id":1283,"data":1284,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"29dd563f-5f0f-41c2-9bcc-1bdf1b1d9a7f",{"type":27,"summary":1285},[1286,1287,1288,1289],"Personal anecdotes boost credibility by building Ethos","Relatable stories make your audience trust you more","Ground your anecdotes in common experiences for better connection","Use names in stories to make them real, but keep them universal for broader appeal",{"id":1291,"data":1292,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"b61ccb94-fe99-46f2-9b3e-93a6d973dbbd",{"type":54,"intro":1293},[1294,1295],"How do personal anecdotes boost credibility in arguments?","When are personal anecdotes most effective in making a point?",[1297,1310,1315],{"id":1298,"data":1299,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1302},"faac17c7-c16d-4254-a221-cdb2890ba929",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1300,"audioMediaId":1301},"Sometimes, it can be even better to use a **personal anecdote**. This helps to build the Aristotelian value of Ethos, which is the credibility of the speaker. By stating that you suffer from the same problem, you can build relatability and trustworthiness.\n\nFor example, in 1952, Vice Presidential candidate Richard Nixon was accused of taking political donations and using them for personal expenses. In his defense speech, he continuously referred back to the story of his life and the life of his family. By talking about his challenge in getting a mortgage and affording insurance, he was able to relate to an American audience struggling to balance their own familial books. As a result, he was able to make himself seem relatable.\n\n![Graph](image://3c06680a-97fa-42c5-85da-ecfd1d9d8b5c \"An image of Former President Richard M Nixon during his famous 'Checkers' speech, where he used a personal anecdote to great effect. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")","a9494730-d356-43a6-aafb-3714ceecbfd3",[1303],{"id":1304,"data":1305,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"74569d5d-4abb-4f08-a3ff-9c560b2567ce",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1306,"multiChoiceCorrect":1308,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1309,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1307],"Which of Aristotle's principles of rhetoric do personal anecdotes play into?",[470],[453,487,400],{"id":1311,"data":1312,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"a062999b-d6b3-49bc-a9df-ed9552817acb",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1313,"audioMediaId":1314},"Personal anecdotes are particularly good examples in cases where an audience member might be suspicious of the speaker’s motives, such as with Nixon’s funding, or their authenticity, like with a major political figure taking a sudden interest in environmentalism.\n\nWhen telling a personal anecdote, **it can be difficult to strike the right emotional balance**. While you hope that the level of detail associated will allow the audience to feel an immediate emotive connection, telling it also requires the example to apply universally so your audience can draw meaningful conclusions from it.\n\nFor example, if you’re telling a story about the time you won the lottery and the difficulty with finding things to spend the money on, you are unlikely to receive much sympathy from your audience. In short, they will struggle to find your anecdote relatable and, as a result, they won’t find the conclusions drawn from it to be applicable to their lives.\n\n![Graph](image://0c3c354a-d14f-45b1-b1f5-5228db631fd9 \"Winning lottery ticket. Image: Santeri Viinamäki, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","2ce967ec-565f-4cdd-a5db-afb54f46846c",{"id":1316,"data":1317,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1320},"811ca989-cdc5-4ae8-9304-6f9b5d972a15",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1318,"audioMediaId":1319},"As a result, when telling a personal anecdote, **it is important to ground it in your audience’s personal experiences**. Try to think of anecdotes which will be relatable to other people - if talking to a family, it is much better to say that the idea struck you at the family dinner table over a pizza than to say you had it while skydiving in Buenos Aires. **Even if what you are talking about is unusual, try to pepper it with details showing the normality of other parts of your life situation**.\n\nWhen telling a story, **another big example is whether to use the names associated with your examples.** Should you mention that it was Hugh who dropped the coin? Or should you just say that a friend of yours dropped it?\n\n![Graph](image://00f474d5-ddf3-454f-af7e-9afdaa0e9d44 \"Coin on the pavement. Image: PePeEfe, CC BY-SA 3.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nOn the one hand, **a frequent use of names can make an example seem more real and easy to relate to**. On the other hand, adding a specific name can detract from the universality of the example’s applicability - sometimes it is better to remember that this is something that could happen to everyone.\n\nOften, when it comes to the questions of whether to use names as part of an example, **you will want to consider what the point of your example is**. Are you trying to argue that this is a specific problem that applies to specific people or a generalized one? For example, if you are campaigning for people with multiple sclerosis, it might be better to use a named example because it will allow people to feel more compassionate toward the emotive case study. However, if you are talking about how climate change is going to hurt your grandchildren, it might be better to use generic terms.","ea483992-311e-4028-8a9f-d259da3545f8",[1321],{"id":1322,"data":1323,"type":73,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27},"b7443a73-ee76-4695-b604-76b55151f17e",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1324,"activeRecallAnswers":1326},[1325],"It's important that anecdotes are ...",[1327,1328,1329],"Authentic","Relatable","Relevant to your audience",{"id":1331,"data":1332,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1334,"introPage":1342,"pages":1348},"5713952a-f6fd-4f4e-aac6-2870d8a2f43a",{"type":41,"title":1333},"Making Examples Effective",{"id":1335,"data":1336,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"7b612f02-e248-4e7d-ae98-058cd7215067",{"type":27,"summary":1337},[1338,1339,1340,1341],"Stories hit harder than stats because we care more about individuals","Use stats to show that your example isn't just a one-off","Memorable examples have unique details but shouldn't be too weird","Discredit examples by showing they're isolated or missing context",{"id":1343,"data":1344,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"85b908a9-90df-4f35-a98d-832a1a40b3cb",{"type":54,"intro":1345},[1346,1347],"How can you prove an example is representative?","What's a trick to make an example unforgettable?",[1349,1365],{"id":1350,"data":1351,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1354},"95ea2fb7-5baf-46f6-a926-db1929852a1e",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1352,"audioMediaId":1353},"Making examples representative can be a challenge. Often, a story is more emotionally powerful than a statistic, as it's easier to care about an individual than a large number. This is due to the human mind's capacity to visualize and care about a limited number of people at a time.\n\nHowever, this can lead to criticism of an example being an isolated incident. Therefore, it's important to contextualize the number of people affected by something, often using statistics to show the relatability of examples.","b31e9660-5f62-49cf-a3a7-26098c1004ca",[1355],{"id":1356,"data":1357,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"6a234c68-e621-467e-b613-dfc0f9757ef1",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1358,"multiChoiceCorrect":1360,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1362,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1359],"In order to show that they are not just isolated incidents, it's important to make examples...",[1361],"Representative",[1363,1327,1364],"Memorable","Relevant",{"id":1366,"data":1367,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1370},"b4e27f7f-46d5-4acb-8886-b18670676c1f",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1368,"audioMediaId":1369},"Another crucial aspect of using examples is making them memorable. The details can make a difference. For instance, using unusual fruits to demonstrate price inflation at a market can make the example stick in people's heads. However, it's important not to be too outlandish, as this can distract the reader from the main point.\n\n![Graph](image://1b6ac9be-c59e-48a2-8ba7-0a2d75a11531 \"Unusual fruits in a supermarket. Image: Chayquo Shumo, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nWhen arguing, you're likely not the only one using examples. You may need to discredit your opponent's examples. The grounds for disproving an example are often similar to the things you have to consider when making it. You can question whether an example is applicable to all situations or just an isolated case.\n\nAdditionally, looking into the wider context behind the example and identifying any neglected factors can be useful. Co-opting counter-examples can be a powerful tool in argumentation, as it not only removes evidence from your opponent but also adds it to your argument.","e2674d46-fe10-4776-8819-1f7199f9fef7",[1371,1382],{"id":1372,"data":1373,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"89279e3d-5d2b-4fdc-a002-0d2018cd6e20",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1374,"multiChoiceCorrect":1376,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1378,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1375],"Which of these would be a method of making your examples more memorable?",[1377],"Including unusual details",[1379,1380,1381],"Using well-known examples","Using the same examples as your opponent","Questioning your opponents' examples",{"id":1383,"data":1384,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"a6689d77-6e8d-45ac-abce-4fa14f3a0de2",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1385,"multiChoiceCorrect":1387,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1390,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":21,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1386],"In rhetoric, what are the two things you can claim to counter an example?",[1388,1389],"Non-applicability","Anomaly",[828,826,1391],"Substituent Burdens",{"id":1393,"data":1394,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"orbs":1397},"6d94253e-c3a8-496b-978e-720a31076b73",{"type":29,"title":1395,"tagline":1396},"Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics","How to use and present data and numbers to prove your point.",[1398,1469,1521,1581],{"id":1399,"data":1400,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1402,"introPage":1410,"pages":1416},"06cbbc13-b714-43ce-a953-cd49bca4ae04",{"type":41,"title":1401},"Understanding Statistics",{"id":1403,"data":1404,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"8f0932db-9c32-4d29-ad97-349074071a5d",{"type":27,"summary":1405},[1406,1407,1408,1409],"Statistics can be used to prove anything if presented misleadingly","People trust statistics more when they come from sources they already believe","The way statistics are presented can make them more persuasive","Humans struggle to visualize large numbers, making presentation crucial",{"id":1411,"data":1412,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"a759ff7f-977b-4d45-9c65-24ac0069b1bf",{"type":54,"intro":1413},[1414,1415],"Why do humans struggle to grasp large numbers in statistics?","How can visual aids help in understanding big numbers?",[1417,1432,1447],{"id":1418,"data":1419,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1422},"588cec50-09bd-4a54-ba5b-029877c54053",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1420,"audioMediaId":1421},"According to Arthur James Balfour, “there are three kinds of falsehoods: lies, damned lies and statistics.” But what did he mean by this? Well, he, along with others, argues that it's possible to prove anything by the misleading use of statistics. In fact, there are a number of influential books that have been written on it.\n\nHowever, **the fundamental use of statistics when arguing is to prove that something is true**. Moreover, **you can use statistics as a yardstick** to measure the relative importance of problems. Imagine that you’re the director of a medical research company who’s looking to invest in a new treatment. You’d far sooner try to treat Covid, a disease affecting millions, than to treat an extremely rare type of elbow injury that only affects a hundred thousand people globally.\n\n![Graph](image://1fe6b78c-aa4a-4d1d-ad2c-34e1cfa63ba6 \"X-ray of an elbow. Image: MB, CC BY-SA 2.5 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","77c11ca3-b45d-465e-b20d-75045faf58f2",[1423],{"id":1424,"data":1425,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"205025f6-4e77-4433-bd37-0c90948862b7",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1426,"binaryCorrect":1428,"binaryIncorrect":1430},[1427],"Statistics are always a source of indisputable proof.",[1429],"FALSE",[1431],"TRUE",{"id":1433,"data":1434,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1437},"7e9534f7-a6d6-46b6-bf70-7040bdaadb8d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1435,"audioMediaId":1436},"Often two people engaged in an argument will both have their own **competing statistics**. One person will say one thing and back it up and another will produce a similar statistic for the other side. But **how does the audience distinguish between the 2 competing statistics**?\n\nWell, there are two things that they evaluate. First of all, they evaluate the **credibility** of the facts. Does it fall in line with what they think the rough number would be? Does it come from a reliable source? Often, statistics will hit home more effectively when they come from a source trusted by the audience. While liberal audiences have tended to favor the news channel CNN, conservative ones have traditionally prefered Fox News. Similarly, **while establishment supporters like to use government statistics, anti-establishment figures are more critical of them**.\n\n![Graph](image://277d485b-e097-40e6-81d1-b89b1cfc3cd3 \"Behind the scenes of the Fox News channel newsroom. Image: Spud of Inside Cable news, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","1d6ec37a-3994-40ea-9ca7-607d03cc2202",[1438],{"id":1439,"data":1440,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"69c0bf47-bb45-4db3-a5f9-4356b95a110b",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1441,"binaryCorrect":1443,"binaryIncorrect":1445},[1442],"Which of these parties are more likely to use government figures in a debate?",[1444],"Establishment supporters",[1446],"Anti-establishment figures",{"id":1448,"data":1449,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1452},"e37a3eb5-dbf5-4f32-8199-a0c316483e60",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1450,"audioMediaId":1451},"Secondly, **people can be more or less persuaded by a statistic based on its presentation**. Has it been contextualized? Is it easy to visualize? Is it attention grabbing? Do they feel it's relevant to them? Often, this is where battles over statistics are won and lost.\n\n**It can be difficult for people to visualize numbers**. It is easy for us to think of 10 people - you would just imagine a recent birthday party or gathering. It is even possible to visualize hundreds. For those who often go to concerts and sports games, it might even be within the realm of possibility to visualize thousands. But **the human brain has not evolved to visualize any numbers bigger than that**.\n\n![Graph](image://1c18a052-5256-4986-af34-a0e9d120e7f7 \"A 19th century infographic visualising the size of Napoleon's armies. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nThis is a problem spoken about by EH Gombrich. In his *Little History of the World*, he says it's almost impossible for us to imagine the passing of millions of years because we have no personal experience to compare it to. Similarly, it is impossible for us to visualize a million people, or 18 billion coffee grinds because we’ve never had any relatable experience.\n\nAs a result, **the presentation of statistics**, both in audible and written forms, is almost as important as those statistics themselves.","380c969f-ceb6-4afa-b401-fa661b911dea",[1453,1460],{"id":1454,"data":1455,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"7560f5bf-3d79-4ab4-b6e8-c736dd042326",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1456,"binaryCorrect":1458,"binaryIncorrect":1459},[1457],"Do all audiences have the same conception of source credibility for statistics?",[1031],[1033],{"id":1461,"data":1462,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"661fc9e1-83c7-4b87-967e-1778b2fb44c5",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1463,"binaryCorrect":1465,"binaryIncorrect":1467},[1464],"Which of these would be the most effective rhetorical presentation of the number of people in the French Army?",[1466],"Four football stadiums' worth",[1468],"208,000",{"id":1470,"data":1471,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1473,"introPage":1481,"pages":1487},"b10d6871-e7ac-452f-aac2-2164ee427c68",{"type":41,"title":1472},"Visualizing Statistics",{"id":1474,"data":1475,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"03aa6c10-7ccc-40fc-89c6-883058acc394",{"type":27,"summary":1476},[1477,1478,1479,1480],"Imagining tiny things like nanometers is tough because we’ve never seen them","Air travel seems dangerous until you know 0.002% of flights had accidents in 2009","Context helps: 1 in 48 people in the UK identify as gay, making it easier to picture","Dividing big numbers by relatable ones makes stats easier to understand",{"id":1482,"data":1483,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"f43980a6-55d2-48fc-97fc-87fcc0f1bae5",{"type":54,"intro":1484},[1485,1486],"What's the coolest way to show off huge numbers in a graph?","How can you spot trends in a sea of data?",[1488,1503,1508],{"id":1489,"data":1490,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1493},"53e33672-6368-4031-8d59-6966ab4b30d2",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1491,"audioMediaId":1492},"One of the things that’s difficult to imagine is **things which are very small**. For example, **while we can picture a yard, it is more difficult for us to imagine a nanometer**. Even if we know there are a million nanometers in a millimeter, we still can’t imagine it very easily because we’ve never seen something that size.\n\nFor example, imagine that you were arguing about the safety of air travel. Saying that in 2009 there were 763 air travel accidents might make it seem frequent. In fact, if you presented the statistics in isolation, you might be led to believe that airplanes are very dangerous. However, if you were also told that roughly the same number of people died by bedsheet strangulation each year, it makes the number seem much smaller. After all, nobody refuses to go to sleep.","95c88f15-6dc3-47a2-98c6-2075162acef2",[1494],{"id":1495,"data":1496,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"41dfecb6-7130-42e1-942e-c1595bda6fba",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1497,"binaryCorrect":1499,"binaryIncorrect":1501},[1498],"In rhetoric, what's the most effective way of conveying how small a probability is?",[1500],"Compare them to other probabilities of normal events",[1502],"Show them as percentages",{"id":1504,"data":1505,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"900e9e19-4b9a-40c6-a1bd-549b3f6bf60a",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1506,"audioMediaId":1507},"Moreover, if you look at the total number of air journeys, the statistic is further contextualized. In 2009, there were 29.5 million air journeys in the world. That means that 0.002% of journeys ended in death. That’s a far cry from the 763 that looked like such a big number earlier.\n\n![Graph](image://ccb2f27a-1696-4688-8cfd-a5d995739203 \"Plane crash damage. Image: Staselnik, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","c254533b-c6f9-4688-9b7f-648c70d5e921",{"id":1509,"data":1510,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1513},"cff20b36-dd27-4116-b096-0dbd7188ef21",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1511,"audioMediaId":1512},"The most common way of **visualizing large statistics** is by **contextualizing** them. For example, we can’t picture 1.4 million people identifying as gay in the UK. However, if you were told that 1 in 48 people in Britain self-identified as gay, it is far easier to picture. **Everyone knows 50 people so they can visualize the statistics**.\n\nSimilarly, it would be difficult for us to understand the significance of the fact that 375,000 cars sold each year are electric. In fact, it might seem like a huge number. However, if we were told that only 1 in 5 cars are electric, it helps us get a better picture of the environmental impact of new cars sold.\n\n![Graph](image://41e7374b-81c0-4268-8cd5-70b3f9376d07 \"Electric Renault charging. Image: werner hillebrand-hansen, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nTypically, **finding another number to divide the large number by is key to understanding its relative significance**, and showing it to a population.","4791f495-c7ed-4dff-8d7e-8fcb22239960",[1514],{"id":1515,"data":1516,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"06d6c7ed-dbd8-4a29-9f11-ae2819cbb18c",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1517,"clozeWords":1519},[1518],"We can help an audience understand large numbers by relaying them as fractions or percentages of total population sizes",[1520],"total population sizes",{"id":1522,"data":1523,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1525,"introPage":1533,"pages":1539},"16122908-7e2c-408e-8d4f-c2b20b8aa7be",{"type":41,"title":1524},"Believability of Statistics",{"id":1526,"data":1527,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"912f2e32-fc7f-4356-9413-0887c2feab3d",{"type":27,"summary":1528},[1529,1530,1531,1532],"True statistics can be disbelieved if they don't match expectations","Explaining how statistics are calculated makes them more believable","Multiple attribution makes resources seem larger than they are","The Brexit bus misled by suggesting money could fund multiple things at once",{"id":1534,"data":1535,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"52dfdfd9-771e-480a-8ca1-0393290fd201",{"type":54,"intro":1536},[1537,1538],"What is 'multiple attribution' in statistics?","How can 'multiple attribution' be used to mislead in arguments?",[1540,1553,1568],{"id":1541,"data":1542,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1545},"8871199e-a896-4c4c-8f43-dd19d2345091",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1543,"audioMediaId":1544},"Another strange thing about statistics is that **they aren’t always believable just because they’re true**. A Stanford study showed that, even once told something is true, **people are still prone to not believing it if it doesn’t fit with their expectations**. Additionally, some statistics which are true, people don’t believe. For example, 41% of Americans think that humans co-existed with dinosaurs, despite us having missed each other by 64 million years.\n\n![Graph](image://f66e5b4e-f803-4f68-a762-876918a27fb6 \"Man stands by dinosaur tracks. Image: Dill Tom, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nAs a result, **it is often important to help explain the methodology behind the statistics obtained**. Rather than just spouting the statistic and offhandedly attributing it to its source, it can be useful to explain the methodology behind its calculation and finding. That way, people are more likely to believe it.","265e93b9-0373-496d-b03d-a1dcd16060a1",[1546],{"id":1547,"data":1548,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"b516d329-f1c8-4bd4-9ee5-8f4cb197e9d9",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1549,"binaryCorrect":1551,"binaryIncorrect":1552},[1550],"Should you trust that just because a statistic is true, people will find it credible?",[1031],[1033],{"id":1554,"data":1555,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1558},"7c65b7b0-d80e-4f62-98b5-5674064ff4a1",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1556,"audioMediaId":1557},"One common statistical fallacy is **multiple attribution**. This occurs when people take a statistic and try to state that it can be used for multiple things.\n\n![Graph](image://818ed671-aae1-40ac-9736-a9e7cff9a911 \"Vote Leave poster in a window. Image: DAVID HOLT from London, England, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nIn the 2016 Brexit referendum, the VoteLeave campaign drove a bus round the country with an infamous claim written on the side. It said that Britain’s exit from the European Union would save the country £350 million *per week*. That’s equivalent to 10,500 new nurses, 13,000 policemen or approximately two hospitals.","09e271cf-4846-4c3e-bda4-8dc20ab35957",[1559],{"id":1560,"data":1561,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"9b280fe4-c02e-41f0-a22f-5acebdd01501",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1562,"binaryCorrect":1564,"binaryIncorrect":1566},[1563],"What statistical fallacy can make resources seem larger than they are?",[1565],"Multiple Attribution",[1567],"Sunk Cost",{"id":1569,"data":1570,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1573},"882e84b6-b931-4e4c-bf49-98c3737c0aec",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1571,"audioMediaId":1572},"The problem with this is that people imagined it going to the nurses **and** the policemen **and** the new hospitals. This led to the satisfaction of multiple different interest groups - those who wanted increased policing and those who wanted increased medical funding. As a result, **both groups largely voted for the leave campaign**. However, the money cannot be used twice.\n\n![Graph](image://1dbe00b4-765d-4827-a989-aa90e347433c \"Congregation of Greater Manchester Police officers. Image: Terry from uk, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**By providing multiple uses for a resource - whether it be money or barrels of oil - you can make it seem larger than it actually is**.","eaba80f2-8bfc-460f-a724-e09a62dc2394",[1574],{"id":1575,"data":1576,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"93891482-836b-46a6-a4a3-8705c3458b01",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1577,"clozeWords":1579},[1578],"Multiple attribution occurs when you show multiple potential expenditures equivalent to a resource that can only occur in isolation",[1580],"Multiple attribution",{"id":1582,"data":1583,"type":41,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1585,"introPage":1593,"pages":1599},"72bfe41a-0737-42e4-95bb-0a9b777e02a9",{"type":41,"title":1584},"Correlation and Causation in Statistics",{"id":1586,"data":1587,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"39554053-785b-4373-ac55-05c65d9f6b42",{"type":27,"summary":1588},[1589,1590,1591,1592],"Correlation doesn't always mean causation","Spurious correlations are coincidences with no real-world link","Mechanizing explains how one event leads to another","More than one link? Mechanize to show causality",{"id":1594,"data":1595,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"bbdad443-821d-4a1b-ade7-3cb43c5d9dfc",{"type":54,"intro":1596},[1597,1598],"What does 'mechanizing' mean in statistics?","How can 'mechanizing' explain causal links between correlated stats?",[1600,1624,1629],{"id":1601,"data":1602,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1605},"b53faf34-c163-428f-a04b-29bf89cee1e1",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1603,"audioMediaId":1604},"Another common statistical fallacy is assuming that **correlation** always implies **causation**. However, this is not always the case. Sometimes, 2 statistics might have similar patterns but have no real world relation to each other. We call these ‘**spurious correlations**.’\n\n![Graph](image://d43ea895-15c0-4b1e-8283-7c1d7604a501 \"Mozzarella cheese in a bowl. Image: Luigi Versaggi, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nFor example, there is a high mathematical correlation between consumption of mozzarella cheese and the number of civil engineering doctorates awarded from 2000 to 2009. However, **this does not mean that eating mozzarella increases the quality of civil engineering education**. The coincidence of the 2 statistics is simply that - a coincidence. Similarly, there is a 95.24% correlation between the number of people who drowned after falling out of a fishing boat and the marriage rate in Kentucky. However, **there is little evidence to suggest that people are getting married in Kentucky because people are falling out of fishing boats**.","aa7cced0-267f-49e6-b776-1cc72fcc990d",[1606,1615],{"id":1607,"data":1608,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"4429edb5-d2b0-4282-9497-e227df30094c",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1609,"binaryCorrect":1611,"binaryIncorrect":1613},[1610],"Which of these statements is true?",[1612],"Correlation may not mean causation",[1614],"Correlation implies causation",{"id":1616,"data":1617,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"8d0fe5d5-b932-4e55-84aa-0a580cb6232f",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1618,"binaryCorrect":1620,"binaryIncorrect":1622},[1619],"What is it called when two statistics follow each other's patterns?",[1621],"Correlation",[1623],"Causation",{"id":1625,"data":1626,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"10dbe3af-f531-4074-9150-3b2215b4a09e",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1627,"audioMediaId":1628},"As a result, it is important, when being presented with a statistic, **to think about whether or not it is possible that a correlation was caused simply by the benefit of coincidence, or whether it is actually real mathematically**. One way of getting around the spurious correlation fallacy is to show causal links. **When you outline a series of steps from one thing that happened to lead to it causing another, we call that process ‘mechanizing’**.\n\n![Graph](image://61ffba1b-2935-4947-813a-6f1fb8a88b2f \"Capsized fishing boat. Image: Calistemon, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","c7eaba96-c5f9-49d2-af36-c320292cd66e",{"id":1630,"data":1631,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1634},"fdc4c767-354f-43f0-9650-1e79a374aadc",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1632,"audioMediaId":1633},"For example, you might ‘mechanize’ that the reason why an increase in sports car ownership led to more crashes is because sports cars drive faster and are harder to control. By explaining the reason why 2 statistics might have a correlation, you can show that the correlation isn’t a spurious one.\n\nTypically, **if a statistic is the kind that has an obvious link, explaining the causality is not necessary**. However, if your concept is slightly further afield - such as explaining why the rise in domestic cats is lowering the spread of avian disease across continents, you might need to fill in the blanks with the extra steps. The 2 statistics look like a coincidence unless you explain that domestic cats are eating the birds; therefore, stopping them from migrating.\n\nIn short, a good rule of thumb is that if your statistics require more than 1 link, it is usually a good idea to mechanize the link.\n\n![Graph](image://5f77527e-dc0f-4c24-a179-2def4d89b2db \"Two domestic cats. Image: Jeremy Foo, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","6faa34a9-a360-41a1-8fee-abd0a668b122",[1635],{"id":1636,"data":1637,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"614edfa0-f811-47ad-9510-4f545e8fc768",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1638,"activeRecallAnswers":1640},[1639],"What is it called when you explain the logical steps or processes that cause a statistic to behave in a certain way?",[1641],"Mechanization",{"id":1643,"data":1644,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"orbs":1647},"a7527c8f-eba2-4c3d-80db-2a2452dc9469",{"type":29,"title":1645,"tagline":1646},"Comparison and Opposition","Introducing the antagonist, and showing you how to engage with them directly",[1648,1717,1811],{"id":1649,"data":1650,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1651,"introPage":1659,"pages":1665},"7d0483ae-73b7-4b0b-a419-209cc3822570",{"type":41,"title":252},{"id":1652,"data":1653,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"c5a449c5-cbf1-4a9d-a6a6-b03545588215",{"type":27,"summary":1654},[1655,1656,1657,1658],"Arguments often involve a third character: an opponent","Rebuttals are responses to opposing arguments","Comparing viewpoints helps audiences understand consequences","False dichotomies limit choices to two options, often misleadingly",{"id":1660,"data":1661,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"8f51b3c0-1a7b-4da4-8cfd-b565a8a9bd39",{"type":54,"intro":1662},[1663,1664],"What makes an argument strong or weak?","How does comparison play a role in arguments?",[1666,1683,1688,1693],{"id":1667,"data":1668,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":1671},"65b92cbf-9598-4ff2-a7d3-126537c161b1",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1669,"audioMediaId":1670},"Often, when trying to convince someone of something, you are not doing it in isolation. The two characters that are obvious when thinking about persuasion are **the person who is making the argument** and **the person they are trying to persuade**. But often, **there is a third character in the story: an opponent**. Sometimes, the opponent might be the person you are trying to convince.\n\n![Graph](image://bd16e6ee-f880-42f9-ba34-5fb9d39117f6 \"Brother and sister disagree. Image: Rod Waddington, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nFor example, if you and your brother are arguing about where to go to dinner, your brother is both your audience and your opponent. Other times, the opponent might be another person altogether. For example, if you’re arguing with your brother about where to go for dinner, but your mom is going to end up deciding, your brother is your opponent and your mom is your audience.","d31c9e52-1bad-4e6d-ae9e-99d79e4601a9",[1672],{"id":1673,"data":1674,"type":73,"version":41,"maxContentLevel":27},"7d757f40-8d90-4ee1-b236-9de9d8aef59a",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1675,"multiChoiceCorrect":1677,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1679,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1676],"In an argument where you are trying to persuade you sister of something, which party is she?",[1678],"Both opponent and audience",[1680,1681,1682],"Opponent","Audience","Neither opponent nor audience",{"id":1684,"data":1685,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"f27620b3-6bc1-4b75-8a22-5b354229446b",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1686,"audioMediaId":1687},"In an argument, there are usually two people with opposing beliefs. Each of them will try to bring forth their own convincing arguments. However, these arguments don’t exist in isolation to each other either. Often, they will have to interact and be responded to. This is called **‘rebuttal.’**\n\n![Graph](image://c3b37ff1-c0e6-4b82-bf6d-02ee4ad23a92 \"A 19th-century barrister makes an argument in court. Image: Public domain via Wikimedia\")\n\nOften **2 competing viewpoints will require a comparison**. Have you ever watched an election debate? Seldom do the candidates just talk about why their own policies are good. Instead, **they compare** them with their opponent’s policies. In fact, they often compare their own personalities with their opponent’s character and integrity.","c0c401cd-f424-49c4-984d-eb2d357ddf82",{"id":1689,"data":1690,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27},"73359927-636f-4d6e-b10d-00089e4fe5bb",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1691,"audioMediaId":1692},"One example of this came in the 2016 Presidential election. After criticism of Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama uttered in support of her the phrase that “when they go low, we go high.” This attempted to establish the Democratic campaign as more morally grounded than their opponents. Rather than just saying that they were the moral choice, they attempted to show, through comparison of behaviors, that they were the more moral choice.\n\n![Graph](image://806f90fb-c43b-496d-89a0-b8a1ae515b71 \"Michelle Obama speaking. Image: Amanda Lucidon, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**Comparison in arguments serves to allow audiences to get a better grip on the consequences of the argument - namely what will happen if they pick either option**. As a result, it is a highly effective part of rhetorical thinking.","e2a4ed99-ecfe-4b3f-86c7-d163c0170f16",{"id":1694,"data":1695,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1698},"229a316c-6f56-472a-9279-f0bef5bb276e",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1696,"audioMediaId":1697},"One logical fallacy that is often employed in arguments is the **false dichotomy**. This is when people artificially restrict people to choosing between one of two options.\n\nFor example, someone going into the grocery store might say ‘either we can eat pizza or green vegetables.’ This might create a compelling argument for eating pizza. After all, who likes green vegetables? However, it is not necessarily a binary choice: there are many other things that they could eat. Their audience might not even like pizza, but if they dislike the other thing more they’ll choose it.\n\n![Graph](image://a71ef9f1-1184-4c40-8855-e979226fe468 \"A tasty option. Image: Missvain, CC BY 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nLet’s look at a real world example. In New York City, political arguments rage about regulating noise pollution. On one side of the debate, campaigners say that you can’t regulate noise pollution because otherwise businesses like bars will have to close. However, in saying so, they are neglecting all the other options bars might have - they could simply close earlier or soundproof their walls.\n\n**The False Dichotomy is a powerful tool to employ when making an argument - just so long as nobody notices that it’s false.**","ebf849a2-6adf-4699-b9c7-b9ad94822211",[1699,1708],{"id":1700,"data":1701,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"235308e0-af26-4976-86cb-d07e0884af2d",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1702,"binaryCorrect":1704,"binaryIncorrect":1706},[1703],"What is a false dichotomy?",[1705],"A logical fallacy that artificially restricts people to choosing one of two options",[1707],"A logical fallacy that artificially forces people to select two options when they could select more",{"id":1709,"data":1710,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"3c8a1cd5-60d3-4696-8858-a7a33ee13b6d",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1711,"multiChoiceCorrect":1713,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1715,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1712],"What rhetorical technique is \"we either have to take the slow train or you can drive\" an example of?",[1714],"False Dichotomy",[1716,621,751],"The Transport Fallacy",{"id":1718,"data":1719,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1721,"introPage":1729,"pages":1735},"1fab7bac-234f-4a68-9f4a-5772afb72a75",{"type":41,"title":1720},"Rebuttal Techniques",{"id":1722,"data":1723,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"e2f49f46-2566-47cc-9567-df1ce0f4a5dd",{"type":27,"summary":1724},[1725,1726,1727,1728],"Use the 'pulped' framework to find six ways to criticize an idea","Weigh the importance of your argument by scale, size, and likelihood of impact","Avoid straw man fallacies by not misrepresenting your opponent's argument","Practicality, unintended consequences, and logic are key in rebuttal",{"id":1730,"data":1731,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"259a4f08-0d17-4e10-9217-ce5019cd77f8",{"type":54,"intro":1732},[1733,1734],"What's the straw man fallacy?","How does the 'appeal to emotion' technique work?",[1736,1749,1754,1769,1785],{"id":1737,"data":1738,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1741},"410cb5cf-9b3c-47af-89dd-964e8845f7df",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1739,"audioMediaId":1740},"If you’re looking to oppose an idea, a good way of doing it is through using the ‘pulped’ framework. This gives you 6 different ways to criticize an idea, initiative or policy. The first concept in the framework is ‘**practical**.’ Is the policy that they have proposed practically applicable? Does it have proportionate costs to the problem they are trying to solve?\n\nThe second concept is whether a policy might have ‘**unintended** consequences.’ Other than doing what it is supposed to, what else might the policy accidentally cause? The third concept is whether the argument is ‘following **logic**.’ Are all the steps of their chain of reasoning necessarily linked?","eb5a34d6-12ce-49e5-8e43-e265d432d7fc",[1742],{"id":1743,"data":1744,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"03d52525-ddfb-4afe-8520-bc7201e4c188",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1745,"activeRecallAnswers":1747},[1746],"What does the first 'P' stand for in the 'Pulped' acronym for  criticizing arguments?",[1748],"Practical",{"id":1750,"data":1751,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41},"f1896e11-2e13-4320-803f-f8c5068a5911",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1752,"audioMediaId":1753},"The fourth concept is ‘precedent backed.’ Does this policy line up with success stories that have been tried before? The fifth concept is whether or not something is ‘***e***thical.’ Does it fit with widely held consensus values on morality? Finally, an idea can be criticized based on the ‘***d***ifference with alternatives.’\n\nIs there a better way of solving the problem? Are there other ideas that compare more favorably? So, if you’re ever stuck looking for grounds to criticize an idea on, think ‘pulped.’\n\n![Graph](image://66166106-ae27-439f-9b87-f64cc698ef48 \"The Pulped Framework for Rebuttal. Image: Public domain\")","714c63e6-809e-41fa-b944-cf27434220f2",{"id":1755,"data":1756,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":1759},"0c53b0bc-ee3f-47f7-93ac-31f7f5c50d90",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1757,"audioMediaId":1758},"Another way to rebut is to **weigh the relative importance of your argument**. Typically, this can be done using the following basic equation: ***Importance = scale of impact × size of impact × likelihood of impact***. The scale of the impact is how many people it affects. The size of the impact is how greatly they are impacted.\n\nImagine that Helen and Martha are debating the Covid vaccine. Helen argues that it could lead to heart failure and people dying. Martha counters by saying that the vaccine will save far more lives. As a result, Martha’s scale of impact is larger than Helen’s while both have equal sizes of impact.\n\n![Graph](image://83e3a53c-4e3c-4341-9206-a04e1eb03558 \"Two friends debate in the street. Image: Pedro Ribeiro Simões from Lisboa, Portugal, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","785b0530-9bbb-4c83-aeee-530d2fafa7c3",[1760],{"id":1761,"data":1762,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"b0c79f4e-fd42-4827-a7c3-b90fcea80fac",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1763,"activeRecallAnswers":1765},[1764],"What three features can be used to show the importance of an argument?",[1766,1767,1768],"Size of impact","Scale of impact","Likelihood",{"id":1770,"data":1771,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":1774},"86011589-fadc-4864-9cd0-06ad0670fc83",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1772,"audioMediaId":1773},"Imagine now that their friends, Henry and Steve, are arguing about masks. Steve says that people should wear masks. Henry then says it will impact more people negatively than positively because Covid is survivable for most people.\n\nBut Steve then points out that the people who do die of Covid have a much larger size of impact - death - than the simple discomfort of others. Even though Henry’s argument has more scale, Steve’s has much more size.\n\n![Graph](image://bc2d4bef-3964-4c30-8081-6a1f20f5fff4 \"Man wearing two masks in the supermarket. Image: Jules Verne Times Two, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","b0a536d6-5487-4355-ab65-739a9632d21d",[1775],{"id":1776,"data":1777,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"8882f622-6fc4-404e-8a0a-14e22968dcfa",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1778,"multiChoiceCorrect":1780,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1782,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1779],"Which logical fallacy involves misrepresenting your opponents case to make it easier to rebut?",[1781],"Straw Man",[243,1783,1784],"False Dilemma","Ad Hominem",{"id":1786,"data":1787,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1790},"8ea7e55f-2ae4-4a2c-beb0-3a8324ed77d4",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1788,"audioMediaId":1789},"A **straw man logical fallacy** is an argument that someone makes which is predicated on **misrepresenting their opponent’s argument in order to criticize it more easily**. In a straw man argument, **someone proposes an argument for the sole purpose of taking it down**.\n\nAlthough there is no doubt that a straw man is an argument in bad faith, it can nonetheless be an effective way of building an argument in the short term. For example, imagine an argument between Bob and Jerry. Bob is arguing that “we should lower taxes for working class people.” Jerry responds by saying “if we eradicated tax, there wouldn’t be any money to pay for public services.”\n\n![Graph](image://0b8c06c3-6390-4225-a7ae-eced5608a537 \"Two men in discussion. Image: Matej Grochal, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nWhat is important to understand is that Bob was never arguing to eradicate tax entirely. In fact, nobody in the argument ever said that. However, through responding by criticizing an argument that doesn’t exist, Jerry is implying that it is Bob’s argument. As a result, he is able to rebut an easier argument and falsely attribute it to Bob.","5cd6c3a8-043f-428d-9fe4-670f0f5d66c5",[1791,1802],{"id":1792,"data":1793,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"89cb7cc9-3b05-4051-b0b1-39448fbe5003",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":1794,"activeRecallAnswers":1796},[1795],"What are the six grounds upon which an argument can be rebutted, spelling out the acronym \"pulped\"?",[1748,1797,1798,1799,1800,1801],"Unintended consequences","Logical fallacies","Precedence","Ethical","Difference with alternatives",{"id":1803,"data":1804,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"6a50ffac-7b55-4838-bb69-3dbd207ebb6c",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1805,"binaryCorrect":1807,"binaryIncorrect":1809},[1806],"Which type of argument attitude involves taking your opponent at their strongest case and accepting their consensus burdens?",[1808],"Good Faith",[1810],"Bad Faith",{"id":1812,"data":1813,"type":41,"version":74,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1815,"introPage":1823,"pages":1829},"c06c9744-77c7-466b-a11b-e1ed3b6d32e9",{"type":41,"title":1814},"Rhetorical Devices and Strategies",{"id":1816,"data":1817,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"d5fd2b90-566b-4b37-ac90-a469dab2102d",{"type":27,"summary":1818},[1819,1820,1821,1822],"Litotes uses negation to subtly suggest the opposite idea","\"Even if\" arguments accept a premise but question its application","Points of clash are where both sides argue the same criteria","Focus on the most important clash points to win efficiently",{"id":1824,"data":1825,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"3212808c-b2b3-4c2a-b642-30b22c5bbcd5",{"type":54,"intro":1826},[1827,1828],"What is the purpose of using anaphora in a speech?","How does a metaphor strengthen an argument?",[1830,1843,1856,1871],{"id":1831,"data":1832,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1835},"a2130168-e1ae-43a7-8b93-5f69f664dd61",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1833,"audioMediaId":1834},"Another bad faith argumentative mechanism is litotes. **Litotes is where you use the negated form of a statement when, in reality you are hoping to suggest the opposite**. For example, imagine that we’re deciding whether to have sweetcorn or carrots with our dinner. If I said “I’m not saying we should have broccoli for dinner,” I am planting the idea of broccoli in your head. In fact, it might be possible that neither of us had considered broccoli before. However, even though I’m not endorsing broccoli, I’ve managed to get you to start thinking about it even by its indirect mention.\n\nOne historical example of this came in an example from Abigail Adams to her husband John, who was the Second President of the United States. In her letter, she said “I cannot say that I consider you to be kind to the ladies.” However, she is not simply telling us that she’s unable to say it. Instead, **she’s trying to suggest that he is not kind enough without directly criticizing him**.\n\n![Graph](image://b64df056-749c-459d-b241-c6deb9ddcdb9 \"Abigail Adams, who was the wife of the second President of the United States. Charles Francis Adams, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","5447534a-a478-4532-a488-9162518df426",[1836],{"id":1837,"data":1838,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"ff4c8909-d01b-4080-9a43-e5af7a732da4",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1839,"multiChoiceCorrect":1841,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1842,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1840],"What rhetorical technique is being used in the statement \"I'm not saying Donald Trump lacks brain cells\"?",[243],[1781,1783,751],{"id":1844,"data":1845,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1848},"73c546a5-0e43-4082-b5f9-4635c088da3d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1846,"audioMediaId":1847},"**One powerful way of engaging in a comparative argument is through the process of ‘even if’ leveraging**. This is when you accept your opponent’s premise but question whether, even if it's true, the application still holds.\n\nFor example, imagine your opponent says that “we need to put price caps on cough medicine because it's too expensive” and you’re disagreeing. If you say “even if cough medicine was too expensive, which it isn’t, most people can still afford it anyway.” This allows you coverage in the case of multiple scenarios.\n\n![Graph](image://395e1063-18a9-422f-be6a-596878a56c1c \"Cough medicine. Image: Styroks, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**When you temporarily acknowledge what would happen ‘even if’ their underlying premise was true, you allow yourself to win the argument with observers who might end up believing your opponents key pillars anyway**.\n\nWhen you argue with someone, there are **key points of clash**. These are instances wherein you’ve both argued that your side is better for the same specific criteria. However, **these clash directly because you can’t both be correct**.","ff405153-9862-49c4-a7ab-8e9879ce3ac4",[1849],{"id":1850,"data":1851,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"13495c26-300b-445c-a744-dce646b912cd",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":1852,"clozeWords":1854},[1853],"One powerful way of engaging in a comparative argument is through the process of ‘even if’ leveraging.",[1855],"even",{"id":1857,"data":1858,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":74,"reviews":1861},"f4e5e1eb-0eb4-451c-a636-547c7efe9b82",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1859,"audioMediaId":1860},"Imagine that you’re having an argument with your sister about which takeout to order from. While you’re trying to convince your parents that pizza is the better option, your sister is a fierce advocate of fried chicken. If you say “pizza is tastier and cheaper” and she says “fried chicken is tastier and cheaper,” you have two points of clash. Firstly, there’s the point of clash of which food choice is tastier. Secondly, there’s the clash over which food choice is cheaper. Both of you have argued that your argument is better on that criteria.\n\n![Graph](image://76ed3584-7f58-4648-8c28-01656db9b5fe \"Pizza and fried chicken options. Image: Akashdoley13, CC BY-SA 4.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\n**If you can identify the key clashpoints in an argument and explain why you’ve won them, you can give your audience**, which in this case is your parents, **a logical pathway to accepting the superiority of your argument**.\n\n**It isn’t always smart to try to win on all points of clash.**","577ed110-646a-4aea-a7ab-873365ee0a9d",[1862],{"id":1863,"data":1864,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"cc650376-3e23-4de7-9f23-cadb492c770b",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1865,"multiChoiceCorrect":1867,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1869,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1866],"What is the term for when two sides of an argument have both argued that their side wins on a given criteria",[1868],"Clashpoints",[243,1870,1714],"Straw Man Fallacy",{"id":1872,"data":1873,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1876},"b28a5545-67e9-4da2-b411-3d9645debdde",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1874,"audioMediaId":1875},"Imagine that your family is on an extremely strict budget when deciding whether to order pizza or fried chicken. The point of clash about price is far more important to you than the one about tastiness, so you should focus on it more. Rather than wasting time arguing with your sister about tastiness, you can let her argue about that while you focus entirely on price. As a result, **you can use your time to make the argument as efficiently as possible**.\n\n**While it can be tempting to fight an argument on all fronts, it is rarely the easiest way to win**. In fact, points of clash can be red herrings. If your sister said that fried chicken contained more chicken than pizza, there is little point arguing that your pizzas contain more chicken. After all, it's irrelevant to which you should order. However, **if you can step back from the heat of an argument and analyze the ground you’re fighting on, you’re more likely to win**.","28edca58-2f72-451f-969f-8554195ba807",[1877],{"id":1878,"data":1879,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"53450304-b2d9-4f41-976e-fb5b25effd52",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1880,"binaryCorrect":1882,"binaryIncorrect":1883},[1881],"In rhetoric, should you try to win on all points of clash all the time?",[1031],[1033],{"id":1885,"data":1886,"type":29,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"orbs":1889},"02fd6189-44b4-4b13-b2d4-c82330f23f67",{"type":29,"title":1887,"tagline":1888},"Logical Fallacies","What is a logical fallacy and how can I identify one?",[1890,1954,2020],{"id":1891,"data":1892,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1894,"introPage":1902,"pages":1908},"f6b8de7d-5470-48ad-ac92-979415f1f764",{"type":41,"title":1893},"Understanding Logical Fallacies",{"id":1895,"data":1896,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"73792c39-59a0-42f3-b12e-58b4452c8736",{"type":27,"summary":1897},[1898,1899,1900,1901],"Aristotle identified 13 common logical fallacies in his treatise De Sophisticis Elenchis","Argumentum ad hominem attacks the person, not the argument","Argumentum ad ignorantiam claims something is true or false due to lack of evidence","Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence",{"id":1903,"data":1904,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"3df693e1-29e5-462a-b084-609484407f85",{"type":54,"intro":1905},[1906,1907],"What's a logical fallacy?","How can you spot a straw man argument?",[1909,1924,1939],{"id":1910,"data":1911,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":1914},"e7e7465f-6676-4731-9067-a6c6e77a492d",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1912,"audioMediaId":1913},"Much of what we know about the art of persuasion we owe to Aristotle. Indeed, he serves as the founder of much of what we think about argumentation and even logic itself. So, it seems only natural that Aristotle identified some of the areas where people commonly fail when presenting their argument.\n\n![Graph](image://ea05bb26-d8ab-4aa7-8662-f7f17dfc1697 \"Greek Philosopher Aristotle, to whom we owe much of what we know about rhetoric. Image: Sergey Sosnovskiy, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nIn his treatise entitled *De Sophisticis Elenchis*, Aristotle identified 13 common logical fallacies. While these may convince an untrained listener or reader, they mean that the argument doesn’t make sense intellectually. As a result, although it is possible to use logical fallacies as a tool, they are largely to be avoided in arguments with an intelligent opponent, where careful consideration is inevitable or when the goal of the argument is to converge on a wider truth.","3381ee41-6b40-4a69-8ac6-4db462a25baa",[1915],{"id":1916,"data":1917,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5320b8a9-d084-453a-956b-00250dfca319",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1918,"binaryCorrect":1920,"binaryIncorrect":1922},[1919],"How many logical fallacies did Aristotle identify in 'De Sophisticis Elenchis'?",[1921],"13",[1923],"15",{"id":1925,"data":1926,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1929},"ac8d0089-9016-4dd0-b1fc-9661a6c01d50",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1927,"audioMediaId":1928},"Over the course of this tile, we’re going to go through some of the key logical fallacies and how to spot them. One of the most common logical fallacies is ‘*argumentum ad hominem*,’ which means ‘argument against the man.’ This occurs when you attack someone personally rather than the deductive argument they put forward.\n\nFor example, imagine that Darren says that “tuna is the best fish because it contains the most protein.” It would be a logical fallacy if Kiara then replied by saying “Darren doesn’t eat fish so what does he know?” Despite not eating fish, Darren is still qualified to talk about its protein content. In fact, Kiara hasn’t responded to the claim at all: she has just attacked Darren. Kiara has provided no grounds to disprove Darren’s claim.\n\n![Graph](image://70efa3af-87f7-4bf9-b9dc-5b9f2f8d6191 \"Fisherman measures tuna fish on a boat. Image: Mr. Cormish, CC BY 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nWhen an argument is reliant on attribution as evidence, *ad hominem* is not necessarily fallacious. For example, if Darren said that “Tuna is the best kind of fish because it is the one I find tastiest” and Kiara mentioned that Darren doesn’t eat fish, she would be attacking the reasoning behind his logic. However, ad hominem is largely done for deductive arguments, meaning that it is most often correctly called out as false.","a1d07bbf-e375-463a-bbc7-b8fd6a3cac8e",[1930],{"id":1931,"data":1932,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"5a5fe426-07bc-401d-bca6-1e2edfb6655d",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1933,"binaryCorrect":1935,"binaryIncorrect":1937},[1934],"Which of these qualifies as an example of Ad Hominem?",[1936],"John doesn't know anything, look at that terrible shirt he's wearing",[1938],"John doesn't know anything, he couldn't name the capital of France",{"id":1940,"data":1941,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1944},"a07f0332-6865-44b7-b3fe-c0e99b8bb533",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1942,"audioMediaId":1943},"Another well-known logical fallacy is ‘*argumentum ad ignorantiam*,’ which means an argument stemming from ignorance. This is arguing that something must be false because there are no known examples of it, or that it must be true because we have no known examples where it is not the case. However, this logical fallacy neglects the fact that it is possible that the statement can be sometimes or selectively true, or that we might have imperfect information to judge it.\n\nFor example, if someone said “aliens don’t exist because we’ve never met one,” that would be a logical fallacy. It is possible that aliens do exist and that we’ve never met one. It is also possible that aliens do not exist and that we’ve never met one. While we may be able to draw conclusions about the probability of aliens existing from empirical evidence, we cannot prove decisively whether or not they exist purely because we haven’t met one.\n\n![Graph](image://abe8aae2-2241-461c-959f-5688d3556c4a \"Aerial footage of Area51. Image: The original uploader was Sansculotte at German Wikipedia., Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nThis fallacy can significantly impact our interpretation and understanding of empirical evidence. Empirical evidence refers to information acquired through observation or experimentation. While it is a crucial part of the scientific method, the 'argumentum ad ignorantiam' fallacy can undermine its validity.\n\nIt's crucial to consider all possible limitations and confounding factors in empirical research. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. A lack of evidence supporting a hypothesis doesn't inherently disprove it; it may merely indicate that our existing methods or data are inadequate.","d50874dd-509e-4965-b2d9-fcd4397cbd8a",[1945],{"id":1946,"data":1947,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"c6418ce2-57b6-4b57-82b3-8130b792ac9b",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1948,"binaryCorrect":1950,"binaryIncorrect":1952},[1949],"What is it called when someone argues something is necessarily false because we have no empirical evidence of it?",[1951],"Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam",[1953],"Argumnetum Ad Hominem",{"id":1955,"data":1956,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":1958,"introPage":1966,"pages":1972},"ef84332d-31f5-4033-a733-4b3fca4dccad",{"type":41,"title":1957},"Exploring Common Logical Fallacies",{"id":1959,"data":1960,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"5ef418ed-d6ee-49d6-9f32-ed76bf783a97",{"type":27,"summary":1961},[1962,1963,1964,1965],"Circular arguments use their own premise as proof, creating a logical loop","Argumentum Ad Populum claims something is true because most people believe it","Argumentum ad Authoritam relies on authority figures to validate a claim","The Asch effect shows people often believe authority figures, even if they're wrong",{"id":1967,"data":1968,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"a2ce24bb-9d8d-4c06-a6ce-3bd40b1b68f7",{"type":54,"intro":1969},[1970,1971],"What is a straw man fallacy?","How does an ad hominem attack weaken an argument?",[1973,1996],{"id":1974,"data":1975,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":1978},"f9e49e27-c5ab-47e6-84ea-351de3fc639f",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1976,"audioMediaId":1977},"The circular argument is a logical fallacy where the premises that we are trying to prove are also the basis of our logic. An argument that only works if its premise is true does not follow logically. For instance, if Pastor Jim argues that the Bible is true because God wrote it and God exists because the Bible says so, this is a circular argument. While these things both may be true, we cannot prove them to be true based on each other.\n\nArgumentum Ad Populum is a logical fallacy where someone argues something is true because a majority of people believe it. Popularity does not prove that something is ethical or beneficial. For example, if Bob says “aliens exist because 97% of Americans think they do,” this statement proves popularity, but it is not necessarily true. Those Americans could be wrong. Similarly, arguing that “the death penalty is wrong because only 40% of people support it” doesn't prove its ethicality. Arguments are meant to inform the masses, rather than the masses informing the arguments.\n\n![Graph](image://73b201da-4419-4f92-b4e4-2839e07dd2d2 \"Florida State Prison Elecchair. Image: Donald Gregory \\\"Donn\\\" Dughi, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","83aa1013-baaa-49bb-93e2-1eaf588eaed9",[1979,1989],{"id":1980,"data":1981,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"d7485d7c-c7cb-4cfb-b19a-7cc6a3917135",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":1982,"multiChoiceCorrect":1984,"multiChoiceIncorrect":1986,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[1983],"Which logical fallacy occurs when a conclusion is predicated on a premise, which is itself predicated on the original conclusion?",[1985],"A circular argument",[1987,1951,1988],"Argumentum Ad Populum","Argumentum Ad Hominem",{"id":1990,"data":1991,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"54ff4471-f39c-46de-a917-8b5f6771d1b6",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":1992,"binaryCorrect":1994,"binaryIncorrect":1995},[1993],"Can we prove that something is ethical or beneficial solely by indicating its popularity?",[1031],[1033],{"id":1997,"data":1998,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":41,"reviews":2001},"b8e507db-5416-4954-a98a-43f18abcbf36",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":1999,"audioMediaId":2000},"Argumentum ad Authoritam is a logical fallacy where something is considered right simply because somebody famous or who is an expert also believes it. For instance, the statement that “they must have weapons of mass destruction because the President says so” is an example of this fallacy. The President's opinion does not allow for a conclusive judgment to be made.\n\nThis fallacy preys upon a common cognitive bias called the Asch effect. People are more likely to believe something if an authority figure perpetuates it, even if they know that it is wrong. As a result, Argumentum ad Authoritam can be one of the most dangerous types of fallacy.","64b6dfbd-e1ef-49a4-9378-96c023c7c2d8",[2002,2013],{"id":2003,"data":2004,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"f894e61c-cd1f-4b9e-921f-04892d4a60f3",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":2005,"multiChoiceCorrect":2007,"multiChoiceIncorrect":2009,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[2006],"Which of these is an example of 'Argumentum ad Authoritam'?",[2008],"Plastic bottles cause cancer - my teacher told me",[2010,2011,2012],"Plastic bottles cause cancer - this has been proved in studies","Plastic bottles cause cancer - they must do because loads of people get cancer","Plastic bottles cause cancer - it happened to my grandfather",{"id":2014,"data":2015,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"438f2887-ced7-4ed8-9b82-7d6b7b31bd0f",{"type":73,"reviewType":74,"spacingBehaviour":24,"clozeQuestion":2016,"clozeWords":2018},[2017],"Argumentum Ad Authoritam is a logical fallacy based off a cognitive bias called the Asch effect.",[2019],"Asch",{"id":2021,"data":2022,"type":41,"version":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"summaryPage":2024,"introPage":2032,"pages":2038},"ade4095a-a9c5-431c-8622-7aa1b474ed1d",{"type":41,"title":2023},"Understanding the Impact of Logical Fallacies",{"id":2025,"data":2026,"type":27,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"9438a7bb-66c5-4a39-b192-4325eb53c882",{"type":27,"summary":2027},[2028,2029,2030,2031],"Reductio ad absurdum is when an argument is taken to an extreme to make it look ridiculous","Reductio ad hitlerum invalidates an opinion by associating it with Hitler","Post hoc, ergo propter hoc assumes that if one event follows another, the first caused the second","The slippery slope fallacy argues that one action will lead to a chain of negative events without logical steps",{"id":2033,"data":2034,"type":54,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":24},"94f6231b-1342-4f74-b168-7632ac7ef6b6",{"type":54,"intro":2035},[2036,2037],"How can a straw man fallacy mess up an argument?","Why does the slippery slope fallacy lead to bad decisions?",[2039,2060,2077],{"id":2040,"data":2041,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":2044},"7e7f74ef-d560-4961-b05a-9a6e1838db64",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":2042,"audioMediaId":2043},"Another logical fallacy to look out for is ‘reductio ad absurdum,’ which translates to ‘reducing something to the absurd.’ **This is the logical fallacy of taking an argument, extrapolating it so that it becomes absurd and then testing it with edge cases**.\n\nFor example, imagine that a policymaker wants to ban civilians carrying heavy weapons. An objector might say “what if there’s a war?” Given that this case is unlikely, and also not the current status quo, it is an absurd suggestion.\n\nThe other rhetorical fallacy, which derived its name from the form of logical argument known as *‘reductio ad absurdum’* is *‘reductio ad hitlerum.’* This is an attempt to invalidate an opinion simply because it resembles one held by someone universally derided, like Adolf Hitler. As a result, it is, to a certain extent, the inverse of ‘*argumentum ad authoritam*.’\n\nFor example, imagine that Antonio is an ardent anti-smoking campaigner. Gustav, a chainsmoker, could say “Hitler was also anti-smoking so banning smoking must be a Nazi policy.” **This is a logical fallacy because it’s perfectly possible, and indeed probable, that Antonio might have other reasons for opposing smoking.**\n\n![Graph](image://7ce39263-b5d1-453a-819a-3effd5704103 \"Image from an anti-smoking campaign. Image: Airman 1st Class Brittany Perry, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons\")","9d8cc20f-e9b0-4d15-bf12-6efe23a1633c",[2045,2052],{"id":2046,"data":2047,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"f515a634-e48f-45f0-8c09-16000d887181",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":2048,"activeRecallAnswers":2050},[2049],"What is it called when someone extends the principles of an argument until they are unreasonable?",[2051],"Reductio Ad Absurdum",{"id":2053,"data":2054,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"86a4cac8-20cd-412b-b462-8ed5a0a6f8a4",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":2055,"binaryCorrect":2057,"binaryIncorrect":2059},[2056],"What is it called when you compare an argument to the views of someone universally derided?",[2058],"Reductio Ad Hitlerum",[2051],{"id":2061,"data":2062,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":2065},"87a0957b-dd02-4031-bf3a-7f44f7096147",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":2063,"audioMediaId":2064},"Imagine that a man swears at his wife and then later gets hit by a car which his wife was driving. It might seem logical to think that she hit him because he was swearing at her. However, that isn’t necessarily true.\n\n![Graph](image://be3efe1f-4978-4e87-a38e-f53fc6c1d85d \"Man and woman assess damage after a car collision. Image: Shuets Udono, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")\n\nThis is the logical fallacy of ‘*post hoc, ergo propter hoc*,’ which roughly translates to ‘after this, therefore this.’ **People falling foul of this fallacy will argue that just because ‘Event A’ happened directly before ‘Event B’ that ‘Event A’ must have caused ‘Event B.’**\n\nA famous example of this comes in an episode of *The West Wing*, an American political drama. In an episode titled after the fallacy, someone says the President didn’t win the vote in Texas because he made a joke about them wearing funny hats. However, the President correctly pointed out that there are many reasons why he lost the vote in Texas. **Just because he made a joke before the election, doesn’t mean the joke caused him to lose**.","713e9653-81b7-4625-bbff-d81fa9e32d8f",[2066],{"id":2067,"data":2068,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"c425b288-0c06-4e3d-a0b0-07ffa6893af8",{"type":73,"reviewType":27,"spacingBehaviour":24,"multiChoiceQuestion":2069,"multiChoiceCorrect":2071,"multiChoiceIncorrect":2073,"multiChoiceMultiSelect":6,"multiChoiceRevealAnswerOption":6},[2070],"What does 'post hoc, ergo propter hoc' mean, in terms of logical biases?",[2072],"If Event B follows Event A, it was caused by Event A",[2074,2075,2076],"If someone well-known argues something, it's true","If a view resembles that of someone universally hated, it's a bad view","If the majority of people believe something, it's probably true",{"id":2078,"data":2079,"type":24,"maxContentLevel":27,"version":27,"reviews":2082},"3b830bbe-5340-4d9a-bc52-ba8e35f138c3",{"type":24,"contentRole":41,"markdownContent":2080,"audioMediaId":2081},"The final logical fallacy that we’re going to cover is **the slippery slope**. In this fallacy, **someone argues something is bad because it will lead to something that is bad. However, the mechanized steps in between don’t necessarily make sense.**\n\nFor example, imagine a mother telling her child not to eat chocolate. She might say “if you eat this chocolate, you’ll get addicted and eat more chocolates. Then, you might eat too many chocolates and get diabetes. Once you get diabetes, you could die. Do you want to die?”\n\nAt face value, this might seem like a compelling argument. However, **it is fundamentally flawed**. Most people who eat chocolate don’t die immediately of diabetes. It’s possible, and indeed probable, that one chocolate won’t form an addiction that spirals to death. As a result, this is an example of the slippery slope logical fallacy.\n\n![Graph](image://5fe09fa2-772f-441b-b34a-01b9a928b656 \"Child crying after being refused chocolate. Image: Crimfants, CC BY-SA 2.0 \u003Chttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons\")","e2f6d6d3-23ad-4a3c-bf16-3de5b67a37dd",[2083,2092],{"id":2084,"data":2085,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"c2e6d086-e236-4538-b75e-4394aa03f12d",{"type":73,"reviewType":41,"spacingBehaviour":24,"binaryQuestion":2086,"binaryCorrect":2088,"binaryIncorrect":2090},[2087],"What is the logical fallacy of thinking that just because one event followed another, that the second one must be caused by the first?",[2089],"Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc",[2091],"Slippery Slope",{"id":2093,"data":2094,"type":73,"version":24,"maxContentLevel":27},"269d492d-32c7-4547-8ef7-be2d85ca9918",{"type":73,"reviewType":24,"spacingBehaviour":24,"activeRecallQuestion":2095,"activeRecallAnswers":2097},[2096],"What is it called when someone argues something will lead to disaster by describing a non-inevitable set of steps?",[2091],{"left":4,"top":4,"width":2099,"height":2099,"rotate":4,"vFlip":6,"hFlip":6,"body":2100},24,"\u003Cpath fill=\"none\" stroke=\"currentColor\" stroke-linecap=\"round\" stroke-linejoin=\"round\" stroke-width=\"2\" d=\"m9 18l6-6l-6-6\"/>",{"left":4,"top":4,"width":2099,"height":2099,"rotate":4,"vFlip":6,"hFlip":6,"body":2102},"\u003Cg fill=\"none\" stroke=\"currentColor\" stroke-linecap=\"round\" stroke-linejoin=\"round\" stroke-width=\"2\">\u003Cpath d=\"M12.586 2.586A2 2 0 0 0 11.172 2H4a2 2 0 0 0-2 2v7.172a2 2 0 0 0 .586 1.414l8.704 8.704a2.426 2.426 0 0 0 3.42 0l6.58-6.58a2.426 2.426 0 0 0 0-3.42z\"/>\u003Ccircle cx=\"7.5\" cy=\"7.5\" r=\".5\" fill=\"currentColor\"/>\u003C/g>",1778228390899]