Pink delivers a masterful speech which demonstrates many strong speech techniques, including:

• A powerful opening, which establishes a framework utilized throughout;
• Building of ethos and logos;
• Well-timed use of humor;
• Employing contrast and the rule of three;
• Powerful conclusion; and
• Superb delivery.

The strength of this speech isn’t surprising at all, given Pink’s former role as chief speechwriter for Al Gore.

This is the latest in a series of speech critiques here on Six Minutes.

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation in the comment section.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Opening – Superb and Yet Flawed

The opening of the speech is very strong. The first words of the speech — “I need to make a confession…” — create mystery and draw the audience in immediately. The humor woven into this opening invoked strong laughter from the audience, but may not have been the best choice. (see below)

The other noteworthy element of the opening is the way that Pink frames his speech as not a story, but a case [1:34 -- these are references to speech times which you can use to view specific parts of the speech]:

“I don’t want to tell you a story. I want to make a case. I want to make a hard-headed, evidence-based, dare I say lawyerly case for rethinking how we run our businesses.”

This is speechwriting genius. In just a few sentences, Pink establishes the framework around his topic. Given that his audience is likely to be skeptical (because his primary message goes against conventional business wisdom), he assures them that what he’s about to say is not a fictional story, but a solid case — a clear, truthful, logical argument.

He specifically refers to the audience as “Ladies and gentlement of the jury…” [1:51] to cement this framework. Later in the speech, he twice references this framework.

• “Let me marshall the evidence, because I’m not telling a story. I’m making a case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury…” [9:05]
• “I rest my case.” [18:28 - the final words of the speech]

But, there’s a small flaw…

In most circumstances, self-deprecating humor is a wonderful speechwriting tool. You get the audience laughing, and you risk offending nobody, because the humor is about you.

However, the self-deprecating humor in this speech pokes fun at the very thing on which Pink has hinged his argument — on his ability to demonstrate a solid, legal case. He playfully (and perhaps modestly?) points out his poor law school performance, and the fact that he’s never worked as a lawyer. This has the effect of undermining his credibility. The skeptical audience member might argue that if he isn’t a smart lawyer, then maybe he can’t put together a strong case, and if he can’t put together a strong case, then perhaps the case being presented in this speech is weak.

The lesson? When using self-deprecating humor, don’t poke fun at your expertise in a way which weakens your credibility.

Build Logos and Ethos

Aside from the self-deprecating humor, this speech is very strong in both logos (logical argument) and ethos (credibility of the speaker).

A few ways in which Pink builds strong logos include:

• “This is not a feeling… [joke] … This is not a philosophy… [joke] This is a fact… [joke]” [8:33]
  This passage was one of the most emphatic in the entire speech, and it strikes at the heart of the audience opposition.
• “Some of you may look at this and say ‘Hm. Sounds nice, but it’s utopian.’ But I say ‘nope’. I have proof.” [16:02]
  Again, Pink directly addresses the opposing point of view, and then proceeds to offer tangible, real evidence to support his claim.
• The speech is littered with references to both academic research as well as case studies taken from contemporary businesses. He specifies institutions, names, and quotations. In doing so, Pink makes it clear that his central argument is not just a theory; it is grounded in reality.

A few ways in which Pink successfully raises his ethos include:

• Through the speech, Pink cites academic research at globally recognized institutions, including Princeton [3:08], MIT [9:10], Carnegie Mellon, the University of Chicago, the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States, and the London School of Economics (“alma mater of 11 Nobel Laureates in Economics”) [10:48]. As the named institutions all have high ethos, referencing them in this way adds credibility by association to Pink.
• “I spent the last couple of years looking at the science of human motivation.” [5:07] This particular line was delivered in an understated way, but I think it boosts his credibility considerably.

Make it personal (and flattering)

About half-way through the speech, Pink makes the first explicit connection between his topic and the audience in the room. He says:

• “Think about your own work… everybody in this room is dealing with their own version of the candle problem” [7:49]

This flatters his audience, because it implies that they are all engaged in truly difficult and challenging work. (i.e. they don’t have careers doing mechanical tasks) More importantly, it makes his speech message more personal. From that moment on, every time Pink references “the candle problem”, each member of the audience hears “my problem”. Having your audience personalize your message is one powerful way to persuade them.

Use Humor

This was not a “fluff” speech by any definition. On the contrary, it is packed with thought-provoking ideas. Yet, Pink wisely injects humor throughout the presentation:

• “I need to make a confession. I did something I regret… in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I went to law school.” [0:38]
• “I graduated in the part of my law school class that made the top 90% possible.” [1:00]
• “I never practiced law a day in my life. I pretty much wasn’t allowed to.” [1:14]
• “Now this makes no sense, right. I’m an American. I believe in free markets. That’s not how it’s supposed to work…” (into the reality show joke which didn’t get much laughter) [4:00]
• Fade-in effect on slide (also with color) to add “For Dummies” to “The Candle Problem” [6:30]
• “This is not a feeling. I’m a lawyer, I don’t believe in feelings.  This is not a philosophy. I’m an American, I don’t believe in philosophy. This is a fact. Or as we say in my home town of Washington, D.C. — a true fact.” [8:33]
• “Is this some kind of touchy-feely socialist conspiracy going on here?” [10:38]
• “London School of Economics. Training ground for great economic thinkers, like George Soros, Friedrich Hayek, and Mick Jagger.” [11:10]
• Atlassian joke [13:45]
• “Fedex days” joke [14:30]

The speech is about 18 minutes long, and includes 10 (mostly successful) attempts at humor.  The timing of the humor is also noteworthy: 0:38, 1:00, 1:14, 4:00, 6:30, 8:33, 10:38, 11:10, 13:45, 14:30. Pink mixes humor every two minutes or so, with a little more in the first 90 seconds (to build a connection with the audience), and then none for the last three and a half minutes (to focus on a powerful closing argument). This humor strategy is worthy of emulation in your speeches!

Employ the Rule of Three

This speech is packed with rhetorical devices, the most frequent of which is the use of triads. Pink employs the rule of three in a variety of ways, including both humor and his most serious statements. A few examples include:

• “(1) This is not a feeling… [joke] … (2) This is not a philosophy… [joke] (3) This is a fact… [joke]” [8:33]
• “Too many organizations are making their decisions… based on assumptions that are (1) outdated, (2) unexamined, and (3) rooted more in folklore than in science.” [11:45]
• (1) Autonomy, (2) Mastery, and (3) Purpose [12:40]
• “(1) How they do it, (2) when they do it, (3) where they do it…” [15:40]
• “… noone gets paid (1) a cent, (2) or a euro, (3) or a yen…” [16:33]
• “If we repair this mismatch between what science knows and what business does…
  If we bring our notions of motivation into the 21st century…
  If we get past this lazy, dangerous ideology of carrots and sticks…
  we can strengthen our businesses,
  we can solve a lot of those candle problems, and maybe, maybe, maybe,
  we can change the world. ” [18:02 -- concluding argument]

Use Contrast

The most memorable catch phrase in this speech was introduced with a slide, and spoken multiple times, at 5:18, 11:35, 17:28, and 18:02. This phrase is cleverly crafted, and is far better than an awkward alternative such as: “Present-day business practices are ignoring the knowledge by scientific research.”

Other uses of contrasting terms include:

• “This is one of the most robust findings in social science [pause]… and also one of the most ignored.” [5:00]
• “That’s actually fine for many types of 20th century tasks. But for 21st century tasks…” [5:40]
• “Routine, rule-based, left-brained kind of work” [7:25] versus “Right-brained, creative, conceptual.. ” [7:45]
• “… productivity goes up, worker engagement goes up, worker satisfaction goes up, turnover goes down” [15:53]
• “This is the titanic battle between these two approaches. This is the Ali-Frasier of motivation.” “intrinsic motivators versus extrinsic motivators… autonomy, mastery, and purpose versus carrots and sticks” [17:05] — Pink amplifies the contrast between these approaches by invoking a comparison to the historic boxing match.

Make Your Conclusion a Concise Call to Action

Pink signals his conclusion with the words ”Let me wrap up” [17:23] followed a lengthy pause of four seconds. This pause is very effective in helping the audience get ready for the words which follow.

Pink then restates his signature phrase (“There’s a mismatch between what science knows and what business does…”) and adds “… and here’s what science knows.” He then follows this with three concise findings. Summarizing your arguments like this helps to aid understanding and memorability.

He concludes with an energetic call-to-action (using back-to-back triads) and a reference to his legal case framework (“I rest my case.”) I love the way that this bookends the speech.

Add Energy with Your Gestures and Vocal Variety

The majority of this review has been devoted to speechwriting techniques, but a full review of Pink’s delivery techniques could easily fill another article.

Although he could reduce the finger-wagging, his use of gestures and body language throughout the speech are superb. He matches his movements and gestures to the large venue. His energy and enthusiasm come through strong when viewing this speech.

As just one example, consider the three frames below, where Pink is indicating the low, medium, and high rewards. If this were a typical, boring PowerPoint presentation, a bar chart could have been used. On the contrary, Pink demonstrates that the most important visual is the speaker!

Similarly, the vocal variety demonstrated by Pink is worthy of emulation. His use of emphasis, pauses, and varied pace and volume are all well done. Not only does this help to convey his enthusiasm and convictions, but it aids understanding and adds drama throughout.

More About the Science of Motivation

After watching this speech, I’m eager to learn more about the science of motivation. I’m going to be checking out two books written by Dan Pink:

• Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
• A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future

Both are highly rated on amazon. I’m curious to hear if you have read these books and, if so, what are your impressions?

Your Thoughts?

What did you think of this speech? What are the best aspects of this speech? How could this speech have been made even better?

Please share your thought in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009) 5 Presentation Lessons from Randy Pausch in The Last Lecture How to Speak: 7 Speaking Tips from Patrick Henry Winston Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

I agree. After all, who am I to argue with Aristotle?!?

Regardless of the venue (10 people or 1,000 people, a conference, a sales call, or a feedback session), we, as speakers, are always trying to sell our credibility and value – not to mention our ideas. Hence, all speaking is persuasive.

Unfortunately, all too often presenters think they are “just giving information.” “Information” is often better delivered in written form, giving the audience time to digest and think about the material.

Just think for a minute how much time would be saved if people read the material in advance, and the group time was spent answering questions.

That being said, presenting information in a way that shows passion and enthusiasm not only makes the material more interesting, but the speaker more memorable and inspirational – even persuasive.

So, what makes a presentation and presenter persuasive?

There are 4 critical factors. I’ll start with three that Aristotle himself mentioned, and then add one of my own.

1. Logos

Translated from Greek, it means logic. Information must make sense – it needs to be organized logically so people can follow along. Not only is organization important, but so are the facts and figures that make your case. Information that hits the “head” falls into the logos category. Logic alone, however, isn’t enough to spur people to action — it’s critical to justify the movement. That’s why Aristotle said that along with logos, you also need pathos.

2. Pathos

Pathos = emotions. We are moved by our emotions – hitting the heart and the gut. Not everyone is moved by the same things, however. Some people are motivated by money; others by prestige or power. The better you know the people that you want to persuade (their demographics, job levels, reasons for being there, etc.), the better you can use examples that will move them. Overall, a speaker’s goal is to create a need – driven by the positives that the people will achieve by doing what the presenter suggests or the pain they will experience by not doing it.

3. Ethos

Your ethos is your credibility. If people believe and trust you as a speaker, you will have a much easier time getting them to believe what you have to say. If they don’t like or trust you, it would be rare for them to buy into your ideas. There would always be an undercurrent of skepticism. This “unearned” credibility can come from the bio audience members read before attending your presentation, or in the words of an introducer reading your prepared introduction.

4. Passion

No matter what the message, a speaker must deliver it with passion. Use vocal variation that makes the message convincing. I have frequently been called a motivational speaker, but I see myself as a high content speaker who is passionate about my message. Not only is vocal passion critical, but it must be congruent with your visual body language. I have had people say to me, “I can’t be passionate, my topic is boring …” or, “I am an accountant, scientist,” etc. My answer to them is …

There are no boring topics. Boring is an attitude. There are boring speakers.

If your message can help audience members, and you believe in its content, it is up to you to deliver it enthusiastically so that people get excited.

Persuasive speaking can be used for the greater good or for negative purposes. Each listener should be aware of the ultimate purpose of the person presenting the message. It is easy to be swayed when the speaker is using logic, emotion, unearned credibility and passion. Use these persuasive speaking tools well.

Persuasive Speaking: A Look at Logos, or Logic

There are many ways to organize your information in a presentation, to be more persuasive. Three techniques include:

A. Motivated sequence

Attention, need, satisfaction, visualization, and appeal to action.

1. The attention step is designed to gain the audience’s attention, and create goodwill and respect between the presenter and audience.
2. The need element is developing a general problem and relating it to audience members’ desires. Remember, the needs are theirs and not yours.
3. Satisfaction is showing how your service or product solves the problem. It points out the features of your product/service and benefits to audience members.
4. Visualization is to intensify the desire of audience members to move ahead with the solution you proposed. You describe how things will be after the proposal is adopted, and further explain the benefits.
5. Lastly, the action step is when you urge audience members to take action – with the objective to close your presentation with a sense of completeness, spurring people to act.

B. Reflective

Present a problem; give several alternatives; evaluate them; select the best. If you already have the solution, you want to ensure that your information supports that solution. Here are 8 steps a presenter follows when using this speech organization method:

1. Introduction
2. Problem (establishing criteria for evaluating the options)
3. Possible solution (evaluate using the criteria; start with the positives and end with the negatives – making sure that the negatives outweigh the positives)
4. Repeat step 3 again
5. Your choice
6. Possible solution (reverse your approach by mentioning the negatives first, and end with the positives – making sure that the benefits outweigh the negatives)
7. Review (problem, criteria, and optimum solution)
8. Call to action/memorable statement

C. Proposition to proof

In your introduction, present your proposition; then prove it throughout the body of your speech. Conclude with an appeal to accept or act upon your proposition. Here are the 5 steps a speaker uses when using this method to organize a presentation:

1. Introduction
2. State your proposition (what you want them to believe or do)
3. Proof (give reasons – logical and emotional – that support the proposition)
4. Review
5. Call to action/Memorable statement

Similar Articles You May Like... Book Review: Thank You For Arguing (Jay Heinrichs) Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) How to Dress for Public Speaking 17 Easy Ways to Be a More Persuasive Speaker What is Logos and Why is it Critical for Speakers?

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Marjorie Brody is a Hall of Fame speaker, coach to Fortune 500 executives and author of more than 18 books, including Speaking is an Audience-Centered Sport. She is CEO of BRODY Professional Development, a business communication and presentation skills company located in the Philadelphia suburbs that offers tailored training programs, workshops, keynote presentations, and executive coaching. To contact Marjorie, visit www.BrodyPro.com.

The previous article in the Ethos, Pathos, and Logos series defined logos and described why logical arguments are so important for your presentations.

Okay, that’s all very good in theory, but do we need to be logical masters to build high logos?

No, not at all.

In this article, we examine simple techniques you can use in your presentations to be more persuasive by improving your logos.

General Strategies for Improving Your Logos

In the last article, we identified, three general principles that you can adopt to improve your logos:

1. Make it Understandable
   Can your audience understand you? Or have they only absorbed half of your points?
2. Make it Logical
   Do your arguments make sense? Or do you require your audience to make an extreme leap of faith? How easy is it for your audience to connect the dots?
3. Make it Real
   Concrete and specific tends to win over abstract and general.

We’ll now look at 17 specific techniques derived from these three general strategies.

You may wish to compare to techniques in previous articles:

• 15 ways to improve ethos
• 18 ways to improve pathos

Make it Understandable

If your audience doesn’t understand you, they can’t be persuaded by you. To be an effective communicator, you’ve first got to be a clear communicator. To be a clear communicator, you must use words, phrases, examples, and visuals that are understandable, and you’ve got to deliver them at a pace that the audience can absorb.

How can you do this? Let us count some ways…

#1: Use plain language.

Use words that your audience uses. Avoid technical jargon that your audience (or a portion of your audience) isn’t familiar with.

Favor short words and phrases over long and convoluted counterparts. Don’t imitate the language you might find in a legal transcript or an academic paper. Technical language is necessary for those contexts, but it isn’t helpful in a conversation or presentation.

Note that “plain” language doesn’t mean “boring” language. Use vivid and descriptive language where appropriate.

#2: Be explicit.

Your audience should not need a decoder ring to figure out your message. It should be obvious. Spell it out if necessary. Make sure you are not misinterpreted.

It is particularly important to make the connection between premises and conclusions explicit. Because is a magic word for this purpose:  “Because premise A and premise B, we can see that conclusion must be true.”

If your arguments involve more than a couple premises, be sure your audience sees the relationship between them. “And these five advantages — capital costs, scheduling, inventory control, marketing, and employee satisfaction — together make this a winning proposal.”

#3: Trace sequences or processes in order.

To help your audience understand a sequence or process, march through the steps or phases in a meaningful order, usually sequential. If you jump around the steps out of order, your audience will be confused.

As the number of steps increases, so does the need to use a diagram for clarity.

#4: Use diagrams.

Carefully crafted and focused diagrams almost always enhance the understandability of your arguments. It doesn’t matter if you draw in PowerPoint, on a white board, or on the back of a napkin — it only matters that you clarify concepts for your audience.

But, be careful not to introduce an unnecessarily complex diagram. In the worst case, a busy diagram or one with lots of irrelevant details will frustrate your audience and diminish your understandability.

#5: Use charts.

Like diagrams, a carefully crafted chart or graph will speak volumes and clarify a previously fuzzy relationship.

Remember the warning about unnecessary complexity applies to charts too.

#6: Use progressive disclosure.

Suppose the diagram (or chart) which best explains the concepts is a complex one. What then?

In nearly all cases, it should be possible to use progressive disclosure. This means that you build up the entire diagram (or chart) progressively as a series of chunks, revealing only a part of the overall diagram at a time. If you are drawing the diagram as you speak, you are inherently using progressive disclosure. (You draw a few lines, explain what you’ve drawn, draw a few more, explain again, and repeat.) This is easy to do with PowerPoint too.

#7: Use comparisons, analogies, and metaphors.

Whenever you introduce new concepts, search for an appropriate analogy which helps the audience understand the new concept in terms of how they already understand the old one.

Make it Logical

Okay, your audience understands what you are saying, but does what you are saying make sense?

Does it pass the logical tests which your audience will be applying subconsciously?

#8: Leverage audience commonplaces.

Commonplaces often provide the most stable foundation for your argument. It’s a good ideas to start with these — because your audience already believes them — and build the remainder of your argument outward.

In a similar manner, framing the issue from your audience’s perspective is a great way to be more persuasive.

#9: Ask questions, and get your audience thinking.

Questions engage your audience and make them active participants in the conversation. Rather than passively waiting for you to provide answers, they’ll be contributing to the answers as you go. As a result, they will collectively feel ownership when you move toward conclusions. In the best case, they will feel that they came to the conclusions themselves — a sure way to guarantee your persuasiveness.

#10: Address the opposing point of view, and refute it.

On the surface, it seems foolish to bring up the opposing arguments. What if your audience didn’t think of that? Now you’ve just planted a seed of doubt!

On the contrary, bringing up opposing arguments makes you seem unbiased and boosts your ethos. (“You must be trustworthy; you are pointing out your opposition!“) Further, and more importantly, it allows you to directly refute the opposing arguments with logical arguments of your own.

#11: Emphasize the points of most value to audience

Unless you are using only perfect, irrefutable facts as premises, and making a purely deductive argument (where the conclusions follow immediately from premises), there are going to be holes in your inductive argument. (This doesn’t mean you’ve done a poor job. Inductive arguments have uncertainties by definition.)

Since your presentation has a finite length, you must make choices how to best spend your time. You will be most effective if you devote the majority of your presentation to discuss the issues of primary interest to your audience.

Make it Real

Concrete and specific details improve the strength of your arguments, and thus make your overall message more persuasive.

Explaining the theory behind why your new solution will raise profits is a good start; sharing a story about a company which raised profits 17% by adopting your solution is much stronger.

#12. Use props or photographs.

Talking about something in abstract terms is good, but using real objects or photographs carries more logos. Visual evidence is very hard to refute.

#13: Use vivid details.

In lieu of photographs, you can make your claims more real by supplying vivid details.

#14: Use facts and statistics.

Assigning numbers adds to the impact.

Compare the following statements:

• Every year, many people die of cancer.
• Every year, 3000 people in our community die of cancer.

Which one of these statements is more likely to persuade your audience to contribute money to cancer research?

#15: Cite your sources.

A statistic may be accurate, but without citing a source, your audience may dismiss it. By citing a source, you tip the scale towards believability.

(The credibility of your source is also important, but that is more closely related to ethos.)

#16: Use real examples and case studies.

You can construct convincing arguments about theories and ideas, but your audience will be left to wonder whether the theory holds in reality. Real examples and case studies show that the theory works in the real world.

#17: Use personal stories and anecdotes.

A personal story combines the power of a real example with that of a cited source. Assuming you are a credible source, personal stories and anecdotes carry more logos than stories or anecdotes “which happened to a friend of mine.”

What do you think?

The techniques listed here are far from complete. There are other ways to improve your logical arguments and your persuasive effectiveness.

What other techniques do you use?

When you are in the audience, what qualities of the presentation make you more likely to judge it to be a sound argument?

Please share your ideas in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... What is Logos and Why is it Critical for Speakers? Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Presentation Power: Four Ways to Persuade Book Review: Thank You For Arguing (Jay Heinrichs)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

Have you ever listened to a speaker and thought:

• “I’m… so… lost.”
• “How did he come to that conclusion?”
• “Interesting theory, but it wouldn’t work for me.”
• “No way! That number has to be wrong.”
• “Nice slides, but I’ll stick with my own method.”

In all of these cases, the speaker probably suffered from poor logos. As a result, it’s doubtful that you adopted their central message or followed the call-to-action.

In this article of the Ethos, Pathos, and Logos series, we examine logos and the importance of conveying your message in a way that is both understandable and convincing to your audience.

What is Logos?

Logos is the Greek root word from which the English logic is derived.

So, it isn’t surprising that, in speaking, logos is often equated with “logical reasoning” or “an argument based on reasoning”.

You might be thinking that logic is dry and boring. You might also be thinking that you want to be a dynamic and fun speaker, and so logical reasoning isn’t really that important to you.

While you may not get turned on by logical analysis, it is critical to your success. Before we can see why logos matters to you as a speaker, however, we need to define a few terms.

A (Very) Brief Tour of Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning has two flavors:

1. Deductive reasoning, and
2. Inductive reasoning

Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning consists of one or more deductive arguments. You generally start with one or more premises, and then derive a conclusion from them. Premises can be facts, claims, evidence, or a previously proven conclusion. The key is that in a deductive argument, if your premises are true, then your conclusion must be true.

For example, consider the following deductive argument:

1. Audiences hate all boring things. (premise)
2. Bullet-point slides are boring. (premise)
3. Therefore, audiences hate bullet-point slides. (conclusion)

So, if audiences hate boring things (yes!) and if bullet-point slides are boring (yes!), then audiences must hate bullet-point slides.

Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning is similar in that it consists of premises which lead to a conclusion. The difference is that the conclusion is not guaranteed to be true — we can only state it with some degree of confidence.

For example, consider the following inductive argument:

1. All Six Minutes articles you have read in the past were insightful. (premise)
2. This is a Six Minutes article. (premise)
3. Therefore, this article is insightful. (conclusion)

Given these premises, it is reasonable to expect that this article will be insightful, but it cannot be stated with certainty based on those premises. It must be inferred.

Audiences and Logical Arguments

Okay, so why is this important?  It’s important because your audience is applying deductive and inductive reasoning all the time. It happens subconsciously, but they are doing it before you start speaking, while you speak, and after you’ve finished.

Let’s consider an example.

Example Scenario: You are trying to convince your audience to try a new weight-loss diet.

• You claim that the new diet reduces hunger. (premise A)
• You claim that reducing hunger will reduce caloric intake. (premise B)
• You claim that reducing caloric intake will cause weight loss. (premise C)
• You conclude that the new diet will cause weight loss.
  (This is a sound, deductive conclusion which must be true if premises A, B, and C are true.)

What could your audience be thinking?

• Every diet I have tried in the past has failed miserably. (premise D)
• This new diet is like those failed diets. (premise E)
• Therefore, this new diet will fail miserably.
  (This is a reasonable inductive conclusion drawn from premises D and E.)

Because their own conclusion is based on strong, emotional experiences (i.e. a failed diet is emotional), it has high pathos and probably trumps your conclusion. Since your audience has to resolve these conflicting conclusions, they will look to your arguments for flaws. Although your deductive conclusion is sound, they will doubt your premises:

• “I’m always hungry when I am on a diet!” (counters premise A)
• “But if my caloric intake drops, I won’t have enough energy to exercise, and I’ll gain weight!” (counters premise C)

How can you be persuasive in this challenging scenario? Your success depends on your ability to simultaneously make your argument stronger and competing arguments weaker.

For example:

• You can boost your argument by providing supporting facts, diet research, or even your personal success story with the new diet.
• You also must show why this new diet is unlike all those past failed diets. If successful, you would significantly cast doubt on premise E, and their entire inductive argument.

Kill Two Birds with a Single Stone: Commonplaces

It may seem impossible to build a strong argument when you’ve got to compete against a lifetime of beliefs and premises that your audience has previously formed. You may wonder how you can persuade anyone of anything.

The answer: commonplaces.

Commonplaces are simply beliefs which are widely held. Commonplaces often represent “shared wisdom”, and come from many sources. For example:

• Family members may agree that “eating dinner together every day keeps us strong”.
  • This commonplace would make it hard for you to convince them to join a club that meets in the dinner hour.
• Organizations may have core values which include “communication is key to our success”.
  • This commonplace means that they are particularly receptive to ideas which promise to improve organizational communication.
• Society at large generally believes that “freedom of speech is a good thing”.
  • This commonplace would be a good starting point to persuade members of your school board not to ban controversial classics from the school library.

There are two keys to using commonplaces in your speeches:

1. Commonplaces can be used as (often unstated) premises in your speeches. You can use them just as you would use any other fact or claim.
2. When your commonplaces are different from your audience’s commonplaces, use theirs, not yours!

A wonderful example of this second principle is provided by Jay Heinrichs in Thank you for Arguing, page 101:

Suppose you want to encourage students graduating from an elite private liberal arts college to enlist in the military. Use the audience’s commonplaces, not the military’s. Instead of “A strong nation is a peaceful nation,” say, “Our armed forces can use independent, critical thinkers.”

When you use your audience’s commonplaces as your premises, your arguments appear much, much stronger. You don’t have to convince them to adopt a completely new viewpoint; rather, you are simply encouraging them to take what they already believe (the commonplace) and apply it to a new scenario.

Okay, I’ll Use Commonplaces. Anything Else?

Unfortunately, there’s more to it than that. Using audience commonplaces is just one particularly strong technique.

In general, you can develop strong logos by following three general principles:

1. Make it Understandable
   Whatever arguments you employ, they have to be easily understood by the audience before they can be persuasive.
2. Make it Logical
   Make sure your arguments stand up under the deductive and inductive reasoning that your audience will be using. Make sure your premises don’t have holes in them, and have a strategy for addressing competing arguments which your audience already believes.
3. Make it Real
   Premises which are based on concrete and specific facts and examples tend to be accepted quicker than premises which are abstract and general. The more easily your premises are accepted, the more easily your conclusions will be as well.

Why is Logos Critical for Speakers?

Preconceptions are not easily pushed aside. If your presentation is hard to follow, or if your arguments are fairly weak, your audience will find it easy to dismiss your ideas.

Sound, logical arguments, on the other hand, are hard for your audience to ignore. When combined with good ethos and pathos, strong logos will cause all but the most stubborn audience members to give strong consideration to your ideas.

The Circular Relationship between Logos and Ethos

By demonstrating logos with strong, logical arguments, your audience will tend to see you as knowledgeable and prepared. This, in turn, raises your ethos (because, after all, only someone with pure intentions would work so hard to prepare such a convincing argument).

Similarly, speakers with high ethos tend to receive less opposition when they present logical arguments. Their facts and claims are more easily believed.

Work on both traits, and you will be much more persuasive.

How do you Establish Logos?

There are many specific ways to establish logos throughout your speech, and we’ve hinted at some of them already in this article.  We examine some of these methods in greater detail in the next article of this series.

Similar Articles You May Like... 17 Easy Ways to Be a More Persuasive Speaker Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Presentation Power: Four Ways to Persuade Book Review: Thank You For Arguing (Jay Heinrichs)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

It is grounded in the wisdom of the past (beginning with Aristotle’s ethos, pathos, and logos) and yet written for modern speakers with countless references to everyday persuasive examples.

This article is the latest of a series of public speaking book reviews here on Six Minutes.

• What’s Inside?
• The Price
• What I Loved
• How could it be better?
• What Others Think
• Verdict

What’s Inside?

You might think that a book which discusses ancient public speaking theories would be dull and boring. I did.

But I bought it anyway, and I’m glad I did. I was wrong. The author, Jay Heinrichs, has accomplished a rare feat. He has written a highly educational book which is also lively and entertaining.

Thank You For Arguing covers the core rhetorical teachings of Aristotle and Cicero, but Heinrichs does it entirely using modern examples, drawing on political, marketing, workplace, and cultural references, as well as his own family arguments. One paragraph discusses Socrates; the next discusses Sherlock Holmes. The balance between formal lessons and practical examples makes the book highly valuable and applicable to everyday speaking.

Among other things, you will learn:

• A deep understanding of ethos, pathos, and logos
• Many figures of speech
• How to recognize strong and weak logical arguments
• How to recognize (and use, or defend against) persuasive techniques
• How to construct a persuasive speech

The Price

At the time of writing this review, you can get this paperback book for only $10.08 from amazon.com. This is 28% off the list price.

As you can see from the Amazon screenshot below, the book is both popular and well-liked.

3 Things I Love about Thank You For Arguing

The three things I liked most about Thank You For Arguing are:

1. Figures of Speech Abound

I bought this book to gain a deeper understanding of figures of speech, and I am completely satisfied. The book delves into dozens of figures of speech, like accismus, anadiplosis, and anaphora just to name a few of the A’s. Heinrichs provides not only definitions and examples, but also the origins of the techniques. He discusses them in context with related figures and rhetorical concepts. As a result, you learn not only how to recognize the figures, but also when and where it would be to your advantage to use them.

2. The Honest “Persuasion Alerts”

The pages are littered with sidebar “persuasion alerts” which the author introduces by saying “it’s only fair to show my rhetorical cards — to tell you when I use devices to persuade you.”

These sidebars make it clear that this book is not only written about persuasive techniques, but also written with persuasive techniques. For example, antithesis is discussed on page 217 in depth, but the sidebar on page 5 points out that the author just used that technique in the introductory chapter. I admire the transparency of his approach.

Like all the best teachers, Heinrichs teaches best by demonstrating his own lessons.

3. Valuable Reference Materials

The Appendices are worth the price of this book alone. These include, as expected, a summary of figures of speech, and also a valuable guide to speechwriting techniques that I will utilize as I write and re-write my future speeches.

How could it be better?

1. Sidebar Layout could be Improved

Although I loved the sidebar persuasion alerts (and many other sidebar notes), I would have preferred if they were placed in distinct margins without text wrapping around them. (See the page excerpt at right.)

Because they are so instructive, I think they deserve a little more whitespace. The “extra” whitespace created would also provide more room for readers to scribble notes of inspiration.

2. Chapter 22

I agreed with most of the other twenty-four chapters, but Chapter 22 (talking about the presentation medium) caused me to utter a few “I don’t think so”s. If I were asked to edit the book, this is the only chapter I’d focus on.

I must concede that Heinrichs more than makes up for it with Chapters 23 and 24 where he applies all of the lessons in the book to common, everyday situations that we all might face: speaking up at a local town hall meeting, acing the job interview, persuading others in a social club, or seeking investment for a business idea.

3. Cultural Bias

The flip side of all of the practical examples drawn from popular (American) culture is that it has introduced a cultural bias. Most Six Minutes readers are probably okay (I, too, write with a western culture bias), but it’s something you should be aware of if you are considering this book.

What Others Think

Gordon Alley-Young, American Communication Journal:

… the short, succinct chapters make the book an easy reference that can be picked up and set down to be read at short intervals. This makes the book well suited to readers with busy schedules or for those who commute via mass transit a lesson can be gleamed on a short trip to campus.

Jay Heinrichs’ blends a popular cultural savy with an equal opportunity approach to critiquing any political and/or cultural figure.

Peter Kimpton, The Observer:

This entertaining volume is a romp through the rules of rhetoric, a primer in the art of argument. [...]

We’re offered ways to seduce, avoid conflict, manipulate the present tense to succeed at work, write speeches and even use eristic techniques to stop a US cop from issuing us with speeding fines.

Tom Boncza-Tomaszewski, The Independent:

If you’re the kind of person who wants to win people over, this book will help you succeed.

Verdict

Every speech and presentation is an opportunity for persuasion, even those business and scientific talks which speakers casually treat as “just informational talks.” No matter what type of speeches you deliver, your speechwriting skills will improve by reading this book, and your well-constructed arguments will be more persuasive. I learned a great deal, and you will too.

I highly recommend Thank You For Arguing for all speakers.

Similar Articles You May Like... Presentation Power: Four Ways to Persuade Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) How to Dress for Public Speaking Gifts for Every Speaker… from Zero to Eighty Dollars Speeches that Changed the World

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

2300 years ago, Aristotle wrote down the secret to being a persuasive speaker, the secret which forms the basis for nearly every public speaking book written since then.

Do you know the secret?

If you don’t, you might be wondering what a 2300-year-old theory has to do with public speaking in the year 2010.

In a word — everything!

In this article, you’ll learn what ethos, pathos, and logos are (the secret!), and what every speaker needs to understand about these three pillars of public speaking.

What are Ethos, Pathos, and Logos?

So, what are ethos, pathos, and logos?

In simplest terms, they correspond to:

• Ethos: credibility (or character) of the speaker
• Pathos: emotional connection to the audience
• Logos: logical argument

Together, they are the three persuasive appeals. In other words, these are the three essential qualities that your speech or presentation must have before your audience will accept your message.

Origins of Ethos, Pathos, Logos — On Rhetoric by Aristotle

Written in the 4th century B.C.E., the Greek philosopher Aristotle compiled his thoughts on the art of rhetoric into On Rhetoric, including his theory on the three persuasive appeals.

Many teachers of communication, speech, and rhetoric consider Aristotle’s On Rhetoric to be a seminal work in the field. Indeed, the editors of The Rhetoric of Western Thought: From the Mediterranean World to the Global Setting call it “the most important single work on persuasion ever written.” It is hard to argue this claim; most advice from modern books can be traced back to Aristotle’s foundations.

In The Classic Review, Sally van Noorden points to George Kennedy’s modern translation as the standard reference text for studying On Rhetoric. Kennedy’s translation is the source that I use. (At the time of this writing, it is available from amazon.com for $24.56, 18% off the list price.)

Ethos

Before you can convince an audience to accept anything you say, they have to accept you as credible.

There are many aspects to building your credibility:

• Does the audience respect you?
• Does the audience believe you are of good character?
• Does the audience believe you are generally trustworthy?
• Does the audience believe you are an authority on this speech topic?

Keep in mind that it isn’t enough for you to know that you are a credible source. (This isn’t about your confidence, experience, or expertise.) Your audience must know this. Ethos is your level of credibility as perceived by your audience.

We will define ethos in greater detail, and we will study examples of how to establish and build ethos.

Pathos

Pathos is the quality of a persuasive presentation which appeals to the emotions of the audience.

• Do your words evoke feelings of … love? … sympathy? … fear?
• Do your visuals evoke feelings of compassion? … envy?
• Does your characterization of the competition evoke feelings of hate? contempt?

Emotional connection can be created in many ways by a speaker, perhaps most notably by stories. The goal of a story, anecdote, analogy, simile, and metaphor is often to link an aspect of our primary message with a triggered emotional response from the audience.

We will study pathos in greater detail, and look at how to build pathos by tapping into different audience emotions.

Logos

Logos is synonymous with a logical argument.

• Does your message make sense?
• Is your message based on facts, statistics, and evidence?
• Will your call-to-action lead to the desired outcome that you promise?

We will see why logos is critical to your success, and examine ways to construct a logical, reasoned argument.

Which is most important? Ethos? Pathos? or Logos?

Suppose two speakers give speeches about a new corporate restructuring strategy.

• The first speaker — a grade nine student — gives a flawless speech pitching strategy A which is both logically sound and stirs emotions.
• The second speaker — a Fortune 500 CEO — gives a boring speech pitching strategy B.

Which speech is more persuasive? Is the CEO’s speech more persuasive, simply because she has much more credibility (ethos)?

Some suggest that pathos is the most critical of the three. In You’ve Got to Be Believed to Be Heard, Bert Decker says that people buy on emotion (pathos) and justify with fact (logos). True? You decide.

Aristotle believed that logos should be the most important of the three persuasive appeals. As a philosopher and a master of logical reasoning, he believed that logos should be the only required persuasive appeal. That is, if you demonstrated logos, you should not need either ethos or pathos.

However, Aristotle stated that logos alone is not sufficient. Not only is it not sufficient on its own, but it is no more important than either of the two other pillars. He argued that all three persuasive appeals are necessary.

Is he right? What do you think?

Next in this Series…

In the next article of this series, we examine ethos in greater detail.

Similar Articles You May Like... Presentation Power: Four Ways to Persuade Book Review: Thank You For Arguing (Jay Heinrichs) Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) 17 Easy Ways to Be a More Persuasive Speaker What is Logos and Why is it Critical for Speakers? 18 Paths to Pathos: How to Connect with Your Audience

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.