Problem promise arguments solution conviction. Distraction from the problem, distraction, joke. Partial argumentation method

Laws of argumentation and persuasion

“It cannot but be shameful to be powerless to help oneself with a word,

for the use of the word is more natural to human nature than the use of the body."

Aristotle. "Rhetoric"

Proving and persuading are different processes.

To prove is not to convince.

Belief is the process of forming a new point of view to replace the old one. Persuasion is a successful rational and emotional influence on the free will of a person, as a result of which he himself comes to the conclusion that the act that you require of him is necessary.

To convince means to create the impression, to inspire confidence that the truth of the thesis has been proven.

The main idea of ​​any speech - the thesis - is affirmed in the mind with the help of arguments.

Thesis- thought, position, the truth of which is required to be proved (WHAT do you want to prove).

    it must be clearly articulated;

    it must be formulated in the affirmative;

    the thesis should not contain a logical contradiction;

    it must remain unchanged in the course of this proof

Arguments- grounds, arguments, with the help of which the thesis is substantiated (proved). Proof is the logical establishment of the truth of some proposition on the basis of statements whose truth is known.

Argumentation- intellectual activity on the analysis and selection of grounds and arguments necessary for further reasoning and sufficient for this purpose.

inference is a conclusion made on the basis of several judgments. A way of thinking that leads from judgments to conclusions. He can be deductive: From general to specific; inductive: from private premises to a generalizing conclusion or conclusion Similarly.

Argumentation methods: logical reasoning, totality inferences, which are used in the proof; intelligent modeling; a thought experiment followed by a logical analysis of the findings.

Argumentation is a deeply personal, individual reasoning. PRINCIPLE I.

ARGUMENTS MUST BE TRUE STATEMENTS.

Demonstration- form or method of proof (logical reasoning, a set of inferences that are used in the proof).

Distinguish between direct and indirect evidence.

At direct evidence the thesis is substantiated by arguments without the help of additional constructions.

circumstantial evidence involves substantiating the truth of the thesis by refuting the contradictory position - the antithesis.

In indirect proof, two methods are used:

    By contradiction

    Exclusion method

Kinds of Arguments

They differ in the degree of impact on the mind and feelings of people: 1) strong; 2) weak and 3) insolvent. Counterarguments have the same gradation.

1. Strong - do not raise doubts, they cannot be refuted, destroyed, not taken into account. It:

    precisely established and interrelated facts and judgments arising from them;

    laws, charter, governing documents, if they are implemented and correspond to real life;

    experimentally verified conclusions;

    expert opinions;

    quotations from public statements, books recognized in the field of authorities;

    testimonies of witnesses and eyewitnesses of events;

    statistical information, if its collection, processing and generalization are done by professional statisticians.

2. Weak

Raise doubts of opponents, customers, employees.

    Inferences based on two or more facts, the relationship between which is not clear without a third.

    Tricks and judgments built on alogisms (“Water? I drank it once, it does not quench my thirst.” Joke about “female logic”)

    analogies and non-illustrative examples

    arguments of a personal nature arising from circumstances or dictated by motivation, desire;

    biased digressions, aphorisms, sayings (taken out of context)

    arguments, versions or generalizations made on the basis of conjectures, assumptions, sensations;

    conclusions from incomplete statistics.

3. Failed Arguments .

They allow you to expose, discredit the opponent who used them.

    Judgments Based on Falsified Facts

    Voided Decisions

    Speculation, speculation, conjecture, conjecture

    Arguments based on prejudice, ignorance;

    Conclusions drawn from fictitious documents;

    Advance Promises and Promises

    False statements and testimonies

    Forgery and falsification of what is being said.

A simple argument scheme

Thesis(hypothesis) - thesis development(arguments different types) –conclusions(suggestions).

Arguments of different types:

    Interpretation, clarification of the thesis itself

    Refutation of other opinions (proof by contradiction)

    Positive facts, examples (examples from life, literature, history)

    Contrasting facts, examples

    Comparisons, analogies, juxtapositions

    Summing up, conclusions

Laws of argumentation

    The law of embedding (embedding) into the logic of the partner's reasoning

    Z the common language of thought

    Law of argument minimization (5-7)

    The law of objectivity and evidence

    The law of dialectic (unity of opposites). Talk not only about the pros of your evidence, but also about the cons

    The law of demonstration of equality and respect. A friend is easier to convince than an enemy.

    The law of reframing (centering). Do not reject the partner's arguments, but, recognizing their legitimacy, overestimate their strength and significance by changing the context. Emphasize the importance of losses and decrease the importance of gains if you accept his position. Use the technique of reformulating the opponent's words in a favorable angle for you.

    In the course of the argument, use those arguments that you and your opponent understand the same way.

    if the argument is not accepted, find the reason for it and do not insist on it.

    Do not underestimate the importance of the strong arguments of the opponent, emphasize their importance and your correct understanding.

    Give your arguments after you have answered the arguments of your partner.

    Measure the pace of argumentation with the characteristics of the partner's temperament.

    Excessive persuasiveness always causes a rebuff - the superiority of a partner is insulting.

    Give one or two striking arguments. Don't make the "argument brute force" mistake.

You need to write an effective selling text

for site

The text must be addressed to a specific client

Our goal is for the client to contact us

The text on the site should play a role good manager by sales:

answer ALL visitor questions

focus on strengths product (service)

justify the benefits that the client receives from cooperation with you

to convince and stimulate to take the action that you need

Exordium (intro). Start with an intriguing statement that will grab the attention of your target audience.

Narratio (exposition). State a problem readers have that your product can solve.

Confirmatio (approval). Promise a solution, backing up the promise with solid evidence.

Peroratio (conclusion). Name the benefits that the person who takes advantage of your offer will receive and call to action.

Attention - Interest - Desire - Action

Problem + Promise + Argument + Solution = Persuasion

The necessary decisions are not always made by us, very often important decisions for us are made by other people. Even if they are subordinates, they can also "do things", what can we say about business partners. The conclusion is simple - we need to convey our beliefs, the method of arguments and arguments is the most correct and open way to influence the decision-making of another person.

Management decisions, argumentation tactics.

Argumentation

the most difficult phase of persuasion. It requires knowledge, concentration, endurance, presence of mind, assertiveness and correctness of statements, the need to master the material and clearly define the task. At the same time, we should not forget that we depend on the interlocutor, because it is he who, in the end, decides whether he accepts our arguments or not.

Persuasive influence on partners business communication achieved through reasoning. Argumentation is a logical and communicative process aimed at substantiating the position of one person for the purpose of its subsequent understanding and acceptance by another person.

Argumentation structure - thesis, arguments and demonstration.

Thesis is the formulation of your position (your opinion, your proposal to the other party, etc.).

Arguments- these are the arguments, provisions, evidence that you give to substantiate your point of view. Arguments answer the question why we should believe or do something.

Demonstration- this is the connection of the thesis and argument (i.e., the process of proving, persuading).

With the help of arguments, you can completely or partially change the position and opinion of your interlocutor. To achieve success in a business conversation, you must adhere to some important rules:

Rules for Success in Business Communication

  • use simple, clear, precise and convincing terms;
  • tell the truth; if you are not sure that the information is true, do not use it until you check it;
  • the pace and methods of argumentation should be chosen taking into account the characteristics of the character and habits of the interlocutor;
  • the argument must be correct in relation to the interlocutor. Refrain from personal attacks on those who disagree with you;
  • non-business expressions and formulations that make it difficult to perceive what has been said should be avoided, however, speech should be figurative, and arguments should be visual; if you provide negative information, be sure to name the source from which you take your information and arguments.

Bizkiev

If you are very familiar with your subject, then you most likely already have some arguments at your disposal. However, in most cases, if you are going to convince your partners, it will be useful for you to stock up on convincing arguments in advance. To do this, you can, for example, make a list of them, weigh and choose the strongest.

But how to correctly assess which of the arguments are strong and which should be discarded? There are several criteria for evaluating arguments:

Criteria for evaluating arguments

1. Good arguments must be based on facts. Therefore, from the list of your arguments, you can immediately exclude those that you cannot support with factual data.

2. Your arguments must be directly relevant to the case. If they are not, discard them.

3. Your arguments must be relevant to your opponents, so you need to find out in advance how interesting and timely they can be for them.

In modern scientific and educational literature, many methods of argumentation are covered. Consider the most important, in our opinion, for situations of business communication.

1. Fundamental Method of Argument. Its essence is in a direct appeal to the interlocutor, whom you acquaint with the facts that are the basis of your evidence.

Numerical examples and statistical data play an essential role here. They are the perfect backdrop to support your thesis. After all, unlike the information stated in words - often controversial! - the figures look more convincing: this source is usually more objective and therefore attractive.

When using statistics, you need to know the measure: a pile of numbers tires the listeners, and the arguments do not make the necessary impression on them. We also note that carelessly processed statistical materials can mislead listeners, and sometimes even deceive.

For example, the rector of the institute provides statistical data on first-year students. It follows from them that during the year 50% of female students got married. Such a figure is impressive, but then it turns out that there were only two students on the course, and one of them got married.

In order for statistics to be illustrative, they must cover a large number of people, events, phenomena, etc.

2. Method of contradiction in argumentation. It is defensive in nature. Based on the identification of contradictions in reasoning, as well as the argument of the interlocutor and focusing on them.

Example. I.S. Turgenev described the dispute between Rudin and Pigasov about whether or not beliefs exist:

"- Wonderful! Rudin said. - So, in your opinion, there are no convictions?

No and does not exist.

Is this your belief?

How do you say they don't exist. Here's one for you, for the first time. Everyone in the room smiled and looked at each other.

3. Method of comparison in argumentation. Very effective and of exceptional value (especially when the comparisons are well chosen).

Gives the speech of the initiator of communication exceptional brightness and great power of suggestion. To a certain extent, it is in fact special form method of drawing conclusions. This is another way to make the statement more "visible" and weighty. Especially if you have learned to use analogies, comparisons with objects and phenomena that are well known to listeners.

Example: "Life in Africa can only be compared to being in a furnace, where, moreover, they forgot to turn off the light."

4. Method of argumentation "yes, .. but ...". It is best used when the interlocutor treats the topic of conversation with some prejudice. Since any process, phenomenon or object has both positive and negative aspects in its manifestation, the “yes, ... but ...” method allows us to consider other options for resolving the issue.

Example: “I also imagine all the things you listed as benefits. But you forgot to mention a number of shortcomings ... ". And you begin to consistently supplement the one-sided picture proposed by the interlocutor from a new point of view.

5. Method of argumentation "pieces". It is often used - especially now, when dialogue, conversation, discussion are actively introduced into our lives instead of monologues. The essence of the method is in dividing the monologue of your interlocutor into clearly distinguishable parts: “this is for sure”, “this is doubtful”, “there are the most various points vision", "this is clearly erroneous".

In fact, the method is based on a well-known thesis: since in any position, and even more so in a conclusion, one can always find something unreliable, erroneous or exaggerated, then a confident “offensive” makes it possible to a certain extent “unload” situations, including the most complex.

Example: “What you reported about the model of modern warehouse operation is theoretically absolutely correct, but in practice there are sometimes very significant deviations from the proposed model: long delays from suppliers, difficulties in obtaining raw materials, slowness of the administration ...”.

6. Boomerang method of argumentation. It makes it possible to use the "weapon" of the interlocutor against him. It has no force of proof, but it has an exceptional effect on the audience, especially if it is applied with a fair amount of wit.

Example: V.V. Mayakovsky speaks to the inhabitants of one of the districts of Moscow on the issue of solving international problems in the Land of Soviets. Suddenly someone from the audience asks: “Mayakovsky, what is your nationality? You were born in Baghdati, so you are Georgian, right? Mayakovsky sees that in front of him is an elderly worker who sincerely wants to understand the problem and just as sincerely asks a question. Therefore, he answers kindly: "Yes, among Georgians - I am Georgian, among Russians - I am Russian, among Americans - I would be an American, among Germans - I am German."

At this time, two young men sitting in the front row sarcastically shout: “And among the fools?”. Mayakovsky calmly replies: “And among the fools I am for the first time!”.

7. Method of argumentation "ignoring". As a rule, it is most often used in conversations, disputes, disputes. Its essence: the fact stated by the interlocutor cannot be refuted by you, but its value and significance can be successfully ignored. It seems to you that the interlocutor attaches importance to something that, in your opinion, is not so important. You state it and analyze it.

8. Method of argumentation "conclusions". It is based on a gradual subjective change in the merits of the case.

Example: "Wealth has no limits when in large sizes going abroad"; “The small fry knows best who will get the profit. But who will listen to the small fry?

9. Method of argumentation "visible support". It requires very careful preparation. It is most appropriate to use it when you are acting as an opponent (for example, in a discussion). What is it? Let's say the interlocutor stated his arguments, facts, evidence on the issue of the discussion, and now the floor is given to you. But at the beginning of your speech, you do not contradict or object to him at all. Moreover - to the surprise of those present, come to the rescue by bringing new provisions in his favor. But all this is just for show! And then comes the counterattack. Approximate scheme: “However ... you forgot to cite such facts in support of your thesis ... (list them), and this is far from all, since ...”. Now comes the turn of your counterarguments, facts and evidence.

Rules for the argumentation of managerial decisions

1. Operate with simple, clear, precise and convincing concepts, since persuasiveness can be easily "drowned" in a sea of ​​words and arguments, especially if they are unclear and inaccurate; the interlocutor "hears" or understands much less than he wants to show.

2. The method and pace of argumentation must correspond to the temperament of the performer:

  • arguments and evidence, explained separately, reach the goal much more effectively than if they were presented all at once;
  • three or four bright arguments achieve a greater effect than many average arguments;
  • argumentation should not be declarative or look like a monologue of the "protagonist";
  • well-placed pauses often have more impact than the flow of words;
  • the interlocutor is better influenced by the active construction of the phrase than the passive one when it comes to evidence (for example, it is better to say “we will do it” than “it can be done”, it is more appropriate to say “conclude” than “make a conclusion”).

3. Conduct arguments should be correct in relation to the employee. It means:

  • always openly admit that he is right when he is right, even if this may have adverse consequences for you. This gives your interlocutor the opportunity to expect the same behavior from the performing side. Also, by doing so, you are not violating the ethics of management;
  • you can continue to operate only with those arguments that are accepted by the employee;
  • avoid empty phrases, they indicate a weakening of attention and lead to unnecessary pauses in order to gain time and catch the lost thread of the conversation (for example, “as was said”, “or, in other words”, “more or less”, “along with the noted” , “it is possible both so and so”, “it was not said”, etc.).

4. It is necessary to adapt the arguments to the personality of the performer, i.e.:

  • build an argument taking into account the goals and motives of the interlocutor;
  • do not forget that “excessive” persuasiveness causes a rebuff from the subordinate, especially if he has an “aggressive” nature (“boomerang” effect);
  • avoid non-business expressions and formulations that make argumentation and understanding difficult;
  • try to present your evidence, ideas and considerations to the employee as clearly as possible. Remember the proverb: "It is better to see once than hear a hundred times." When making vivid comparisons and demonstrative arguments, it is important to remember that comparisons should be based on the performer’s experience, otherwise there will be no result, they should support and strengthen the manager’s argument, be convincing, but without exaggerations and extremes that cause distrust of the performer and thereby put under doubt all the parallels being drawn.

The use of visual aids increases the attention and activity of the employee, reduces the abstractness of the presentation, helps to better link the arguments and thereby ensure a better understanding on his part. In addition, the clarity of the arguments makes the argument more persuasive and documentary.

There are two main reasoning structures:

  • evidence-based argumentation, when it is necessary to prove or substantiate something;
  • counterargumentation, with the help of which it is necessary to refute the theses and statements of the performer.

For both designs, the same basic techniques apply.

Argumentation techniques

In relation to any persuasive impact or speech, there are 10 parameters, the observance of which makes this impact the most optimal.

  1. Professional Competence. High objectivity, reliability and depth of presentation.
  2. Clarity. Linking facts and details, avoiding ambiguity, confusion, understatement.
  3. visibility. The maximum use of clarity, well-known associations, a minimum of abstractness in the presentation of thoughts.
  4. Constant direction. During a conversation or discussion, it is necessary to adhere to a certain course, goal or task, and to some extent familiarize the interlocutors with them.
  5. Rhythm. It is necessary to increase the intensity of a business conversation as it approaches its end, while paying special attention to key issues.
  6. Repetition. The emphasis on the main points and thoughts has great importance so that the interlocutor can perceive the information.
  7. The element of surprise. It is a thoughtful, but unexpected and unusual for the interlocutor, linking details and facts.
  8. "Saturation" of reasoning. It is necessary that during communication emotional accents are made that require maximum concentration of attention from the interlocutor, and there are also phases of lowering emotionality, which are necessary for a respite and fixing thoughts and associations with the interlocutor.
  9. The boundaries of the issue under discussion. Voltaire once said: "The secret to being boring is to tell everything."
  10. A certain dose of irony and humor. It is useful to apply this rule of business conversation when you need to express thoughts that are not very pleasant for the performer or to parry his attacks.

Argumentation Tactics

Let us dwell on the tactics of argumentation. The question may arise: how does it differ from the technique of argumentation, which covers methodological aspects, how to build an argument, while tactics develops the art of applying specific techniques? In accordance with this, technique is the ability to give logical arguments, and tactics are the ability to choose psychologically effective ones from them.

Consider the main provisions of argumentation tactics.

1. Applying Arguments. The argumentation phase should begin confidently, without much hesitation. State the main arguments at any opportunity, but, if possible, each time in a new light.

2. Choice of technique. Depending on the psychological features interlocutors choose different methods of argumentation.

3. Avoiding confrontation. Avoiding aggravation or confrontation is very important for the normal course of the argument, since the opposing points of view and the tense atmosphere that have arisen during the presentation of one of the points of the argument can easily spread to other areas. There are some subtleties here:

  • it is recommended that critical questions be considered either at the beginning or at the end of the argumentation phase;
  • it is useful to talk to the executor alone on particularly sensitive issues before the start of the discussion, since “face to face” you can achieve greater results than at a meeting;
  • in exceptionally difficult situations, it is useful to take a break to "cool heads" and then return to the same question again.

4. "Appetite Stimulation". This approach is based on the following social psychology: it is most convenient to offer the performer options and information to preliminary awaken his interest in it. This means that we first need to describe Current state cases with a focus on possible Negative consequences, and then (based on "provoked appetite") indicate the direction possible solutions with a detailed justification of all the benefits.

5. Bilateral Argumentation. It will have a greater impact on an employee whose opinion does not coincide with yours. In this case, you point out both the advantages and the weaknesses of the proposed solution. The effectiveness of this technique depends on the intellectual abilities of the performer. In any case, as far as possible, any shortcomings that he could learn about from other sources of information should be pointed out. One-sided reasoning can be used in cases where the employee has his own opinion or he openly expresses a positive attitude towards your point of view.

6. Order of advantages and disadvantages. In accordance with the conclusions of social psychology, such information has a decisive influence on the formation of the interlocutor's position, when the advantages are listed first, and then the disadvantages.

7. Personification of argumentation. Based on the fact that the persuasiveness of evidence primarily depends on the perception of subordinates (and they are not critical of themselves), you come to the idea that you need to first try to identify their position, and then include it in your construction of argumentation, or, at least at least not to allow it to contradict your premises. The easiest way to do this is to contact the employee directly:

  • "What do you think of this offer?"
  • “How do you think this problem can be solved?”
  • "You're right"

Having recognized his correctness, having shown attention, we thereby encourage a person who will now accept our argument with less resistance.

8. Drawing up conclusions. It is possible to argue with brilliance, but still not achieve the desired goal if we fail to generalize the facts and information offered. Therefore, in order to achieve as much persuasiveness as possible, you must definitely draw conclusions yourself and offer them to employees, because facts do not always speak for themselves.

9. Techniques of counterargument. When someone tries to confuse you with an impeccable, at least at first glance, argumentation, you should remain cool and think:

  • Are the stated statements true? Is it possible to refute their foundations, or at least separate parts where the facts are not linked to each other?
  • Can any inconsistencies be identified?
  • Are the conclusions erroneous or at least partially inaccurate?

Arguments that convince

Perhaps the most important element impact on public opinion is persuasion. Persuasion is the task of the vast majority of PR programs. Persuasion theory has a myriad of explanations and interpretations. In principle, persuasion means that a person will do something through advice, reasoning, or simple arm-twisting. Many books have been written about the immense power of advertising and PR as tools of persuasion.

How can you convince people? Saul Alinsky, the legendary radical organizer, developed a very simple theory Beliefs: "People understand things in terms of their own experience... If you're trying to get your ideas across to others without paying attention to what they want to tell you, then you might forget your idea." In other words, if you want to convince people, you need to provide evidence that matches their own beliefs, emotions, and expectations.

What arguments convince people?

1. Facts. The facts are indisputable. While it is true that, as they say, “statistics sometimes lie,” empirical evidence is a compelling tool for building a “home” for a point of view. That is why a good PR program always starts with research - finding facts.

2. Emotions. Maslow was right. People really respond to appeals to emotions - love, peace, family, patriotism. Ronald Reagan was known as a "great communicator" largely because he appealed to emotions. Even when the entire nation was outraged after 200 American soldiers were killed in a terrorist attack in Lebanon in 1983, President Reagan was able to overcome its skepticism by talking to a wounded American Marine lying in a Lebanese hospital.

3. Personalization. People react to personal experience.

  • When poet Maya Angelou speaks of poverty, people listen and respect a woman who comes from the dirty and poor fringes of the segregation-era Deep South.
  • When Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy advocates for gun control, people realize her husband was killed and her son badly wounded by an armed lunatic on the Long Island Railroad.

4. Appeal to "you". There is one word that people do not get tired of listening to - it is "you". "And what will it give me?" is a question that everyone asks. Thus, one of the secrets of persuasion is to constantly put yourself in the place of the audience and constantly refer to "You."

Even though these four commandments are so simple, they are hard to understand - especially for business leaders who don't approve of emotions, or personalization, or even reaching out to an audience. Some consider it "below their dignity" to flaunt human emotions. Of course, this is a mistake. The power of persuasion - influence on public opinion - is a criterion not only for a charismatic, but also for an effective leader.

Impact on public opinion

Public opinion is much easier to evaluate than to influence it. However, a well-thought-out PR program can crystallize attitudes, reinforce beliefs, and sometimes change public opinion. First of all, you need to highlight and understand the opinion that you want to change or modify. The second is to clearly define the target group. Thirdly, a PR specialist should have a clear idea of ​​what “laws” public opinion is guided by, no matter how amorphous they may be.

In this context, 15 laws of public opinion developed many years ago by social psychologist Hadley Cantril can be applied.

15 laws of public opinion

1. Opinion is hypersensitive to important events.

2. Events of an unusual scale can cause public opinion to move from one extreme to another for a while. Opinion does not stabilize until the prospects for the consequences of events are assessed.

3. Opinion as a whole is determined by events, not words, except in cases where the words themselves can be interpreted as an event.

4. Oral statements and programs of action are of great importance in situations where opinion is unstructured, and people are open to suggestions and waiting for explanations from reliable sources.

5. By and large, public opinion does not anticipate critical situations, but only reacts to them.

6. Opinion as a whole is determined by personal interest. Events, words, and any other stimuli affect opinion only to the extent that they are related to self-interest.

7. Opinion does not exist without change for a long period of time, except when people feel a high degree personal interest and when the opinion that arose from words is supported by events.

8. If there is a personal interest, then the opinion is not so easy to change.

9. If self-interest is present, then public opinion in a democratic society is likely to dominate official policy.

10. If the opinion belongs to a small majority, or if it is not well structured, then a fait accompli tends to shift the opinion in the direction of accepting the fact.

11. In times of crisis, people become more sensitive to the adequacy of their leaders. If people are confident in them, then they tend to place more responsibility on them; if they are less confident in their leaders, they become less tolerant than usual.

12. People are less reluctant to trust their leaders to make important decisions if they feel they have some part to play.

13. People most often have an opinion, and it is easier for them to form an opinion about the objectives than about the methods of achieving these objectives.

14. Public opinion, like individual opinion, is colored by desire. And when an opinion is mainly based on desire, and not on information, then it can fluctuate under the influence of ongoing events.

15. In general, if in a democratic society people are given opportunities for education and easy access to information, then public opinion reflects common sense. The more people are aware of the consequences of events and proposals for self-interest, the more likely they are to agree with the more objective opinions of realistic experts.

We deliberately repeated the basic truths several times, we hope our material will help you convincingly convince your interlocutor to make the right decision.

In law enforcement, the most widespread methods of influence, which are based on verbal means. These methods include:

Persuasion (argument);

Compulsion;

Suggestions;

Informing.

Method of persuasion (argumentation)

Persuasive influence in professional communication is achieved through argumentation. Argumentation is a logical and communicative process aimed at substantiating the position of one person for the purpose of its subsequent understanding and acceptance by another person.

Argumentation is the statement and discussion of arguments in favor of the proposed solution or position in order to form or change a person's attitude to this decision or position.

The argumentation structure includes the thesis, arguments and demonstration. The thesis is the formulation of your position (your opinion, your proposal to the other side). Arguments are arguments, positions, evidence that you give to substantiate your own point of view. Arguments answer the question: "Why should we believe in something or do something?" Demonstration is the connection of the thesis and argument (i.e., the process of proof, persuasion).

Conditions for constructive reasoning:

A. The employee must be clearly aware of the purpose of the argument and openly formulate it for the object of influence, for example: "I will now try to convince you of the advantages of my proposal ^", "I will still try to convince you ...". If the purpose of the impact is not proven to the addressee, he may perceive it as cunning, manipulation, deceit.

B. Before making an attempt at argumentation, it is necessary to obtain the consent of the addressee to listen to the employee, for example: "does it make sense to convince you, do you agree to listen to my arguments first ...?".

Argumentation should be carried out in a state of "emotional calm" of the addressee, for which it is necessary to carry out preliminary work on the formation of a state of psychological comfort.

D. One cannot be persuasive at all. You can be persuasive for someone specifically, persuasiveness arises in the process of interaction with a specific person, taking into account the logic of this interaction and relationships.

General rules of reasoning.

1. Politeness and correctness. With any statements of a person, the employee must remain polite. Statements that degrade the dignity of a person are unacceptable. Irony and sarcasm should also be avoided, for example: "I thought you had at least average intelligence." Such statements violate emotional comfort and reduce the effectiveness of the impact.

2. Simplicity. All statements should be simple, understandable to the interlocutor, not contain abstruse expressions. It is unacceptable, for example, like this: "Let's approach the problem of testimonies of witnesses ontologically ...".

3. General speech. In the process of argumentation, you need to use a language that is understandable to both interlocutors. In some cases, it is allowed to speak with the object of influence in his language, even if it is too simple and contains elements of profanity.

4. brevity. You can't force someone to listen to your long sentences. Brevity is one of the criteria of respect for the interlocutor.

5. visibility. When arguing in favor of his proposal, the employee can, if necessary, illustrate his statements clearly: with photographs, examples, objects, figurative comparisons.

6. Prevention of over-persuasiveness. Excessive persuasiveness challenges the interlocutor's sense of importance of his intellect and provokes a reaction of resistance. Direct indications of errors in judgment, as well as an excessive number of arguments, can become suspicious. It is necessary to act according to the principle: "Better less is more."

Argumentation Techniques and Counterargumentation Technique of Socrates' Positive Answers is a consistent proof of the proposed solution. Each step of the proof begins with the words: "do you agree that ...". If the person answers positively, this step can be considered completed and proceed to the next one. If - negative, the employee continues with the words: "Sorry, I did not formulate the question very well. Do you agree that ..." until the person agrees with all the steps of the proof or the decision as a whole. "Do you agree to confirm this in court?".

When using this method, asking questions other than "Do you agree that..." is not recommended. Especially dangerous are the questions: "Why do you object to the obvious facts?".

Technique of Two-Way Argumentation - this is an open presentation of both the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed solution. In this case, the strengths should prevail. This enables the person to weigh the positive and negative aspects of the decision himself, which will avoid problems in the future when the negative aspects become apparent.

Argument rewriting technique. Tracking the progress of the solution to the problem or task proposed by the opponent, together with him until a contradiction is found, indicating the validity of the opposite conclusions.

Aerobatics method: help the person come to the conclusion: "I was wrong."

Argument separation technique. Separating the arguments of the object of influence into true, doubtful and erroneous and discussing them according to the formula:

2. "True, I'm already less sure that ..." or "I can not get rid of some doubt that ..." or "I wish it was that way, but as it shows ..., this is not always...." (followed by a dubious argument).

With the help of arguments, you can completely or partially change the position and thoughts of your interlocutor.

If you have experience, know the situation, understand personality traits, observant, attentive to details, then you already have some arguments at your disposal. However, in most cases, if you are going to convince someone of something, you need to stock up on convincing arguments in advance. To do this, you can, for example, make a list of them, evaluate each argument and choose the strongest.

There are several criteria for evaluating arguments:

1. Strong arguments must be based on facts. Therefore, from the list of your arguments, you can immediately exclude those that you cannot support with factual data.

2. Your arguments must be directly relevant to the case.

3. Your arguments must be relevant to your opponents, so you need to find out in advance how interesting and timely they can be for them.

Rhetorical methods of argumentation. Consider the most significant rhetorical methods for situations of professional communication.

1. Fundamental method. Its essence is in a direct appeal to the interlocutor whom you acquaint with the facts, which is the basis of your evidence. Numerical examples and statistical data play an essential role here. They are the perfect backdrop to support your thesis.

2. Method of contradiction. It is defensive in nature. This method is based on identifying contradictions in reasoning, as well as the argument of the interlocutor and focusing on them.

3. Method of figurative comparison. It is of exceptional importance in cases where comparisons are well chosen.

4. Method "yes, .. but ...". It is best used when the interlocutor treats the topic of conversation with some prejudice. Since any process, phenomenon or object has both positive and negative aspects in its manifestation, the "yes, .. but ..." method allows us to consider other options for resolving the issue.

5. The method of "pieces" is similar to the method of rearranging arguments. The essence of the method is to divide your interlocutor's monologue into clearly distinguishable parts: "this is for sure", "doubt", "there are all kinds of points of view", "this is clearly wrong".

6. Boomerang method. Gives the opportunity to use the "weapon" of the interlocutor against him. This method has no force of proof, but it has an impact on the audience, especially if it is used with a fair amount of wit.

7. Method of ignoring. As a rule, it is most often used in conversations, disputes, disputes. Its essence: the fact stated by the interlocutor cannot be refuted by you, but its value and significance can be successfully ignored.

8. Output method. It is based on a gradual subjective change in the merits of the case.

9. Method of visible support. It requires especially careful preparation. It is most appropriate to use it when you are acting as an opponent (for example, in a discussion).

False arguments. In the process of solving the problems of professional communication, a law enforcement officer may encounter a situation where false arguments are used against him.

Psychologist D. Halpern identified the twenty-one most common false arguments:

The influence of associations. If two events occur close to each other in time and / or space, then a connection is formed between them in the human mind. Therefore, when one of these events occurs, a person begins to expect that the other will also occur. The person may begin to feel associated states.

You should be very careful about messages based on associations. If this argument is revealed, another part of the message should be analyzed, because it can be based on an appeal to the emotional, rather than the rational component of the personality.

Arguments against personality. This term is adopted to mean "calling by proper names". With this form of persuasion, one can speak against the people who support an idea, and not against the idea itself. The false argument is based on antipathy for the person, not for the idea itself.

Emphasis on pity (empathic influence). It is very easy to single it out in the proposed premise: "Do this because we need your help." Such parcels can often be used in court by the defense. At the same time, the question of the real guilt or innocence of the suspect is not discussed, but it is said what a hard life he had, how it left him, how sad the circumstances were. In everyday life, this type of argumentation is remarkably used by people with an external type of locus of control.

Popularity and recommendations. You are being urged to support a position or take an action because everyone is doing it. It is implicitly assumed that "if everyone does it, it must be right". A variant of this method is the use of recommendations. The fallacy is exacerbated when the recommendations don't even touch on an area in which the popular person is competent. In the latter case, the false argument intersects with "recourse to authorities."

Wrong dichotomy. So "sometimes called the simplification of the problem or black-and-white arguments, when a person is asked to choose one of two positions, without offering him other options or" gray areas ".

The main mistake of a person who is faced with a similar situation is that she begins to choose "from the offer", thus limiting her own field of consideration of this problem.

An appeal to pride or vanity. In this case, reliance on praise or flattery is used. While flattery in and of itself may not be "evil intent," it can be used to confuse the issue.

Fraud or concealment of information. It is a method of persuasion by withholding information supporting an undesirable position.

Vicious circle. In this type of reasoning, the premise is a differently formulated conclusion. If you construct a structural diagram of this type of argument, you get a circle, since the restatement of the conclusion serves as support for the conclusion. For example: "The victim needed to increase the speed limit because the current speed limit is too low."

Irrelevant arguments. In Latin, this type of false argument is called non sequitur, which means "it is not a consequence." In other words, the argument or premise is unrelated to the conclusion. The most important criterion for the persuasiveness of an argument or recommendation is the presence of premises associated with the conclusion.

"Slope" or continuum. One of the arguments against the adoption of court decisions on the unification of schools for different ethnic groups inhabiting the region was that if we allow the court to decide which schools our children will attend, then the court will also begin to indicate who we should let into church, who should be invited to guests and even whom to marry. The argument is that if we place events at one end of this continuum under the jurisdiction of the court, then the court will take over the other events included in it. Most life events can be arranged in a row. But it does not at all follow from this that actions concerning one part of this series will be applicable to others as well.

"Straw Scarecrow". The straw man is unstable and easily knocked over. This is the name of the method when the opponent's conclusion is presented in the weakest form, and then it is easily refuted. At the same time, an opponent who opposes a certain conclusion distorts the arguments in favor of this conclusion and replaces them with much weaker ones.

"Part is whole". Wrong arguments like "part - whole" is the reverse side of the same error. In using this argument, one assumes that judgments that are true of the whole are also true of all its parts, and that judgments that are true of the parts are also true of the whole.

Use of ignorance. The peculiarity of using ignorance is that in this way it is often possible to support two or more completely different conclusions. This should serve as a sign that the arguments presented are erroneous. Our ignorance is used to prove that the conclusion is wrong because there is no evidence to support it. Our ignorance of the matter can also be used to support a conclusion by arguing that it is true because there is no evidence against it.

Weak and inappropriate analogies. Using analogies is one of the basic thinking skills. We turn to analogies when we encounter something new and try to make sense of it based on what we already know. While analogies are an extremely useful tool for understanding, they can be misused. Two objects or events are similar if they have certain general properties. When we reason by analogy, we assume that statements that are true for one object or event are true for another.

incomplete comparisons. Incomplete comparisons often use evaluative expressions like "better", "safer". This is a special case of considering the missing components of the inference. What is "better"? How to measure it? Who measured? Compared to what?

Knowing what cannot be known. "We need to increase the number of law enforcement agencies, as the number of unreported rapes has risen sharply", "At the moment, 150,000 drug addicts have been recorded, but the real figure is 1,000,000." There is no way we can know what cannot be known.

False reason. A fallacious argument occurs when someone claims that because two events occur simultaneously or follow one another, one of them is the cause of the other. "Simultaneously with the increase in the number of churches in the city, the number of prostitutes also increases."

Reducing the credibility of the source. There is a decrease in the status of the opponent's authority, often due to humiliation, appeal to emotions. "Only a fool would support this candidate." Thus, supporting this point of view, you automatically fall into the category of fools, people devoid of patriotic feelings or mind.

Appeal to traditions. "We've always done that." Anyone who has tried to change any rules has heard this phrase, or a variant of it: "Don't try to fix what's not broken yet." Maybe, existing system is indeed better than the proposed changes, but it may also turn out not to be the case. The fact that "we have always done this" does not mean that it is a good or The best way goal achievement. One of the qualities of a critical thinker is flexibility.

False accusations in false arguments. This is a false premise! It seems that some people, having learned to recognize erroneous reasoning, immediately call everything that others say wrong.

Persuasiveness of speech and conviction. Persuasiveness depends on taking into account the attitudes, beliefs, interests, needs, way of thinking and individual style of speech inherent in the object of influence.

If you want to convince someone, you must follow certain rules:

The logic of persuasion must correspond to the intellect of the object of influence;

It is necessary to convince by evidence, based on facts known to the object;

In addition to specific facts and examples, information should contain generalized provisions (ideas, principles);

Persuasive information should look as believable as possible;

It is better to comprehend what is presented in small meaningful parts (blocks);

Reported facts and general provisions must be such as to cause an emotional reaction of the object of influence;

The more dynamic the text and the facts that are clearly manifested in it, the more it attracts attention;

It is better perceived that which is close to the interests and needs of the object of influence;

It is better to perceive, comprehend and assimilate the material that is presented in accordance with the national traditions of the perception of the object.

The criterion for the effectiveness of persuasive influence is conviction. This is a deep confidence in the truth of the learned ideas, ideas, concepts, images. It allows you to make unambiguous decisions and implement them without hesitation, to take a firm stand in assessing certain facts and phenomena. Thanks to conviction, attitudes are formed that determine human behavior in specific situations.

An important characteristic of conviction is its depth. It is directly related to awareness, life experience of a person, the ability to analyze the phenomena of the surrounding reality. Deep confidence is characterized by great stability. As practice shows, in order to shake it, logical conclusions alone are not enough. Arguments must evoke an emotional reaction.

Persuasive influence is advisable to carry out in the following cases:

When the object of influence is able to perceive information;

When the object is psychologically ready to agree with our opinion;

In the case when the object is able to compare different points of view, analyze the system of argumentation. In other words, the impact is effective only if the person is able to understand and appreciate what is being said to her;

If the logic of thinking of the subject of influence, the arguments used by him are close to the features of the thinking of the object. Hence the importance of taking into account the national-psychological characteristics of the object, social, national-religious, cultural factors that determine the perception of the content of the message;

If you have time to convince. In order to convince people of something, especially that which is beneficial to the opposite side, it takes time. Changes in the field rational thinking people occur only after comparing and considering the facts.

Persuasive influence typically includes:

Impact of the source of information;

Impact of information content;

The impact of the informing situation. coercion method.

It is not always possible to achieve success by influencing a person with persuasion. Sometimes you have to use coercion. It is important that the object of influence realizes the inevitability of coercive measures taken against him. And this is achieved when coercion precedes persuasion. This provision is the basis for choosing coercion as a method of influencing a person in law enforcement (Chufarovsky Yu.V.).

Coercion is that kind psychological impact, which openly suppresses the ability to resist. This allows you to achieve a goal that is contrary to the desires, intentions and interests of a person.

If you have had time to get acquainted with this site, then you probably know that the main secret of building a big Internet business is TEXT. And not just a text, but a SELLING TEXT.

The text on the site should play the role of a good sales manager:

  • answer ALL visitor questions
  • focus on the strengths of the product (service)
  • justify the benefits that the client receives from cooperation with you
  • to convince and stimulate to take the action that you need

To create an effective selling text, it is not enough just to write correctly and beautifully. You need to write PERFECTLY.

The question of how to convince correctly did not arise today. First fundamental research, dedicated to the art of persuasion, appeared about 2500 years ago in the 4th century BC and belongs to Aristotle. Ancient Greece showed the world a galaxy of brilliant speakers. Supreme view oratory were considered judicial and political speeches. Aristotle proposed a simple but powerful formula that helped speakers achieve main goal- Persuade listeners. Here's what she looked like →

  1. Exordium (intro) . Start with an intriguing statement that will grab the attention of your target audience.
  1. Narratio (exposition). State a problem readers have that your product can solve.
  1. Confirmatio (approval). Promise a solution, backing up the promise with solid evidence.
  1. Peroratio (conclusion). Name the benefits that the person who takes advantage of your offer will receive and call to action.

If you look closely, Aristotle's formula is not too different from the classic AIDA advertising formula →

Aintention-Iinterest-Desire-Aaction

or how would it be in Russian →

Attention - Interest - Desire - Action

When writing, you can use any of the examples of sales texts from the above, but the equation proposed by the legendary American copywriter Gary Bensivenga is closest to me. Here it is →

Problem + Promise + Argument + Solution = Persuasion

Anyone can write a selling text according to this equation. Anyway, try. Experience will come with time. And to make it easier for you to create your own example of a sales text, I will share some subtleties.

Problem

To attract the attention of the reader, it is necessary to carefully consider the TITLE and entry into the text. The abundance of information and the lack of time makes a person very selective. He will not waste time reading a text that did not interest him from the first sentence.

A good header contains:

  • intrigue
  • target audience boundaries
  • benefit

For clarity, here is an example of the title of the selling text:

How to improve efficiency with FOREX by 256%?

A headline containing a question is already intriguing, the mention of the FOREX market highlights the target audience, the promise of a 256% increase in profits is a profitable component.

Next should be a powerful entry into the text. It can be one sentence or several paragraphs. Doesn't matter. The main thing at this stage is to capture the attention of the reader, who is already interested in the title, and he began to read the text. Typically, this part identifies a problem that the customer has that your product can fix.

It has long been established that pain and pleasure, the carrot and the stick, are the best motivators. Pain motivates much more, but in a sales text it is important not to scare the reader, but to detail the problem and paint a picture of a happy outcome. It is necessary to speak with the reader in the same language and in such a way that in your narrative he mentally recognizes himself, agrees with you.

Promise

After the reader has agreed that there is a problem, promise him a solution. And keyword in this section I do not PROMISE, but the DECISION. Show that the problem is temporary, that similar situations happen to many people, give examples of successful overcoming difficulties, etc.

In this part, you can give feedback from those who have already used the product and received the promised effect. The main thing is that the reviews are truthful and specific, and not enthusiastic about anything.

Proof

Having infected the reader with a picture of a happy future, proceed to the evidence. It is important here to avoid idle talk. Words just don't mean anything. There are many ways and examples to increase the persuasiveness of sales texts. Here are just a few of them:

  • Figures and facts . The numbers carry specific information. Avoid the phrases "years of experience", "rich product range", "cheap service". Having constructed the phrase in this way: “14 years of work on the market”, “the company's assortment includes more than 1500 units of products”, “monthly subscription service will cost only 800 rubles”, you do not leave any doubts.
  • Calculations . Do not limit yourself to indicating the size of the discount as a percentage, immediately give the amount of savings.
  • Opinion of experts, professionals. The first thing that comes to mind as an example is a toothpaste advertisement with recommendations from famous dentists.
  • Enumeration of merits, achievements and awards.
  • List of eminent clients who have used the product.
  • Quality assurance, money back etc.
  • Bonuses and Free Apps (consultation, gift, warranty service).

Solution

No matter how good your product is, it costs money that the client will have to part with. He has already appreciated the benefits of your offer, since he has not stopped reading up to this point. It remains to sell him the PRICE of the goods. Not to name, namely to sell.

Each seller wants to sell goods more expensive, the buyer wants to buy cheaper. The selling text is deprived of the possibility of "live bargaining", however, there are a number of effective tactics that contribute to the sale of the price:

  • Crushing the price (specify not total amount overpayments on the loan for the year - 3650 rubles, and the amount of the daily payment - only 10 rubles. in a day)
  • Price comparison (show what you can buy for the same money)
  • Old and new price (indicate the regular price, and offer a new one next to it)
  • Breaking down the price into components (when selling a furniture set, indicate the price of each table-chair, and not the set as a whole)
  • Offer multiple product versions according to the principle, the steeper, the more expensive, etc.

And finally, push the reader to action. A high-quality pendel is provided by the following techniques:

  • limited quantity of goods
  • short term offer
  • price increase in the near future
  • the possibility of pre-ordering at the best price

Also, use imperative verbs: Buy! Book now! Order!

P.S. Qualitative examples of selling texts are presented on the website under the heading "Recent Works". Read. DARE!

Read also