Lecture: Persuasive Speaking & the Rhetorical Appeals
Lecture script · about 15–20 minutes spoken · Week 12
Opening
Picture a nurse asking a hospital unit to try a new hand-off checklist. Now picture a neighbor asking a city council for a crosswalk. Different rooms, same job. Each one has to earn the room's trust, make people care about the right amount, and back the request with evidence the room can check. And each one has a line they shouldn't cross, the line where moving people turns into pushing them around.
That line is what this lecture is about.
Here's where we are. Week 1 made honesty a speaker's first duty. Week 2 taught you to read an audience and name common ground. Week 3 drew the first line between the purposes: inform teaches, persuade moves. Week 4 gave you three real sources and their oral citations. Week 5 named Monroe's Motivated Sequence as one of the six patterns. And Week 11 built the running speech as an informative speech that teaches without taking a side. This week that same speech starts asking for something. Next week, we look under the hood of an argument, with Toulmin's model and the fallacies.
I'll take you through five ideas. First, what persuasion is, and the three kinds of question it answers. Then the three appeals. Then how to build the speech in five steps and aim it at your audience. Then the ethics that keep it honest. And last, we'll check a chatbot's idea of a good statistic.
1. Persuasion versus manipulation
Think about a coworker who wants your team to switch to a shared calendar. One way to do it: show the team two meetings that got missed and offer a one-week trial. Another way: say everyone else already switched, and the old system could crash any day, with nothing behind either line. Both might work. Only one of them treats the team as people who can think.
Here's how the course draws that line. Persuasion is moving what an audience thinks, values, or does, or strengthening a view it already holds, through honest appeals and reasons the audience can weigh and reject. Manipulation is an attempt to move an audience that goes around its judgment instead of through it, such as by inventing evidence, inflating fear, hiding counter-evidence, or rushing a decision.
Hold on to three words from that first definition: weigh and reject. A persuasive speaker gives the audience reasons it could turn down. A manipulator makes sure it never gets the chance.
Every persuasive speech answers a question, and this course sorts those questions three ways. A question of fact is a persuasive question about whether something is true or false, such as whether a crossing has a walk signal; evidence can settle it. A question of value is a persuasive question about whether something is good, right, fair, or better than an alternative; the speaker must name the standard used to judge it. A question of policy is a persuasive question about what should be done, usually marked by the word "should". Some treatments add questions of definition as a fourth kind, so the count stays in words.
Let's sort three claims. "The crossing near the campus's north gate has no walk signal." That asks whether something is true, so it's fact, and a site visit settles it. "A hands-on first-aid workshop is a better use of an orientation hour than a campus tour." That asks whether something is better, so it's value, and you owe the audience your standard for better. Those two are illustrative.
The third is the running speech's new claim. It says the dining hall should run a two-week plate-waste audit before deciding whether to remove trays. The word "should" gives it away. That's policy. Three claims, one for each question type. And the type tells you what you have to prove: a fact needs evidence, a value needs a standard, and a policy needs a plan.
Pause and try this. Last week the running speech explained how the dining hall handles plate waste. Was that persuasive? Why or why not?
Think about whether it asked the audience for anything.
Here's the answer. No, because it taught without an ask, and a persuasive speech is defined by its ask, not by its subject.
2. Three appeals
Picture two people telling you about a faster route to work. One is a neighbor who drives it every day. The other is a billboard. Same claim, different trust. Then a third person shows you both routes timed side by side. Different again. You weigh a request three ways: who's asking, how it makes you feel, and what the evidence shows.
That idea is old. Aristotle's Rhetoric, in the W. Rhys Roberts translation, says, "Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds". The course calls them the appeals: the three kinds of proof a persuasive speaker offers, which this course names ethos, pathos, and logos after the modes of persuasion in Aristotle's Rhetoric. The list is three. Don't add a fourth.
Ethos is the appeal to the audience's trust in the speaker, built from the speaker's competence, character, and goodwill as the audience sees them. Competence means you know the subject. Character means you're honest. Goodwill means you have the audience's interests at heart. Pathos is the appeal to the audience's emotions, which is legitimate when the feeling is relevant to the topic and in proportion to the evidence. Logos is the appeal to evidence and reasoning, such as a cited study or a statistic with its source, which any listener could check for themselves.
Now the running speech, which is illustrative. Its ethos move: the speaker spent a semester volunteering on the dining hall's waste audit. That one move shows competence, character, and goodwill, all three parts. Its pathos move is a scene: picture the compost bin at closing, filled to the lid with food that came back on plates. That feeling is relevant and proportionate. A full bin is real, not a disaster. And its logos move is oral citation 2, from researchers Wenhao Zhang and Junehee Kwon in the journal Sustainability in December 2022. A week without trays in a university dining hall cut how much food diners took. But it did not show a significant reduction in food waste. One move for each appeal.
Two swaps cause most of the trouble. Ethos versus pathos is why they trust you versus what they feel. Ethos versus logos is your credibility versus your reasoning. Here's the test I want you to keep: ask where the proof lives. In the speaker, it's ethos. In the listener's feelings, it's pathos. In evidence anyone could check, it's logos.
Now let's read two real speeches for craft. This is analysis of how a speech persuades, never of whether you agree. Roosevelt's address to Congress in 1941 came the day after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Its phrase "a date which will live in infamy" reaches mainly for pathos. It named the weight of the day before any request was made. Its "Last night" sentences, each naming one more place attacked, reach mainly for logos, because the case builds fact by fact.
Kennedy's inaugural address in 1961 gives us "ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country", which reaches mainly for pathos, a shared sense of duty. And "Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate." reaches mainly for ethos. It presents a speaker of steady character, neither fearful nor reckless. A fragment can reach for more than one appeal, so each reading names the main one. Your reading can differ, as long as you can point to the words.
Pause and try this. A speaker says, "I've weighed these plates for a semester." Another says, "Picture the bin at closing." Which appeal is each?
Ask where the proof lives.
Here's the answer. The first is ethos, because the proof lives in the speaker, and the second is pathos, because it asks the audience to feel something.
3. Build it in five steps
Think about a friend talking you into a road trip. They get your attention. They remind you how long it's been since you went anywhere. They've got a plan: the car, the route, a cheap place to stay. They make you picture the drive with the windows down. Then they ask: are you in?
That's a five-step speech, and Week 5 gave it a name: Monroe's Motivated Sequence, from Monroe's 1935 book, Principles and Types of Speech. The 5 steps run attention, need, satisfaction, visualization, and action.
Let's build the running speech. Attention: the closing-time compost bin, described in two sentences. Need: the campus is deciding on trays with no local measurement, and oral citation 1 sets the size of the problem. "According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Waste FAQ page, which draws on the department's Economic Research Service, between 30 and 40 percent of the food supply in the United States goes to waste." Satisfaction: a two-week audit, weighed daily, before the decision. That's 2 weeks times 7 days, or 14 days of weighing. Visualization: two futures side by side, one where the decision rests on the campus's own numbers, and one where it's copied from another campus. Action: sign up for a weighing shift, and email dining services.
The visualization step is the fourth step of Monroe's Motivated Sequence, in which the speaker helps the audience picture the future with the proposal adopted, without it, or both. It's the step people skip most, because the plan feels finished. But a plan nobody can picture is easy to nod at and forget.
The sequence isn't the only shape. Problem–cause–solution is a persuasive pattern with three main parts: it shows that a problem exists, explains what causes it, and proposes a solution that removes the cause. Comparative advantages is a persuasive pattern for an audience that already agrees a problem exists; it argues that one solution is better than the alternatives by showing its advantages over each.
Then aim. The target audience is the part of an audience a persuasive speaker most hopes to move, described by where it starts on the claim: agreeing, neutral, or opposed. Diners who already want the audit need less on the problem and more on action, so you hand them the sign-up sheet. Diners who haven't thought about trays need the need step and the plan built with care. And diners who want the trays gone now? Open on common ground, since everyone wants less waste. Name the strongest counter-argument fairly: the audit delays the change by two weeks and takes volunteer time. Answer it with oral citation 2. Then ask for a smaller step, an open mind until the 14 days of numbers are in.
Pause and try this. A speaker gives the five steps but ends the satisfaction step and jumps straight to "sign up now." Which step is missing?
Count the steps out loud.
Here's the answer. Visualization is missing, so the audience never pictures the payoff before it's asked to act.
4. Keep it honest
A good salesperson and a con artist can use the same words. Both tell a story, both name a problem, and both ask for something. The difference is what they do with the truth.
The National Communication Association's Credo for Ethical Communication was approved in 1999 and states 9 principles, and the first one puts truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason up front. From it, this course draws four honest moves: honest evidence, proportionate emotion, the strongest counter-argument acknowledged, and an honest ask. An honest ask is a request at the end of a persuasive speech that names exactly what the speaker wants the audience to do, sized to what the evidence supports.
Each honest move has a dark twin. The manipulation moves are four ways a speaker goes around an audience's judgment, which this course names and rejects: fabricated evidence, disproportionate fear, suppressed counter-evidence, and false urgency. Fabricated evidence is a statistic or source that doesn't exist or doesn't say what you claim. Disproportionate fear stirs more fear than the evidence supports. Suppressed counter-evidence hides the part of the record that cuts against you. And false urgency pushes a decision before the facts are in. Next week's false dilemma shows up here only as one form of that last move.
Run the honest checklist on the running speech. Citation 2 is reported whole, both halves. The compost bin is proportionate and labelled illustrative. The two-week delay is named fairly. And the ask is a weighing shift and an email. Four honest moves, all four made.
Timing matters too. A generator ad that runs the morning after a storm lands because the fear is fresh. Timing and the occasion help explain why a speech lands, but timing isn't a fourth appeal. The count stays three. And timing can tip over. If that ad inflates the next storm into a catastrophe to close the sale, the timing has become disproportionate fear.
Pause and try this. A speaker reports only the half of Zhang and Kwon's finding that says diners took less food. Which manipulation move is that?
Ask what the audience never got to hear.
Here's the answer. Suppressed counter-evidence, because the speaker hid the half of the finding that cuts against the trayless side.
5. Check the machine
You'll use a chatbot as a rehearsal coach in this course, and in persuasion it fails in a way that sounds helpful. Ask it for a good statistic, and it often hands you a confident number with an official-sounding group attached and no page behind it.
Here's an illustrative exchange, and it names no product. You ask for a good statistic about trayless dining. The draft says going trayless cuts food waste in half, credited to an official-sounding group with no author, no date, and no page. It reports Zhang and Kwon's study as "trays make diners take more food" and stops. It warns that the landfill is about to overflow because of trays. And it closes by telling the audience to remove the trays this week, before it's too late.
Check it, move by move. The "in half" line has no page behind it, and the real study didn't show a significant waste reduction, so that's fabricated evidence: drop it, and say oral citation 2. The half-reported study is suppressed counter-evidence: restore both halves. The overflowing landfill is disproportionate fear: keep your proportionate compost-bin scene. And "this week, before it's too late" is false urgency: restore the honest ask. Four problems, one for each manipulation move.
Then rehearse. Record the speech twice and self-assess in the shape of the delivery table from Week 9, naming one moment to fix, such as rushing past the visualization step. If you'd rather not use a camera, an audio recording or a run-through for a friend works the same way.
Pause and try this. The chatbot's statistic names an organization. Why isn't that enough to say it aloud?
Think about what a real source lets you do.
Here's the answer. A name isn't a source, because a source is a page you can open with an author or organization, a title, and a date, and this one has none.
Closing
Let me pull it together. Persuasion moves people through their judgment, and manipulation goes around it. A persuasive claim answers a question of fact, value, or policy, and the type tells you what to prove. The three appeals are ethos, pathos, and logos, and you tell them apart by asking where the proof lives. Monroe's Motivated Sequence builds the speech in five steps, and the visualization step is the one not to skip. The emphasis shifts with your target audience. The four honest moves keep you on the right side of the line, and the four manipulation moves are what a chatbot's shortcuts tend to look like.
Next in this module, read the Readings and Resources page, then work through the lecture tutorial, the practice set, and the quiz. Next week, Argument, Reasoning and Logical Fallacies takes the running speech's policy claim apart with Toulmin's model, and shows you the arguments that only look sound.
Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com