Oral Communications
Analysis and Evaluation
California Content Standards
Analysis and Evaluation of Oral and
Media Communications

1.13 Analyze the four basic types of
persuasive speech (i.e. propositions of
fact, value, problem or policy) and
understand the similarities and
differences in their patterns of
organization and the use of persuasive
language, reasoning and proof.
Types of Persuasive
Speeches
 Propositions
of fact
 Propositions of value
 Propositions of problem
 Propositions of policy
Propositions of Fact

A fact claim is a statement about
how things were in the past, how
they are in the present, or how they
will be in the future. A fact claim is
not a fact; it only claims to be a
fact. What makes it arguable is that
the speaker has no direct way of
establishing the truth of the claim.
Propositions of Fact

For example, "The Earth is round" is a
proven fact. "In our right-handed world,
left-handed people are discriminated
against" is a fact claim. A persuasive
speaker must provide arguments which
build a case in favor of the claim, showing
that the claim is probably true, or at least
is more likely true than false.
Propositions of Value

Value claims are arguable statements concerning
the relative merits of something which is measured
subjectively (e.g., "Victoria is a better place to go for
summer vacation than Calgary"). What makes a
value claim arguable is that different people may
disagree on the criteria used to evaluate something
(e.g., weather, live entertainment, water sports).
Differing value claims may be used to argue the
value of a variety of topics (e.g., movies, styles of
living, community organizations). Defending a value
claim involves offering a set of criteria for
consideration, defending the set of criteria as
legitimate, and showing how applying the criteria
justifies the claim.
Propositions of Value

Differing value claims may be used to
argue the value of a variety of topics (e.g.,
movies, styles of living, community
organizations). Defending a value claim
involves offering a set of criteria for
consideration, defending the set of criteria
as legitimate, and showing how applying
the criteria justifies the claim.
Propositions of Problem

A proposition is the main point or viewpoint
that the speaker/writer sets out to
establish or defend. Presenting a problem
claim offers one or more viable solutions.
It is not the same as propositions of fact,
value or policy in that it centers on a
problem and follows a problem/solution
organizational format.
Proposition of Policy

A policy claim is a statement regarding the
merits of one course of action as opposed to
other courses of action. What makes a policy
claim arguable is that, even though people and
institutions may not be totally certain about the
proper course of action to take, they still must
act. To argue in defense of a policy claim is to
state that, given the knowledge we have at the
present time, it is best to act in the manner
proposed rather than in some alternative way.
Content Standards

1.6 Use logical, ethical, and emotional
appeals that enhance the specific tone
and purpose.
Appeals in Persuasive
Speeches

Three basic strategies used in persuasion
are appeal to reason, appeal to audience
emotion, and appeal to audience needs.
Speakers should remember their ethical
responsibilities and not use dishonest or
misleading persuasive appeals. This will
also weaken one’s argument.
Types of Appeal

ETHOS: kind of person you are
-- your education, honesty, reputation,
delivery skills

LOGOS: appeals to the rational intellect
-- proving that we need a change

PATHOS: appeals to our passions and
will; using emotional proofs
-- appealing to deeply held values
Persuasive Speech Formats
PROPOSITION STATED FIRST
*STATEMENT-OF-REASONS METHOD
PROPOSITION
REASONS
*PROB LEM-SOLUTION METHOD
PROPOSITION
STATEME NT OF PROB LEM
STATEME NT OF SOLUTION
*COMP ARATIVE-ADVANTAGE METHOD
PROPOSITION
POINTS OF COMP ARISON (BENEFITS BY CHOICE "A" VERS US
CHOICES "B" OR "C" )
PROPOSITION STATED AT END
*CRITERIA- SATISFACTION METHOD
PROBLEM STATED, CRITERIA TO SOLVE PROBLEM
PRESENTED
HOW CRITERIA WILL BE MET
PROPOSITION
*NEGATIVE METHOD
PROBLEM STATED, OTHER OPTIONS AND WHY NOT WORK
PROPOSITION
*MONROE MOTIVATED SEQUENCE
DRAW A TTENTION TO PROBLEM
SHOW NEED FOR ACTION
OUTLINE A GENERAL PLAN TO SATISFY THE
HELP THE AUDIENCE VISUALIZE THE BENEFITS
SUGGEST A SPEC IFIC ACTION THAT PUTS PLAN INTO
PRACTICE (DETAILED PROPOSITION)
Content Standards

1.12 Identify logical fallacies used in oral
addresses (e.g. attack ad hominem, false
causality, red herring, overgeneralization,
bandwagon effect).
Logical Fallacies: Ad Hominem


"Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against
the person."
An Ad Hominem is when a claim or argument is
rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about
the author or the person presenting the claim or
argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps.


First, an attack against the character of person
making the claim, her circumstances, or her
actions is made (or the character, circumstances,
or actions of the person reporting the claim).
Second, this attack is taken to be evidence
against the claim or argument the person in
question is making (or presenting).
Ad Hominem

This type of "argument" has the following
form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
 2.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
 3.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is
a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or
actions of a person do not (in most cases) have
a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim
being made (or the quality of the argument
being made).

False Causality

False causality: an action purported to
cause an effect, which does not, in fact,
cause the effect. It does not fit into the
following four possibilities:

1.
A causes B.

2.
B causes A.
3.
A and B are both caused by a third factor, C.
 4.
The observed correlation was due purely to
chance.

Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an
irrelevant topic is presented in order to
divert attention from the original issue. The
basic idea is to "win" an argument by
leading attention away from the argument
and to another topic.
Red Herring


This sort of "reasoning" has the following
form:

1.
Topic A is under discussion.

2.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being
relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant
to topic A).

3.
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because
merely changing the topic of discussion
hardly counts as an argument against a
claim.
Examples of Red Herring


"We admit that this measure is popular. But
we also urge you to note that there are so
many bond issues on this ballot that the
whole thing is getting ridiculous."
"I think there is great merit in making the
requirements stricter for the graduate
students. I recommend that you support it,
too. After all, we are in a budget crisis and we
do not want our salaries affected."
Overgeneralization


A generalization that goes beyond the
evidence.
Extending the argument to include broad,
unsubstantiated claims.
Bandwagon Effect


The observation that people often do (or
believe) things because many other
people do (or believe) the same.
An effort to win an argument by ignoring
relevant facts and logic and instead
appealing to a person’s desire to feel or
act like everyone else around him.
Websites Cited:







http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/comm20/mod6.html
http://www.mikeleal.com/speech/chapter15.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/adhominem.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/redherring.html
http://www.abcte.org/teach/english-standards
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect