Factors of a Convincing Argument - Essay Example

Natural occurrences involve phenomena that humans cannot control and the outcome is observed by a large majority of the audience. For example, it is observed that the US is a developed nation that comprises both crime-free individuals as well as criminal elements. For authors to convince their audiences that their perspectives and arguments are valid, historical accounts, as well as observed outcomes, must be accounted for to show the authenticity of the argument. Within the US social context, it is shown that some members of the society have experienced alien activity. However, whether the spotting of UFOS of glowing lights in the horizon accounts for alien activity, the arguments on these phenomena are not convincing as not a majority of society members are familiar with the activities. In this case, authors and speakers have to consider the timeframe, number of observed accounts, reference to the phenomena, and how much the audience can relate to matters at hand.

When considering videos watched in class under the TED talks of various public speakers, it is an observed trend that they present their arguments by offering three types of accounting strategies. Firstly, these speakers ensure that the audiences they address are familiar with the considered issues. In this case, a speaker introduces a point and backs it with facts that the audience can point at. Secondly, while a perspective may be valid, logical considerations do not offer as much convincing power as the use of present and historical accounts and the result of the agenda topic.

For instance, when considering James Hansen’s TED talk (1-17 minutes) about why he must speak about climate change, it is shown that the speaker considers climate change a largely observed phenomenon and describes that a former professor of his introduced solar radiation concept to him. The historical accounting, in this case, shows that the speaker uses solar radiation as a variable that has been associated with climate change. By quoting his professor, Hansen drives his point as the professor was a qualified scientist whose perspective provided Hansen with the opportunity to develop an interest in talking about climate change. To back his argument, Hansen refers to a New York Times published that indicates a study had been carried out on warming that had the potential of rising sea levels. This reference offers a convincing approach that, Hansen’s argument was backed up by evidence.

Thirdly, while still on Hansen’s speech as an example, it is observed that the effect of a phenomenon is related to an audience’s ability to relate. For an audience to relate with a speaker’s point, a shared experience must exist and evidence of such phenomena happening must be explicit. For a point or argument to be convincing and believable, evidence that is directly connected to the considered argument must be relevant under the defined conditions. For instance, as Hansen points out why climate change must be addressed, members of the audience must be able to associate variables such as the melting of ice, increased cases of skin cancer, as well as reduced rainfall, which must connect to support the argument. Thus, the validity of an argument depends on facts, historical and current. Additionally, the audience must relate with the perspective such that speculative or rare occurrences are invalidated based on lack of experience, evidence, and observed outcome.