Thursday, September 18, 2008

Persuasive arguments

I've just been given the opportunity to sit and reflect upon persuasive arguments. At an important Baptist meeting a whole lot of us had to sit and listen to people speak for and against the motion and then make a decision.

It was a fascinating example of people trying to summon up the 'killer' blow, administer the coup de gras, make the decisive plea. I won't get into the issue of the motion itself here (that is a post in itself) but rather think about the powers of persuasion used.

The two men who proposed the motion represented different generations. The were both agreeing with each other but their style was markedly different. The younger (middle-aged) guy had done his homework on his opponents. His approach was to allay fears, to present his proposal in a way that would win over those who disagreed with him. The voice of experience and years spoke next. He simply made an appeal. He stated their position clearly and forcefully.


I realise that this may be me becoming a grumpy old man but is this where politics and the media have led us?

I think there are two lessons to learn from all this:

1. In our modern world how you say something is as important as what you say.

2. There is an even more desperate need for integrity and honesty in how we present the truth.


"we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."
2 Corinthians 4: 2

5 comments:

Stuart Heath said...

I look forward to hearing more about the motion, John.

Just a small note, in case there are some pedants reading: coup de gras means 'fat blow', which may sound a bit odd ;) I think you're after coup de grĂ¢ce.

(Oh, and if you're going to do an edit, 'allay' has two ls. I've embarrassed myself enough, now.)

John Smuts said...

Okay pedant, I''ll give you the allay... but I went for the 'fat blow' because I don't how to do a circumflex accent on blogger!

Anonymous said...

well said John; How + What = social communication itself. to suggest otherwise (i.e. some pure unmediated access to "just the info") seems like an attempt to obscure the importance person suggesting it (cf: your post re: cool-dude driscoll).

realising this kicked my butt back to the importance of Christian virtue BEFORE i speak: love, patience, generosity, charity, nonviolence..etc (sermon on the mount stuff)

i think there is an unhelpful presumption amongst some educators that freedom of speech is a virtue in itself

John Smuts said...

Good point Remy, although that wasn't my main argument.

I was actually thinking about how disingenouous the first speaker was. We were discussing a document and he was saying 'it doesn't actually mean what you think it says, it really means something else' - as if we couldn't be trusted to take it on face value.

Now, true, we do all read our own prejudices into the text. However, he was asking us to take it one way without any assurances that others would read it the same way.

Jonathan Hunt said...

Awww I don't believe it, another pedant got in there first...