Emotion, Manipulation, and Commonplaces

The art of storytelling is truly a persuasive device. I fully agree with Aristotle when he says that "the most effective mood changers is a detailed narrative." Telling a story makes the point more relatable to your audience. They pick an experience they have encountered that is similar or relevant to the one that you have told and they become more emotionally involved with the conversation and point you are trying to make. Like Heinrich says, calling names, ranting, or describing someone that made you mad won't engage the other person in the conversation or make them sympathize with you. However if you want them on your side, all you have to do is tell them the situation in a story setting; then they can relate.

Another point that Heinrich's made that I have never considered is using simple language to create dramatic results. The sentence I found most provoking in this section was:
"The most emotional words of all have just four letters." This statement puts it perfectly. You could yell, scream, and rant for fifteen minutes at your parents telling them how upset you were, and it would make them mad, but if you just simply said "I hate both of yall!!" The conversation would be taken to a whole new level. The same goes for the other four letter word. You and your boyfriend could be getting really serious and he could write a letter telling you how much you mean to him but it STILL wouldn't be as effective as simply saying, "I love you."
Keep it simple when you argue emotionally and you will be more effective.


In my own experience I have used Heinrichs tool of anger in order to manipulate my audience. When I am trying to get people on my side, or just understand my side of an argument, the easiest tool to use is to relate the situation to them. If they are involved or if someone is doing something against them your audience will suddenly be a 100 times more attentive, involved, and emotionally roused.
This is why Heinrich's argument tool he calls the "belittlement charge" is extremely effective. As soon as the audience feels as if they are targeted, their emotions are stirred and they become angry. This example is a perfect portrayal of this tool:

" The company has mocked this legislature for years, saying "Sure, we'll provide better broadband, leave it to us," and then forgetting you the moment it leaves this hearing room."
-by putting "you" into this statement, the audience is suddenly part of the target. They now care more because it concerns them.

It's simple really. Humans are selfish beings. It is in our nature to put ourselves first and primarily care about what concerns us more than what concerns others. Use this simple fact to your advantage. Relate your issue to their lives. If its about them they will be more likely to respond.


An important concpet that I learned while reading these chapters is the importance of focusing your argument on what the audience wants. Commonplaces was a term that was analyzed in the chapters that proves to be a vital key in arguing effectively. In order to give the audience what they want, you must understand what they are thinking. Knowing who your audience is, is key to winning the argument. You must first agree with them, in order to start off on a "level playing field". Once you are on their level, you can begin to redefine terms in your own way.

This way of arguing is something that seems so obvious yet not many people do it. I agree with Heinrich's, "people often pitch an argument that sounds persuasive to themselves, but not to the listeners.


Heinrich's makes it seem so easy. Now the only thing left to do, is argue the way Heinrichs has taught me!!