sebbysteiny Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 Well if it was a public speech to a huge audience ya i wouldve spent a lot more time on it but as such it wasnt for a huge crowd it was for a group of idiot high schoolers whom i despise. As you can probably tell i wasnt motivated to do my best in this instance. :shrug: Other than that, ya this thread is done for. u can close it now On that point, I think your photo is most excellent and worthy of a QP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HydrogenBond Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 A good way to present such a controversial topic is to take the middle path instead of one of the forks in the road. Bounce back and forth between pro and con. This will give everyone something they want and will give them a chance to more objectively see the other side. Maybe the ending to the speech is a type of compromise like; Stem cell research has a lot of innate potential. But on the other hand, it also makes a lot of promises like a polititian. A compromise may be a preliminary test study on one of the main promises that is most expected to work. If that pans out, more funding and success will follow. If that doesn't pan out, we didn't loose too much time and money barking up the wrong tree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 On the other hand, a persuasive speech shouldn't be too middle of the road, and thereby fail to persuade anyone. TFS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebbysteiny Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 I completely disagree with Hydrogen Bond (sorry mate :fly:). You should pick where your heart is and go with it without fear of onesidedness. Hydrogen Bond's version is biased towards neutrality. You certainly would not find me doing a speech on the far right in which I 'toe the middle line'. Nor would I do one on Evolution / "Intelligent Design". Just make sure your claims are not so bold as to be unsupportable and irrational but other than that, have no limits and go where your beliefs take you. Nothing wrong with a bit of heart, sole and contriversy. Account for and / or respect the opposition (as it is a good pursasion technique), but curtail to it only when they make a good point, not for want of bravery. That's what freedom of speech is all about after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 A good way to present such a controversial topic is to take the middle path instead of one of the forks in the road. Bounce back and forth between pro and con. This will give everyone something they want and will give them a chance to more objectively see the other side. (taking this advice to its logical extreme in the face of itself) On the other hand, if you feel passionately about a subject, and you are certain that the position you have found is right, then don't provide the false arguments against it! Speak up about what you think, inform other people, and don't allow them to be mislead by the other side's arguments, it would not only be bad for your speech, it would be irresponsible to your listeners! This doesn't mean to distort the facts, or to ignore facts that are distasteful to you, but it means that you acknowledge that all sides of an argument are NOT equal, that often one side IS better than the other, and that, as a pursuesive speaker it is your job, nay duty, nay your civic responsibility to help bring people to the right side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebbysteiny Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 if you feel passionately about a subject, and you are certain that the position you have found is right, then don't provide the false arguments against it! I don't normally give QP's simply because somebody agrees with me, but what the hell. I'm feeling generous. But this bit I might clarify somewhat. It's okay to put forward one side's false arguments against your [innevitably right] position. It's essential pursuasion since those who are against your position will probably be aware of and support that argument whilst those who are neutral and at first agreed could change when they realise there is 'another side'. But after acknowledging the false argument, you then explain clearly why it is false and that no reasonable person could adopt it. Couple that with a few cheap emotional flourashes and you have a great speech in the making. I'm sure PGRMDave will agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 What the hell is a QP? In college, this was a quarter pound, which meant we really had to pool our money... :hihi: The Hypography term is rep point. Cheers. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.