Isn't he kind?

Assignment Part II:
Persuasion is one of those things that is used constantly but is hardly studied or even cared about. No one decides what type of persuasion they are going to use before they attempt to affect another person. Honestly, I had never even realized that a whole spectrum of persuasion existed! I understand that coercion (on the far right side of the continuum) is not necessarily bad; however, with the example of propaganda attached to it, I find believing in coercion to be very difficult. Persuading with no real conclusion is not at all honest, but is a clever and tempting way to sway minds. How do you think society gets us to buy certain products? Coercion, baby! The middle ground of the continuum displays a healthy balance between pure persuasion and coercion -- legal reasoning. Since this purer version of persuasion has a little good and evil mixed into it.. it makes itself more "user friendly." Though this was also discussed in the beginning of the book I still find my understanding of it a little fuzzy. On the other end of the continuum lie literary texts, "where persuasion approaches purity" (75). This side of the spectrum seems hardest to work with. It is so pure that only the truth is used; there are no loopholes or vague conclusions. No one text books seem so life threatening to read. =).

Is it important to analyze the rhetorical situation because that is what will give the reader a better understanding of the argument that exists ahead. It also shows the argument's strengths and weaknesses so we can determine how believable the material is. The only way one can persuade another is to understand the full message, or rhetorical act. Without that understanding, the material would useless.

Persuasion differs from coercion in many ways, and yes, this distinction matters greatly! Coercion "relies primarily on the suppression of alternatives (73)." In other words, it keeps breaking down one point until there is nothing left but some sort of conclusion. The audience breaks down, so to speak, with it and, eventually, gives in.. believing whatever there is to believe. It turns something that may or may not happen into a reality without any real promise of a solid outcome. Persuasion, on the other hand, takes more truth into consideration. It gives the audience a solid answer and conclusion, and then backs the conclusion up with solid reasoning and facts. In turn, the audience believes that the given conclusion is good. Coercion makes us believe what we think we need, and persuasion helps up believe what we should.

Ramage makes the claims he does because he wants us to understand that even though persuasion and coercion are very different, they are being used as one in the same more and more. He wants us to realize that most people start to use pure persuasion in their works but become discouraged and turn to coercion as their alternative. I don't think Ramage wants us to fall into that pattern.. so he warns us ahead of time . Isn't he kind?

Again, as with the first, I was a little confused by this chapter. I'm hoping my thoughts are significant. See you all on Tuesday!