Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

Watch the video below that revisits Severn Cullis-Suzuki's speech to the United Nations in 1992 about the environmental crisis. Take note of moments of persuasion throughout, and pay close attention to the conclusion to her speech. Video courtesy of BBC Ideas on YouTube Organizational Patterns for Persuasive Speeches The general and specific purpose statements of a persuasive speech differ from those of an informative address, but they, too, help you determine how to arrange your points. A closing argument in a courtroom is a persuasive speech in which the general purpose is “to persuade” and the specific purpose is tied to the facts of the case. For example, the lawyer for Kelly, who was accused of stealing money from a pharmacy, gave a closing argument in which the specific purpose was “to persuade the jury that Kelly did not steal the money because she had no motive or opportunity to commit the crime.” This specific purpose statement encouraged the lawyer to use a particular organizational pattern to accomplish his speaking goals. In this section of the chapter, we detail some of the common organizational strategies you can effectively employ for persuasive speeches. Although persuasive speeches have very different general and specific purposes than informative/technical speeches, the two types of speeches are similar in that the specific purpose often dictates what organizational pattern should be used. Persuasive speeches can be directed at a specific problem or the problem’s fundamental cause. They also can be focused on arguing that one option is better than another. Finally, there are persuasive speeches that attempt to move people to immediate action. Depending on which of these purposes is your goal, you may choose any one of four potential organizational patterns. Problem-Solution Order If you seek to convince an audience that a specific policy or action will solve an existing problem, the problem-solution order might be best. In this arrangement, you first convince the audience that there is a problem and then make the case that the solution you propose will alleviate that problem. To effectively arrange this speech you must first establish a clear specific purpose that states exactly what you want your audience to do. Then you must consider several important questions to evaluate the merits of your case as you develop it and prepare to present it to your audience. The first question deals with the definition and scope of the problem. You need to establish how you see the problem at hand and convince your audience to see it that way as well. If they disagree with your definition of the problem, then you will never get the audience to buy into your solution; you will be stuck arguing over what Quintilian called definitive stasis. So, before even offering a solution you need to clearly establish the scope of the problem you plan to address. In explaining the scope, you may wish to inquire whether any party has been harmed by the problem and share this with your audience. This can help create an emotional connection between the audience and the issue, thus enabling you to add some pathos to your appeal. Photo of an attorney addressing a jury. Once the dilemma that faces the audience has been established, you need to move on to the solution. The initial part of this portion of your speech should answer the question of evaluative criteria. In other words, establish by what criteria the audience should judge a potential solution to the problem. After constructing this list of criteria for evaluating a solution, you should check your proposed solution against it to ensure that what you propose actually resolves the problem. If it does not, then your solution is unlikely to be adopted by the audience. Finally, you need to explain to the audience how your solution can be put into effect. The “how” element is important because it is the prescription for action that you want the audience to follow. It should contain practical and specific steps for the audience to take that will actually enact the solution and solve the problem facing the community. Let’s look at the hypothetical case of Lionel to illustrate how a simple problem-solution speech might be approached. Lionel is tired of the potholes in the road in front of his house, so he attends the city council meeting and addresses the members. First, he explains that the road in front of his house contains ten potholes in a three-block span, and then he informs the council that these potholes have caused several thousand dollars in damage to the cars that drive that road in the last month alone. He then proposes that they use city funds to fill the potholes with macadam to avoid further damage. In this speech, Lionel details the problem and proposes a solution once the problem has been made clear to everyone. Using the problem-solution order, this speech roughly looks like this: Body Main point: State of the road in front of the house (problem) Main point: Funding road repairs (solution) This can be an effective way of convincing an audience to support your plan; however, it is not always the most compelling way to propose a solution. Sometimes, you need to do more. Problem-Cause-Solution Order Problems, whether they are public or personal, always have a root cause, and to effectively resolve the problem you need to address that root cause, or the symptoms will recur. To this end you must look at the situation to determine the causes of the problem facing the audience and then decide whether or not the cause can actually be addressed. If it can, then the speech needs to recognize the problem faced by the community as well as add a discussion of why the problem exists—its cause. In short, you must convince the audience not only that a problem exists, but that the problem exists because of a root cause and that addressing that root cause is the most effective way to handle the situation. Let’s return to Lionel and see how this works. It makes even better sense to not just fix the potholes, but to make sure they don’t happen again. This would involve changing the specific purpose, and as a result, the organization of the main points in the speech. Lionel’s specific purpose would change to reflect his new goal, and it would be something like this: “To persuade the audience to redesign the street where potholes have damaged cars so that they will not occur again.” The goal for Lionel now is to address the problem (potholes) by providing a solution to it and its cause (poor design of the street). Body Main point: The state of the road in front of his house (problem) Main point: The poor street design (cause) Main point: Funding for proper road repairs (solution) His speech arrangement now is problem-cause-solution order, where he first discusses the immediate problem, then explains what caused it, and finally provides a solution that addresses both the potholes and the cause: poor street design. Comparative Advantages More often than not, you will not be the only one offering solutions to a problem. In fact, having multiple ideas about how to fix something or address an issue is commonplace. The important thing to remember here is to research and evaluate all the other potential solutions that might be offered to the problem. After doing so, if you believe yours is the best approach, then it might be helpful to recognize that you are aware of other potential solutions, but that they would not be the best option. This approach looks at the strengths and weaknesses of other solutions and compares them to your own. Such an approach can help increase your ethos with the audience and make your case even stronger. Continuing with the example of Lionel and the dangerous potholes, perhaps he is not the only one who has brought this issue to the attention of the city council. In fact, the council already knows about and agrees there is a problem and its cause is poor street design. Let’s say that the day before Lionel arrives to give his speech the council comes out in favor of a plan to fill the potholes but not redesign the street because it would be cost prohibitive to do so. Lionel, aware of this alternate plan through his thorough approach to research, needs a different specific purpose and organizational pattern than in either of the two previous scenarios. Now his specific purpose is “to persuade his audience that paying the money to fix the street now is a better solution than simply fixing the potholes.” He then structures the body of his speech by using a comparative advantage organizational pattern, in which every main point in the argument explains why redesigning the street is better than just fixing the potholes and not addressing their root cause. Body Main point: Fixing potholes is temporary; a proper repair job will be permanent Main point: Fixing the road will create a smoother surface Main point: Fixing the road correctly will be less expensive in the long run The case of Lionel and his topic illustrates several different ways of organizing persuasive speeches. Each one helps to establish a strong case for taking a particular policy. There is, however, another fruitful organizational pattern for persuasive speeches we wish to discuss and it is particularly useful when seeking immediate action from an audience.