More than 2,000 years before Monroe, Aristotle defined the pillars of good persuasive discourse. According to him, one of the main values of a good speaker is ethics – or credibility. The problem-solving model is an organizational model that commits to taking a specific approach to solving a problem. They would provide evidence to show that there is a problem, and then they would come up with a solution with additional evidence or arguments to justify how to proceed. An essential point that addresses the problem and an essential point that deals with the solution may be enough, but you are not limited to two. You can add a main point between the problem and the solution that describes other solutions that fail. You can also combine the problem-solving model with the cause-effect pattern or expand the speech to match Monroe`s motivated sequence. For example, perhaps your speech should motivate the public to take action against bullying in schools, and this is important to you because you work with the Boys and Girls Club and have seen how anti-bullying programs can have positive results. Sharing your own participation and commitment is the key to the credibility and emotional attraction (ethical and pathos) of the speech added to the logos (evidence showing the success of the programs and the damage caused by harassment that is uncontrolled). However, it would be wrong to produce stories of personal commitment that are false, even if the proposal is socially valuable. The alternative to passive agreement is to act immediately or persuade your audience to engage in a particular behavior. Many passive agreement topics can become directly action-oriented topics as soon as you tell your audience what behavior they should adopt (for example.
B sign a petition, call a senator, vote). While it`s much easier to get passive consent than to get people to do something, you should always try to get your audience to act, and quickly. A common mistake that spokespeople make is telling people to behave in the future. The longer it takes for people to participate in the desired action, the less likely it is that your audience will engage in this behavior. A discourse intended to explain a cause-effect relationship between two phenomena. Pepsi vs Coke: Convincing the public that Pepsi is better than Coke is a matter of value speech, as it depends on a value judgment. . . .