Heinrichs supplies the reader with methods that seem really simple. There's a tactic composed of three steps:
1. "Stimulate your audience's emotions." (P. 22)
2. "Change its opinion." (P. 22)
3. "Get it to act." (P. 22)
It's pretty straightforward: Change your audience's mood so that the likelihood of it conceding will increase, then act and get it to think what you want it to, and then actually make it do what you want it to. Three simple steps that, if done correctly, will allow you to control the person.
Seems easy, doesn't it? But once I began thinking of how I would use these techniques, it got difficult. How exactly could I make my audience feel and think what I want them to, without them being aware of my manipulation? And even more difficult: How would I then have them do exactly what I want them to? If in the first place it wasn't their idea, if I make one mistake, they'll change their minds. You never actually say what you want from them. Instead, you must imply it with such subtlety that they'll end up believing they made up their minds on their own. I really want to learn how to do this, though. So for now I'll start with trivial situations and as I improve (hopefully I will) I'll allow myself to go on to more important, life-changing persuasions.
Heinrichs also provides another method to use once the argument is already taking place. It actually consists on "losing" the argument, as surprising and illogical as that may seem. It consists on "conceding your opponent's point to get what you want." (P. 20) That way, your opponents will feel they won and without being aware of it, they will let you win. This sounds easy as well, right? It is much simpler than the other method, but I still find it a bit complicated. Although it's easier than fooling someone into believing they came up with an idea (which, I must add, sounds a bit like the movie Inception) it is still difficult to hold in all your anger. You might be dying to prove the person wrong and you might have hundreds of comebacks lined-up in your head, but trying to beat the person won't make him/her be nicer to you. On the contrary, they'll become hostile and deny you what you want. So although you'll win for a moment, you won't in the long run. Due to this, you must keep all the banter to yourself and concede to their point. But it's hard for stubborn people (like me) to admit they are wrong... even if it will benefit them later. But that's something we must get used to, I guess, and learn that by "suffering" a bit for a few seconds, you'll end up winning exactly what you wanted.
Although these methods are pretty complicated to me, it is obvious that Heinrichs masters them perfectly. It's the book's second chapter, so he's still proving the usefulness of rhetoric in order to make sure his audience is fully interested. I assumed he would use rhetoric to convince us, but I was shocked at how subtly he used it. I barely even realized it. He begins saying "Learn [rhetoric's] tools and you'll become the face to watch. The rising star." (P. 18) Although by then I was already interested in rhetoric, these sentences enthralled me. I continued reading: "You'll mold the minds of men and women to your will, and make any group yield to the dominion of your voice." (P. 18) I began thinking of how great this sounded. And then it hit me: He was using seduction! He was displaying his topic as irresistible as possible, and it was working perfectly. Even after realizing that he was using rhetoric on his audience, it still worked on me. That's how good he is, and I hope I'll be able to become this good later on.
No comments:
Post a Comment