[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Also, can you give me an example of a persuasive argument that does not use logic?
[/QUOTE]
An argument that makes use of the peripheral route to persuasion is one. A McDonalds commercial doesn’t contain within it any logic, it merely presents the argument that a child that eats a McDonalds hamburger will love his mother more and be happier. There is nothing special about a McDonalds hamburger when compared with a Hardees burger. Instead of relying on fact-based arguments (central route to persuasion), McDonalds relies instead on playing to your emotions, by using things that elicit strong, positive emotional responses such as the words “smile” and “love”, laughing children, grandma, and cartoon characters. There is a reason Obama uses the word “hope” instead of “optimism.”
The Yale Attitude Change studies have examined what arguments work and why they work. Essentially, there are two methods of persuasion: the peripheral route to persuasion, and the central route to persuasion. The central route relies on facts and logic. For instance: our product contains 3% salicylic acid, whereas theirs contains 1%. At the same price, our product is more powerful. That is an argument that takes the central route.
An argument that relies on the peripheral route to persuasion is one that relies on the authority of the person presenting the argument (I’m dr. john and I recommend this toothbrush), their physical attractiveness, the length of the message, or other such short heuristics that indicate that someone is to be trusted.
We rely on the peripheral route a lot more than we want to admit to. In all cases, both are required for a convincing argument, however the efficacy of either style of argument is going to be influenced by how personally relevant the argument is to the person. If you just want fabric softener, you probably just pick whatever and go with it, although that “pick whatever” is likely influenced by the soft cuddly bear kissing kittens you unconsciously associate with that fabric softener. On the flip side, an argument for why one car is superior to another is likely to rely on the central route to persuasion, because a car represents a sigificant investment for the person. When a person has a high amount of personal investment in a belief, they are going to use more of their brain power and techniques such as celebrity endorsement and sexy women are less powerful. Quick run-through of what I said in slightly more detail.
This is all extremely basic psychology, everyone, and I can’t believe we’re all debating this. I recommend emphatically that everyone read Joseph LeDoux’s “The Emotional Brain” and Daniel Wegner’s “The Illusion of Conscious Will” to shake you of this illusion that you’re the masters of your own destiny and that emotions don’t influence your beliefs or your decisions.