Logical arguments are always more persuasive than emotional arguments.?

Question

Logical arguments are always more persuasive than emotional arguments.
True
False

Answer 1

false, many people arent awake to logic.

Answer 2

yer logical arguments are more persuasive but under certain conditions emotional arguments work more effectively. like when you use an emotional argument and the other person can empathise then its more effective than a logical one, also when you're trying to persuade someone emotionally unstable using logical arguments it might not have the same effect as an emotional argument.
but i guess logical arguments are generally more persuasive

Answer 3

I've heard some pretty screwed up arguments based in logic. But if done correctly, then yes, I find them much more persuasive than emotional ones.

Answer 4

False. What we think is logic may only a perception of our emotions. For many mental arguments, emotions are very persuasive. Our emotions can persuade us to do many illogical things.

Answer 5

Depends on who it is you are trying to persuade. Logical arguments addressed to a rational person, that contain no fallacies identifiable to that person, will be most pursuasive.

Logical arguments addressed to a person likes to think of themselves as rational, but who does not have a habit of thinking rationally, and is unable to identify logical fallacies, will be very easily swayed by even a *bad* logical argument: He is suceptable to rhetoric. Rhetoric is what gives lawyers and politicians a bad name.

Emotional arguments are the only means to sway a non-rational person. A character trait assesment group calls 2% of people 'highly rational' and another 8% 'rational'. Since most people are not rational, it is best to include an appeal to emotion in your argument, or it will not fly in a general population. Emotion will appeal to most people, but will not persuade a rational person unless you also have some rational basis as well, or unless it is entirely a matter of taste.

Emotional arguments can sway a rational person *contrary to logical argument* if it is in one of those areas that human beings hold as more valuable to consider at a particular scale of action as a 'compassionate' or 'humanitarian' standard. No matter what the logical result of not quarantining the initial wave of persons infected with HIV, we did not do it, because the acceptable scale of consideration of quarantine has become the experience of the individual. We can see that a person quarantined for a few weeks will later have contributed to society enough to convince him it was worthwhile... But not someone who is to be quarantined *for life*. In this case, although it defies logical argument or rational consideration, most people stood against a quarantine that would have prevented (eventually) the potential deaths of people they know.

Emotion has its structure and function also, and it serves a purpose in society. A person is motivated by self-interest to eschew rational logic and instead embrace sanctioned irrationality, if this is what it takes to support the society he depends upon.

Answer 6

Didn't you just have a 4-day weekend? Maybe someone should've been working instead of procrastinating! Anyhow, not that I really care, but it's a joke that people would think of banning that rule. A 2.0 is not hard to maintain. And plus, any kid who thinks he/she is so athletic that they can make it to the NBA or something while getting a 2.0 or below (which is basically straight C's) is stupid. Only the best of the best make it out there because of their athletic ability, and most of those people can do it with good grades as well.

Answer 7

In most of the cases it is true. Provided emotion and logic does not cross each other. In some cases logic seem to be hurting others ego hence emotion and logic cross each other.

Answer 8

It depends on the topic and the audience. It takes little emotion to stir the pot, but a whole lot of logical explaining to make it stop. Most humans are emotional reactors to at least one kind of stimuli. For some it is children, others it is cats, and still others it is_____. So again, it depends on the topic and the audience.

Answer 9

You'll never see a car salesman or a political advertisement using logic. If you want to persuade the masses, emotionally based appeals work the best. Sad that our species runs on a giant logic fallacy (appeal to emotion).

Answer 10

False. Emotional appeals (appeals to pathos) can be very effective, and when used in certain ways, can overshadow the illogic of an argument.

Answer 11

With me yes, but you have to have logic mind for that. Lots of people don't even know what logic are.