Lord777
Professional
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Points
- 113
"Logic" persuasion style
This style involves the use of mostly rational argumentation. Such a person constantly appeals to logic, common sense, previous experience, brings statistics, analyzes, compares. He can easily build deductive and inductive chains of reasoning. Emotional arguments in his speech are few or not at all. A striking example of this style is the persuasive communication of IT specialists, lawyers, financiers, accountants, which is dictated by the specifics of their profession. According to my observations, most people use this particular style (I wrote about this earlier when we discussed the myth of the "Russian soul"). The problem is that not everyone is able to build really logical cause-and-effect chains, linking arguments with the thesis being proved, connecting them in an understandable and clear sequence.
Examples of "logicians": Mikhail Prokhorov, Boris Nemtsov, Alexander Kudrin, Dmitry Medvedev (although to be precise, his style is between the "logician" and the "storyteller").
Storyteller persuasion style
People with this style of persuasion, along with rational reasoning, regularly use emotional reasoning, constantly appealing to feelings and emotions. They can paint a vivid emotional picture full of images and metaphors, promise mountains of gold, or paint a loss of profits. Their stories, tales, illustrations, legends and incidents are often not really connected with reality, but this is not the main thing. People with this style of persuasion tend to fantasize and exaggerate. Although it is not a fact that it is close to them in spirit. After talking enough with the storytellers, I found out that once they were successful with these tactics, they began to deliberately use them. Moreover, a whole category of people working in sales, network marketing, advertising and other related fields, easily transfer successes from professional experience to everyday life. Most often, in my work, I find in such people a conscious or subconscious desire to move to a higher level, to become charismatic personalities, but for this they lack some individual qualities or they are simply not given it by nature.
Examples of “storytellers”: Alexander Prokhanov, Mikhail Weller, Irina Khakamada.
Expert persuasion style
The “expert” style of persuasion can most often be observed in the process of communication with successful and high-status people who have a certain authority and are accustomed to maintaining subordination. Because of their deep self-confidence and the success they have achieved, they have developed the habit of appealing to personal experience and knowledge in the process of persuasion. They often rely on their authority, considering it the most weighty argument and do not bother to provide rational explanations (as the "logician" does). A typical example of this style is the persuasion process adopted among executives and top managers who are accustomed to persuading others by the strength of their authority and higher position in the hierarchy. “I said, and that's enough” is a very common argument among them.
Examples of "experts": Vladimir Putin, Vladimir Soloviev, Alexey Miller.
"Charismatic" persuasion style
They say about such people: “It doesn't matter what you said, it's important how.” People using the “charismatic” persuasion style are well aware that they can influence others through their personal qualities, charm, a certain charm and attractiveness. They are brilliant speakers, capable of expressing their thoughts vividly and vividly, using abundant emotional techniques. At the same time, logic and common sense in their weight can be in such a belief in last place. We listen not to the rational arguments of the person himself (as in the case of communication with an "expert"), but to our inner, intuitive, emotional feelings. Something mystical and mysterious, some incredible power makes people believe them no matter what. According to my observations, this style is the rarest. I guess it's fair
Examples of "charismatics": Vladimir Zhirinovsky, Yulia Timoshenko.
Chameleon persuasion style
A style that combines all the elements, a kind of golden mean. "Chameleon" is a flexible and easily adaptable person, capable of using different methods of influence, depending on the context. He can use methods of persuasive rational and emotional reasoning and an authoritative, expert style and elements of charismatic, personality-colored influence. At the same time, there is no clear dominance of one of the approaches. However, it should not be assumed that this is the best style of persuasion. The category "best" is generally inapplicable here. It's like comparing who is better: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic or melancholic.
Examples of "chameleons": Alexey Navalny, Evgenia Albats, Maria Gessen.
Like any classification, this one is rather arbitrary, and it is worth determining the style of this or that person precisely by the elements that dominate in his communications. It should be noted that in practice, when analyzing speakers, I often came across combined styles, for example, "logician-narrator" or "expert-charismatic".
(from Nikita Nepryakhin's book "Argument this! How to convince anyone of anything")
This style involves the use of mostly rational argumentation. Such a person constantly appeals to logic, common sense, previous experience, brings statistics, analyzes, compares. He can easily build deductive and inductive chains of reasoning. Emotional arguments in his speech are few or not at all. A striking example of this style is the persuasive communication of IT specialists, lawyers, financiers, accountants, which is dictated by the specifics of their profession. According to my observations, most people use this particular style (I wrote about this earlier when we discussed the myth of the "Russian soul"). The problem is that not everyone is able to build really logical cause-and-effect chains, linking arguments with the thesis being proved, connecting them in an understandable and clear sequence.
Examples of "logicians": Mikhail Prokhorov, Boris Nemtsov, Alexander Kudrin, Dmitry Medvedev (although to be precise, his style is between the "logician" and the "storyteller").
Storyteller persuasion style
People with this style of persuasion, along with rational reasoning, regularly use emotional reasoning, constantly appealing to feelings and emotions. They can paint a vivid emotional picture full of images and metaphors, promise mountains of gold, or paint a loss of profits. Their stories, tales, illustrations, legends and incidents are often not really connected with reality, but this is not the main thing. People with this style of persuasion tend to fantasize and exaggerate. Although it is not a fact that it is close to them in spirit. After talking enough with the storytellers, I found out that once they were successful with these tactics, they began to deliberately use them. Moreover, a whole category of people working in sales, network marketing, advertising and other related fields, easily transfer successes from professional experience to everyday life. Most often, in my work, I find in such people a conscious or subconscious desire to move to a higher level, to become charismatic personalities, but for this they lack some individual qualities or they are simply not given it by nature.
Examples of “storytellers”: Alexander Prokhanov, Mikhail Weller, Irina Khakamada.
Expert persuasion style
The “expert” style of persuasion can most often be observed in the process of communication with successful and high-status people who have a certain authority and are accustomed to maintaining subordination. Because of their deep self-confidence and the success they have achieved, they have developed the habit of appealing to personal experience and knowledge in the process of persuasion. They often rely on their authority, considering it the most weighty argument and do not bother to provide rational explanations (as the "logician" does). A typical example of this style is the persuasion process adopted among executives and top managers who are accustomed to persuading others by the strength of their authority and higher position in the hierarchy. “I said, and that's enough” is a very common argument among them.
Examples of "experts": Vladimir Putin, Vladimir Soloviev, Alexey Miller.
"Charismatic" persuasion style
They say about such people: “It doesn't matter what you said, it's important how.” People using the “charismatic” persuasion style are well aware that they can influence others through their personal qualities, charm, a certain charm and attractiveness. They are brilliant speakers, capable of expressing their thoughts vividly and vividly, using abundant emotional techniques. At the same time, logic and common sense in their weight can be in such a belief in last place. We listen not to the rational arguments of the person himself (as in the case of communication with an "expert"), but to our inner, intuitive, emotional feelings. Something mystical and mysterious, some incredible power makes people believe them no matter what. According to my observations, this style is the rarest. I guess it's fair
Examples of "charismatics": Vladimir Zhirinovsky, Yulia Timoshenko.
Chameleon persuasion style
A style that combines all the elements, a kind of golden mean. "Chameleon" is a flexible and easily adaptable person, capable of using different methods of influence, depending on the context. He can use methods of persuasive rational and emotional reasoning and an authoritative, expert style and elements of charismatic, personality-colored influence. At the same time, there is no clear dominance of one of the approaches. However, it should not be assumed that this is the best style of persuasion. The category "best" is generally inapplicable here. It's like comparing who is better: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic or melancholic.
Examples of "chameleons": Alexey Navalny, Evgenia Albats, Maria Gessen.
Like any classification, this one is rather arbitrary, and it is worth determining the style of this or that person precisely by the elements that dominate in his communications. It should be noted that in practice, when analyzing speakers, I often came across combined styles, for example, "logician-narrator" or "expert-charismatic".
(from Nikita Nepryakhin's book "Argument this! How to convince anyone of anything")
