When we select our arguments, we must also choose the facts that we will use to support them. Most of the time, this work will be more about documentation than argumentation. The main challenge will be to find information strong enough to support our arguments and reliable enough not to be questioned. For this, we will often need to consider all sources: journalistic, scientific, statistical, historical, legal, artistic... The difficulties begin, however, when we consider arg

Anyone who wants to convince must always be ready to face objections. But wouldn't it be better to anticipate them altogether? Indeed, counter-arguing requires careful preparation. So wouldn't it be more effective to anticipate objections even before they are formulated, and thus protect our arguments? This rhetorical strategy is called prolepsis. Prolepsis consists in formulating the interlocutor's objection in his place, in order to respond to it before it can be stated. It

Rhetoric is inherently dynamic. Any argument you present can be countered. his is especially true in conversations, where your interlocutor can challenge you at any time. Even in a monologue, your audience silently debates your points in their minds. To be persuasive, remember that 'the opposite is always true'. This mindset prevents us from becoming too convinced that our arguments are the strongest in terms of logic and effectiveness.

Once you've made an exhaustive list of the arguments that support your position and selected the most rigorous and effective ones, you now need to decide which ones you're actually going to use. And it's often at this stage that most people fail to convince. For a very simple reason: once they've selected the most rigorous arguments, they think they’re going to convince without taking into account the person they're trying to convince. The rigorous-speakers paradox: right yet

We can now distinguish between different types of arguments and evaluate their rigor and effectiveness. But the essential task lies ahead: learning how to develop a solid argumentative line with a consistent, coherent set of arguments. There are 3 steps to achieving this: Step 1: Making a list of all the arguments we could possibly use and evaluating their level of rigor. Step 2: Studying our audience to evaluate which arguments have the highest degree of effectiveness for

Among the many arguments we could consider, two stand out: using incredulity (appealing to common sense) to build community and using examples to frame ideas. They both rely on the undeniable power of evidence. It helps them connect with a wide audience, even if their thoroughness can be questioned. In other words: common sense and examples are usually effective, even if they aren't always precise. Therefore, it's worth paying attention to them.

“That's a good argument”. These are the words you love to hear. If your interlocutor says them, you're on the right track to convincing. But don't get carried away: nothing is certain yet! Arguments are never definitive; they accumulate and respond to each other in a haphazard fashion. But you must learn to choose them, because arguments are the bricks on which your rhetorical edifice rests. Without them, how can you convey images in your interlocutor's mind, arouse emotions?

Rhetoric isn't just for professional communicators. As soon as you express yourself, there's rhetoric. Every day we have to convince, or be convinced, in an infinite variety of situations. Despite this constantly renewed diversity, rhetoric is not a disorderly jungle. On a daily basis, the same configurations come up again and again. We need to understand these dynamics to be able to adapt to them. Because we don't use the same methods and tools depending on the context in wh

Rhetoric is the art of convincing. But what does convincing mean exactly? Where is the boundary with other closely related notions such as figures of speech, eloquence or (if we go over to the dark side) manipulation? Before saying what it is, let's start by saying that rhetoric is not.

To understand the origin or rhetoric, and why rhetoric is still rarely taught, we need to go back to its origins, 2,500 years ago. This short story will also help us understand its bad reputation. 1. Plato & Descartes: philosophy first

Rhetoric is everywhere. In political speeches, ads, business meetings, family dinners, job interviews, chats with friends, romantic...

When you start to work for yourself, when you start to build businesses, one of the things that takes a little bit to learn are these...