Transcript Building a Case

Building a Case
“(Persuaders) are never self-absorbed. Their
gaze is directed outward, not inward. When
they meet someone, their first move is to get
inside that person’s skin, to see the world
through their eyes.”
- Robert Greene
7/1/2016
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
1
1. Defining a “Case”
A structure of proofs selected to
substantiate claims on the issues of
controversy for the purpose of
influencing the beliefs of a particular
audience


7/1/2016
Structure of Proofs: Valid evidence 
Claims  Issues
Audience: Identify beliefs/values
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
2
2. Assembling the Proofs
Develop a brief (e.g., an inventory of
relevant contentions supported by the
evidence)
Select the type of case


7/1/2016
Series Case
Parallel Case
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
3
3. Sides of a Case
Affirmative Case
Negative Case
7/1/2016
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
4
4. Building an Affirmative Case
Fundamental Rule – It must be prima
facie
Types of questions




7/1/2016
Definition
Fact
Value
Policy (Need, Remedy, Disadvantages)
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
5
5. Stock Issues (Policy case)
Need – Is there a need for a fundamental
change in policy?




7/1/2016
Do serious problems actually exist?
Do such problems result in enough harm to
require a policy change?
Is the present policy to blame for the alleged
problem?
Is any policy, short of the proposal, inherently
incapable of mitigating the alleged problems?
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
6
Stock Issues (cont’d)
Remedy: Will the proposal remedy the
problem inherent in the present policy?


7/1/2016
Can the remedy be put into effect?
Will the remedy create a workable system
to replace the allegedly unworkable one?
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
7
Stock Issues (cont’d)
Remedy: Can the remedy be applied
without serious disadvantages?


7/1/2016
Can the proposal be put into effect without
incurring disadvantageous results?
Do these results justify rejection of the
proposal?
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
8
6. Building the Negative Case
Decision Points


What issues should we contest?
What type of strategy should we use?
 Defend Status Quo
 Modify Status Quo
 Develop a counter plan

7/1/2016
What proofs should we use?
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
9
7. Criteria for Selecting Proofs
ROT – Use the most forceful arguments

Dimensions of Proof
 Objective (logos)
 Subjective (pathos)
 Credibility (ethos)



7/1/2016
Experience
Authority
Good Will
Phillip G. Clampitt, Ph.D.
10