So it’s good persuasive writing? I mean the point of this article seems to be both an attempt to persuade the reader of a certain point of view combined with an exploration of the realisation that not everyone thinks the same way?
Looking at the points of view espoused, they seem to be quite positive for their adherents.
I believe that persuasion should happen on merits of arguments, and that trying to activate the social biases of the reader is defecting[1] from that norm (even if it’s normal writing practice elsewhere).
Looking at the points of view espoused, they seem to be quite positive for their adherents.
There’s no way to ensure this would be only done with positive views, because many authors think their beliefs would be positive to spread.
So it’s good persuasive writing? I mean the point of this article seems to be both an attempt to persuade the reader of a certain point of view combined with an exploration of the realisation that not everyone thinks the same way?
Looking at the points of view espoused, they seem to be quite positive for their adherents.
I don’t understand your objection.
I believe that persuasion should happen on merits of arguments, and that trying to activate the social biases of the reader is defecting[1] from that norm (even if it’s normal writing practice elsewhere).
There’s no way to ensure this would be only done with positive views, because many authors think their beliefs would be positive to spread.
(by some amount; not a binary)