Here’s a simple tip for making more convincing presentations, something which President Obama didn’t use in a recent speech but that preceding president Bush did.
When attempting to persuade people to support your position, first give a fair summary of the opposing point of view.
You have to argue the other side’s case on its own merits, says Nick Morgan, blogging on Harvard Business Publishing. Read his post How to Debate Without Further Dividing People.
Obama’s recent address “Protecting Our Security and Our Values” went awry, says Morgan, because it did not accurately describe what the previous administration believed it was doing to improve security after 9-11. At one point Obama says, “Our government made decisions based upon fear rather than foresight, and all too often trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.”
Morgan’s critique:
“You can’t ascribe haste, fear, and the trimming of facts and evidence to them, even if you believe that to be the case. You can’t accuse them of setting aside their principles. You have to argue the other side’s case on its own merits. Then, and only then, you can give your own position.”
He holds up a Bush speech on the use of embryonic stem cells in scientific research as an example of an address that builds credibility by forthrightly acknowledging the scientific and emotional cross-currents surrounding the issue.
It’s a great point. If you don’t address opposing viewpoints with proper due, your argument is only extending debate rather than settling it.
