One of the things I've started to notice is if you approach this by "attacking" with logic, folks fall back onto dogma. I like my slogan because it's more suasive than confrontational.
It's sort of like the difference between expository and rhetorical forms in essay writing: In expository form, you state the thesis, present the evidence, and restate the thesis in the conclusion. If your audience is hostile to the thesis, they offer more resistance to the evidence.
In rhetorical form, you *ask the question* and then present the evidence is such an manner as to guide the reader to your thesis, which is only stated in the conclusion. It's remarkable how much more effective it can be when dealing with a hostile audience. If you can keep them agreeing with the bits along the way, they'll follow you right to the end.
no subject
It's sort of like the difference between expository and rhetorical forms in essay writing: In expository form, you state the thesis, present the evidence, and restate the thesis in the conclusion. If your audience is hostile to the thesis, they offer more resistance to the evidence.
In rhetorical form, you *ask the question* and then present the evidence is such an manner as to guide the reader to your thesis, which is only stated in the conclusion. It's remarkable how much more effective it can be when dealing with a hostile audience. If you can keep them agreeing with the bits along the way, they'll follow you right to the end.