My objective is to focus on character development, specifically how an author uses physical features, as for example facial features, to bring a character or event to life and how by doing this she brings me into her world. I have chosen two works each related to Virginia Woolf: Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches (1909) and Night and Day (1919). Carlyle’s House is a monograph in a form critiqued by David Bradshaw and with a forward by Doris Lessing, published by Hesperus in 2003. Lessing, the well known author and Nobel Laureate provides an incisive comment on Woolf’s early writing and describes the work as:

            “These pieces are like five-finger exercises for future excellence. Not that they are negligible, being lively, and with the direct and sometimes brutal observations, the discriminations, the fastidious judgment one expects from her…”

David Bradshaw MA, D.Phil., FEA is well-known, as Reader in English Literature at Oxford University specializing in late nineteenth and early Twentieth Century literature. According to his resume his field of research is Modernism particularly the works of Virginia Woolf. 

The sketches allow us to analyze Woolf’s craft during the year 1909, two years after she began her first novel and half-dozen years before it was published. She was 27 years old and still an apprentice, but one who knew where she was headed and what habits she would maintain on her journey. Bradshaw quotes a passage from her later autobiographical work the Passionate Apprentice: The Early Journals, 1897-1909:

            “…I wish for the sake of this book that I had anything more brightly coloured & picturesque to write here; it seems to me that all my events have been of the same temperate rather cold hued description; I haven’t had to use many superlatives. I have sketched faint outlines with a pencil. But the only use of the book is that it shall serve for a sketch book; as an artist fills his pages with scraps & fragment, studies in drapery-legs, arms & noses-useful to him no doubt, but no meaning to anyone else-so I…take up my pen & trace here whatever shapes I happen to have in my head…It is an exercise-training for eye & hand…”

            Below I refer to passages from Carlyle’s House, either those authored by Lessing, Bradshaw, or Woolf herself as examples of where this habit plays out in the work. After reading the sketches, I became curious to read how her early “…training for eye & hand…” manifested in a later work and examined Night and Day, (1919) Virginia Woolf's second novel written a decade after Carlyle’s House. I observed that with one small exception Carlyle’s House only treats the features of women. In Night and Day she ventures into the descriptions of men as well. Below, I draw on further examples in this second work, which provided material for the second reading requirement in January.

            In the first of the Carlyle’s House sketches, she records in her journal a visit to the famous poet’s home, a place she had visited on several occasions, once with her father and again with her sister.  She observes a portrait of Jane Carlyle the late wife of Thomas Carlyle, and writes:

                        “There were portraits of Mrs. Carlyle which seemed to look out quizzically upon strangers as though she asked what they really found to look at…”

In this instance, I and I assume other readers of the passage know quite well the look of “…quizzically upon strangers…” that Woolf observes in the visage. In this case it squares with the common experience of one suddenly meeting a stranger in a private part of one’s home, and perhaps where the stranger may not be openly welcome. But, Woolf does not stop there, she continues with a more precise examination of Mrs. Carlyle’s countenance:

                        “Her eyes droop in the pictures, and have a peculiar expression, of humour and melancholy lying dormant, which produces this quizzical look that I speak of; at any moment they might flash with passion, or kindle into tenderness. I think that in her life the expression must have been one of mockery for the most part, with a background of pathos; an unhappy face in spite of the brilliant eyes; the late photographs, which exaggerate the hollow of the cheeks, and the length of the upper lip, are horrid. The eyes are the only parts with warmth or depth in them: the rest is granulated skin tight stretched over a skull.”  

Having attended viewings of many deceased lying still in their coffins, I am struck by the accuracy of her image evoked by her metaphor “granulated skin tight stretched over a skull”. Although the eyes may shine bright, Mrs. Carlyle is dead, indeed, and, in some ways so is the home but a remnant of the poet’s past.

The second essay entitled Miss Reeves, introduces us to Amber Reeves a mid to late 19^th Century advocate of women’s causes and also a close friend of H.G. Wells. Woolf writes in the journal that she met Reeves at dinner the night before the entry:

“She has dark hair, an oval face, with a singular small mouth: a line is penciled on her upper lip. She reminds me of the girl whose mother was a snake. There is something of the snake in her. Her eyes are not large, but very bright, hazel colour. She always leans forward, as though to take flight; her whole figure and pose indicating an ardent spirit. When she is silent, she thinks-her eyes intent on one spot. But she talks almost incessantly launching herself with the greatest ease-but says nothing commonplace.”

Quoting one of Reeves fellow students, Bradshaw writes in his critique of the essay that Reeves was “intellect personified”. Woolf, according to my sensibilities captures a snap shot skillfully weaving in the image of a snake, eye having certain features, leaning forward, all to impose “an ardent figure”. This is not the description of a benign, dull woman, but one aware of her surroundings at every instant in time.

In the third essay, Cambridge, Woolf documents her visit with Sir George Darwin (second son of Charles Darwin) and his family, at the Darwin House which today is part of Darwin College. Woolf tells us that Sir Darwin:

 “…must have known great men, and who is at work always upon great problems, should have nothing distinguishable or remarkable about him.”

Later she describes Darwin, who died three years later, as:

            “…some elderly but wiry grey terrier, with short legs, and choleric eyes, rather watering at the corners.”

In this description, Woolf confirms the image set up earlier about having “nothing distinguishable or remarkable about him”.

The next essay entitled Hampstead has only two references to facial features and they each relate to Miss Margaret Davies a guest at Hampstead, a reference to a home in a small English village with the same name.

Davies is described in comparison to other guests:

“ … from a sterner stock. Her features are sharper, her eyes burn brighter; once she must have had something of the beauty of a delicate Greek head. Now being also past forty years of age, she has the same look of having passed a strenuous life in toil of some kind for others.  

Woolf continues by then drawing the features referred to in speculating about the character:

“Women who have worked but have not married come to have a particular look; refinement, without sex; tending to be austere. Miss Davies, it is clear, has far less tolerance than her friend; and has done what she has done through the force of conviction. She has organized a great co-operative movement in the North, Her eyes have a way of growing dark, as though clouds crossed them, when she is in earnest.”

            Unlike her other descriptions in the sketches, here the specification for the “…the same look of…” and “…particular look…” seems to be missing. I cannot logically or emotionally align the passage “…sharper, her eyes burn brighter; once she must have had something of the beauty of a delicate Greek head…” with what evaluation she wishes us to draw. Nonetheless, we observe Woolf using the technique of equating physical features with a behavioral feature that manifests in an enduring character, habit, passion or simply an idiosyncrasy.

In A Modern Salon, she sets out to describe Lady Ottoline Morrell (1873-1938) who became well known for her Thursday soirees in Bedford Square where authors and artists were invited to her home. She herself was neither author nor artist, and Woolf records in her journal:

“Like other people who are passive rather than active, she is very careful and elaborate in her surroundings. It seems that they too play a part.” …She is curiously passive, even in her expression; and the pallor of her cheeks, the clean cutting of her features, the way she draws her head back and she looks at you blankly give her the appearance of a cast from some marble Medusa.”

            I have a small replica of Cellini’s Perseus holding the decapitated head of Medusa and visualize one possible description—a gruesome one. So, I think that Woolf likely had in mind the Medusa Rondanini, regarded as the best late Roman marble copy of the head and considered more human-like and archetypically  beautiful than Cellini’s no less magnificant work of art, albeit grotesque portrayal of fate.

In Jews, Woolf considers Mrs. Loeb, a woman caught up in the throes of divorce court. This piece is put forth by both Lessing and Bradshaw as evidence of Woolf’s tendency towards semetic prejudice  At page 40, Bradshaw writes: “Apart from the odd passing slur in her earlier journals (citation ommited), Jews’ from now on, will bear the doubtful distinction of being Woolf’s first significant anti-Semitic smear.” Woolf”s (neé Stephen) husband was Jewish, which seems to raise all sorts of questions about the evaluation, however none pertinent here. Bradshaw figures that Mrs. Loeb, in the essay is Annis Loeb, widow of Siegmund Loeb a German Jew from Franfurt to “purse his business interests”.

Contrary to Woolf’s delicate pen-like rendering of her previous female subjects, she leaves nothing to the imagination in decribing Mrs. Leob with a rather heavy chalk lined:

“She is a fat skinned, with drooping eyes, and tumbled hair.”

The balance of Woolf’s characterization of the woman is less than flattering, from the food she served, “…swam in oil and was nasty” to “…a shrewd woman of business…moving in a circle of city people; ‘young people’ tickle her course palate…she wishes to be popular, and is perhaps, kind, in her vulgar way, ostentatiously kind to poor relations…very little disguised, and very unpleasant.”

            Putting aside the personal animosity Woolf may have felt for Loeb, reasons she personally and objectively justified or those of shear bigotry, she does paint a picture of a woman having physical features that square with an unflatering life style. Again, we observe how Woolf skillfully uses one’s physical atributes to draw us into a framework of character and behavior.

            In Divorce Courts, Woolf attends the infamous trial between Alice Mary Fearnley-Wittingstall and the Reverend Herbert Oakes Fearnley-Wittingstall, where the wife petitioned the court for a legal separation. In this essay there is only one noteworthy reference when Woolf writes in reference to the Mrs. Fearnley-Wittingstall,

“She had a bold, course face, strained with the tensions of brazening it out before the world. It was old and joyless; but perhaps she was not forty.”

I note that her association of features in each of the sketches is one of  either a thing, state, such as a place, or human quality, or event. Here, Woolf artfully aligns a human quality one of emotional condition as lining the face, with the very proceedings. Anyone having to attend such an event would  recognize the metaphor. Having attended many divorce proceedings myself, (not my own thankfully), I think that I know well the mold the author’s casts the subject.

Turning now to Night and Day, (1919) a novel Virginia Woolf's authored a decade after the Carlyle’ House sketches, she takes us into the lives of friends, Katharine Hilbery, Ralph Denham and Mary Datchet. The novel uses a mixture of dialogue and description in dealing with not only ordinary lives, but women's suffrage. The book amplifies Woolf’s early use of anatomical description to complement character, scene and action. She expands on the use of Carlyle’ House sketches, both in the draft of longer passages and perhaps yielding richer embroidery with which she threads her characters. Essentially, a stronger linkage also exists between the feature being described and the metaphor for which it stands. For example:

"With the omnibuses and cabs still running in his head, and his body still tingling with his quick walk along the streets and in and out of traffic and foot-passengers, this drawing-room seemed very remote and still; and the faces of the elderly people were mellowed, at some distance from each other, and had a bloom on them owing to the fact that the air in the drawing-room was thickened by blue grains of mist. She could see that he was nervous; one would expect a bony young man with his face slightly reddened by the wind, and his hair not altogether smooth, to be nervous in such a party. Further, he probably disliked this kind of thing, and had come out of curiosity, or because her father had invited him--anyhow, he would not be easily combined with the rest.”

In this passage the author captures the image of a hurried young man attending a soiree in terms of his perception of the faces of the elderly men, “… the faces of the elderly people were mellowed, at some distance from each other, and had a bloom on them…”. This describes the sense I certainly experience after physical exertion, probably caused by blood rushing to my head. It often seems that every thing is at a distance. 

Another example below,…” a habit of moving his head hither and thither very quickly without altering the position of his large and rather corpulent body…” describes an elderly man while creating the image of a grandfather clock, which seems to not only describe the static features of the individual, such as the framework or casing of a clock, but adds a dynamic in the form of pendulum-like motion:

“He was an elderly man, with a pair of oval, hazel eyes which were rather bright for his time of life, and relieved the heaviness of his face. He played constantly with a little green stone attached to his watch-chain, thus displaying long and very sensitive fingers, and had a habit of moving his head hither and thither very quickly without altering the position of his large and rather corpulent body, so that he seemed to be providing himself incessantly with food for amusement and reflection with the least possible expenditure of energy.”

In yet another example, she uses a man’s physical description to keep the reader’s mind moving forward in time. Her earlier Carlyle’s House essays did not seem to enjoy the added dimension of likening the features of an individual to some external physical phenomenon. In one instance with the image of “…deeply running tide of red blood” and in another instance “…slight vibrating or creaking sound in it.” Each of these metaphors draws on natural physical entities.

“He had a singular face a face built for swiftness and decision rather than for massive contemplation; the forehead broad, the nose long and formidable, the lips clean-shaven and at once dogged and sensitive, the cheeks lean, with a deeply running tide of red blood in them. His eyes, expressive now of the usual masculine impersonality and authority, might reveal more subtle emotions under favorable circumstances, for they were large, and of a clear, brown color; they seemed unexpectedly to hesitate and speculate; but Katharine only looked at him to wonder whether his face would not have come nearer the standard of her dead heroes if it had been adorned with side-whiskers. In his spare build and thin, though healthy, cheeks, she saw tokens of an angular and acrid soul. His voice, she noticed, had a slight vibrating or creaking sound in it, as he laid down the manuscript …”

In her passage,”…his spare build and thin, though healthy, cheeks, she saw tokens of an angular and acrid soul…”, delve into not only the observable world, but the man's character in the spiritual world.

What follows are three excerpts that serve as examples of the skill with which Woolf  animates her characters, not through behavioral features, but clear description base on physical features: 

“She was a remarkable-looking woman, well advanced in the sixties, but owing to the lightness of her frame and the brightness of her eyes she seemed to have been wafted over the surface of the years without taking much harm in the passage. Her face was shrunken and aquiline, but any hint of sharpness was dispelled by the large blue eyes, at once sagacious and innocent, which seemed to regard the world with an enormous desire that it should behave itself nobly, and an entire confidence that it could do so, if it would only take the pains.”

"… Denham found himself looked down upon by the eyes of the great poet, Richard Alardyce, and suffered a little shock which would have led him, had he been wearing a hat, to remove it. The eyes looked at him out of the mellow pinks and yellows of the paint with divine friendliness, which embraced him, and passed on to contemplate the entire world. The paint had so faded that very little but the beautiful large eyes were left, dark in the surrounding dimness.”

“Although he was still under thirty, this forecasting habit had marked two semicircular lines above his eyebrows, which threatened, at this moment, to crease into their wonted shapes. But instead of settling down to think, he rose, took a small piece of cardboard marked in large letters with the word OUT, and hung it upon the handle of his door. This done, he sharpened a pencil, lit a reading-lamp and opened his book.”

In Night and Day I observed that the greater attention to physical descriptions in rounding out the characters occurred in the early stages of the 442 page book. Thereafter the author depended less on references to “eyes, nose, or mouth”, but resorted to words such as smile, frown, that suggest behavioral rather than physical attributes. In each case these devises carry forward the story and its characters.

In conclusion, neither story is about a cultural experience I can identify with, but Woolf nonetheless balances her perspective with that of the reader, so in each case she skillfully puts her world at my disposal. I find that Woolf impliedly knows that the real world contains only three entities: physical things having tangible and intangible existance, states of affairs, and events. In her descriptions she seems to draw on one’s physical countance to make connections to the real world, to everyman’s world. Her artful use of physical features imparts the quality of authenticity in emotions, it fills in the structure of the world she creates for the reader, and adds an energy between and among the people, things, time and events that fill her pages.

ESSAYS ON LAW, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

 

Joseph R. Carvalko, Jr.

COPYRIGHT 2008

PREFACE

The manuscript that follows endeavors to weave the threads of law, science and technology for students who may find themselves having to deal with these issues in the course of their careers. Science and technology are in a state of unprecedented growth and although it is impossible to foresee what issues may arise in tomorrow’s world, through selected writings, I hope that an underlying structure will prevail and serve the student’s needs for some time to come.

At the intersection of law, science and technology we find society’s values, goals, and principles such as its ethics. The introductory essays survey the question ‘what is science’ primarily as viewed from the lawyer’s interest. In large part how we frame the issues in science and law depends on the objectivity of the terms used, and the dialectic and sophistry used by advocates on differing sides of the issue. As such, a section on language provides a perspective from differing professions, the ethicist, lawyer, and scientist. The middle essays set forth the proposition that law, ethics and technology shape our institutions and ultimately our society. Several essays deal with intellectual property protection, providing a sense for the scope of cover that the law traditionally allows. In a series of  discussions I venture into a scheme to formulate operators or rules that help separate natural laws, social constructs and legal regulation, each of which bear upon social change. Whether the idea has merit will have to be judged by critical readers on the subject. I also discuss the track the government has taken to liberalize the granting of software patents. The moves show the progression from patenting technology to patenting elements of our institutional reality. I next join technology and ethics in the context of intellectual property as a means of laying the foundation for analyzing evidence that attitudes towards biological and information-based patenting reflect a changing social structure raising moral questions.

In the closing essays, I draw upon facts presented earlier to look beyond economic issues in asking if the goals of the the country's founding political tenets (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) are adequately considered when formulating science, technology and intellectual property regulation.

Many readers will want to have a conceptual point of reference for the technologies discussed (biotechnology, artificial intelligence, computers, and business methods). Therefore, throughout the book I provide short histories of these technologies.

In the essays to follow, most are chosen from individuals and organizations who have offered the benefit of their backgrounds in ethics, law and science. Essays that I have authored state my opinion on a range of subjects. In many cases the opinions may be controversial or out of the mainstram of current thinking. I hope that some of the ideas expressed will foster a spirited debate in the interest of expanding our view of the matters addressed. In essays included from outside sources I have preserved the references as footnotes that accompany the article. In essays that I have authored references are found in the endnotes.

I caution the reader that what follows is a collection of readings that support a point of view. The core of the idea advanced throughout this manuscript considers that humanity constitutes a cycle of natural patterns that form our very existence. These patterns do not merely express the rules of reproduction and survival; they express the form of life through a consciousness and a conscience of social constructs. This includes a moral catechism, albeit authored within the realm of the narrative of the individual, her culture and the times to which she is born. Our social reality creates the very technology that affects where this life cycle both begins and ends. If through an irresponsible and irreversible application of technology we were to damage the patterns formed by nature, we would be accountable for affecting the moral ecology upon which all humanity as we have come to appreciate depends. I believe that the moral ends that one might objectively adopt ought to aim at securing the integrity of our natural patterns of formation; otherwise, we risk moving into patterns that looking forward might be sadly regrettable.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joseph R. Carvalko, Jr. is a lawyer and engineer with over four decades experience in law, engineering and science. He currently practices law in the area of technology, science and intellectual property law representing clients as their needs as relate to technology licensing, acquisitions, and patent matters (prosecution/litigation). He is an adjunct professor of Law, Science and Technology at Quinnipiac University School of Law. He is also a member of the American Bar Association, Section on Law and Technology and and past editorial board member of The SciTech Lawyer a quarterly publication of the Section, and a former Chairman of the Behavioral Sciences Committee of the Section. He has taught trial practice to law students over the years as well as courses on management of intellectual property assets, diagnosing organizational behavior and the responsibility of business to society. He holds patents in a number of diverse fields such as biomedical, business machines and fuel systems. He has conducted research in the fields of data mining, cytological biomedical applications using information theory and its application to optical and acoustic holography; designing parallel processor computers and programming, developing pattern recognition systems for military and biological applications, working under the direction of the well-known information theorist Dr. Marcel Golay and professor Kendall Preston.  In his capacity as a lawyer he has represented a broad class of litigants from clients charged with crimes to patent infringement. He has conducted jury, bench trials, and arbitrations. Mr. Carvalko is a graduate of Quinnipiac University School of Law and a graduate of Fairfield University School of Engineering.

ESSAYS ON LAW, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Joseph R. Carvalko, Jr.

COPYRIGHT 2008

PREFACE.. 7

INTRODUCTION... 11

PART I:  SCIENCE.. 14

A Continuum of Change-So What’s New?. 14

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. 18

Correspondence Rules. 25

How Science Works. 31

Galileo: The Church Controversy. 46

Intelligent Design and the Dover Area School District 48

Global Warming Science. 60

Theories and Nonobservables. 64

Federal Rules of Evidence (2004) 69

William Daubert, et ux., etc., et al., Petitioners v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 71

PART II:  ETHICAL OVERVIEW.... 82

Ethical Questions in Law, Science and Technology. 82

The Language of Ethics. 86

Internal and External Goods. 93

The Inventive Spirit 96

Science and Technology and the Triple D (Disease, Disability, Defect) 102

Genetics and Discrimination. 113

Policy Making. 119

Legislation. 124

Moore v. Regents of University of California. 125

Atoms of Expression-Who Owns Them.. 140

PART III:  LANGUAGE.. 144

Language at the Bottom.. 144

Introduction to an Ontology of Intellectual Property. 147

Phillips v. AWH Corporation, et al 151

Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology. 160

Who Speaks for the Stem Cell 167

On Terminology for Human Cloning. 172

The Maxim Rules. 187

Natural, Constitutive and Regulatory Rules. 191

PART IV:  TECHNOLOGY.. 195

Paradigms, Programs and Paragons. 195

A Short History of Computers. 200

NBICS (NANO-BIO-INFO-COGNO-SOCIO) Convergence to Improve Human Performance: Opportunities and Challenges  208

A Primer on Bioengineering. 225

Defense and Biology: Fundamentals for the Future. 232

The Magnitude of Change. 235

Getting to the Heart of the Mind. 238

PART V:  INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.. 241

Converging Technologies and Intellectual Property Issues. 241

The Legal and Social Rules for Intellectual Property. 244

A Multithreaded Tessellation. 248

Patenting Biological Assets and Pharmaceuticals. 259

Patent Options for DNA Inventions. 260

Patentability. 263

The Business Method Patent- A New Look at a Brief History. 269

ANNEX III Improper Tests For Subject Matter Eligibility. 285

ANNEX IV Computer-Related Nonstatutory Subject Matter. 290

ANNEX 5 Mathematical Algorithms. 295

PART VI:  ETHICS OF PATENTING... 297

The Ethical Reality of Bioengineering. 297

Ethics Considerations in Patenting DNA.. 299

Patenting Life Forms – Ends in Themselves. 304

Diamond V. Chakrabarty. 315

The Emergence of a National Policy. 322

Reaping the Benefits of Genomic and Proteomic Research. 323

Real World Telos. 338

The Ethics of Patenting DNA Chapter 3. 341

Hardware, Symbolware and Natureware. 358

PART VII:  BEYOND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.. 367

Identity-That Which We Are. 367

Issues of Human Dignity in Procreation. 369

Utility of Form and Ethics. 380

Closing Remarks. 392

END NOTES.. 394

CHAPTER 1

          AN APPROACH TO SUCCESSFUL ADVOCACY

When we speak generally of advocating it is obviously in reference to a claim, a resolution or position we take relative to presumably a contrary position. I may advocate for federal sponsorship of stem cell research, and you may advocate against stem research. I may claim that evolution is a theory based on scientific observations and someone else may argue that it is a theory and not proof of the origins of mankind. Frequently we witness advocates lined up on sides in a political campaign, Republicans against “Democrats. Nightly the news broadcasts the latest in one or another court trial where guilt and innocence is determined. We have intimate familiarity with the concepts of advocacy and with the notion of claim.

A claim in order to be effectively supported must have something that convinces us that it is correct, right, just or whatever measure is necessary for the claim to prevail against competing claims. The kind of evidence that might be required to support a claim will depend upon the subject matter of the claim being advanced in addition to its power to persuade those who decide on the nature of the claim. In a court of law only certain kinds of evidence are permitted. The evidence must meet certain conditions before witnesses and judges are permitted to hear and see the evidence.  In law  evidence may be excluded because over time courts and legislators have decided that certain kinds of evidence is generally unreliably or cannot be adequately corroborated. The courts routinely exclude hearsay evidence, that is the recounting of a person typically under oath who indicates that they heard someone say something outside the courtroom that bears on the truth of the matter asserted. Because American jurisprudence requires the right of confrontation, such an out of court statement cannot be subject to cross examination and therefore courts have decided not to consider this kind of evidence. In other instance evidence may be excluded not because it in necessarily unreliable but because certain preconditions were not established before the evidence came into existence. Certain laws against self-incrimination protects citizens from statements made without proper legal representation or at least a knowing waiver of such representation.

Some kinds of evidence is referred to as social consensus. Both in and out of court opinion is shaped by social consensus. Social consensus is formed on the basis of public opinion, political leanings, religion, culture and a myriad of factors to which the decision maker is exposed.

The form of evidence is attributed to the bearer of the information. We refer to it as credibility. As such when a person offers evidence of something that in their view supports a claim, individuals will receive the evidence and treat the evidence depending upon who it is that offers the evidence. If the offering of evidence is made by a known liar, then what such a person says is likely to be depreciated. If the evidence is offered by a person having a stellar reputation for the truth the evidence will accordingly be accredited.

The third major division of evidence comes in the form of matters that we regard as objective data, the kind of data that accompanies scientific or statistical analysis. Typically it may come in the form of a police investigative report, medical report or scientific study. For example a driving while intoxicated case nearly always includes objective data about the level of alcohol. 

The  chapters on psychology assemble basic concepts  such  as  perception,  belief,  need,  attitude,  and behavior. These  chapters   also  delve  into  theories  of  personality   and  motivation.   A  particular model of personality  is  offered  that addresses how we each experience a different reality.

Three guiding principles can be said to form a foundation for the theory of suasion.  Briefly stated:  (1) the  subject  must  trust the advocate to tell the truth;  (2) the  subject  must be urged into  a state of mind to favorably receive  the  advocates propositions,  and, (3) the advocate must,  through  logic  and emotion,  present a schematic of reality that  the  subject is disposed to accept.  This prescription is  administered  throughout  each chapter, for without  relevance  to  these propositions, the theory has little meaning.

Several  chapters focus on what makes us believe,  think and feel the way we do.   We  will  explore  what it is that makes people like, dislike, trust or distrust  us.  When people trust us it does not automatically mean that  they are willing to accept everything we tell them.

Influential people seem to know how to get us to comply  with  their wishes.  They seem to know what our various conceptions  of reality are and how these differing conceptions affect our  beliefs,  dispositions,  insights,  and propensity to be persuaded.  When   we understand a  person's  beliefs,  values,  needs and attitudes,  we can create greater opportunities for  being influential.

PSYCHOLOGICAL OVERVIEW

Most trials, political campaigns, social argument or commentary and  negotiations incorporate  combinations  of  logical structure and  impressionistic  arrangements of ideas, things and events.   Depending on our make up, we see in others some  aspects of behavior emerge, yet exclude others.   We may commit  some  idiosyncrasy to memory and then forget some important  point.  Our individual dispositions amplify our sensitivities,  what we remember,  what we choose to believe,  what we intend  to do, and finally what we actually do.  If we desire to persuade, we first need to know ourselves, our predilections, strengths, weaknesses and fears.

To sway and audience, requires knowledge of the kinds of interests they represent and what kind of sensibilities they possess.   If I am trying to persuade you, I need to understand your leanings in respect to the claims and importantly what communication style  appeals  to  you.   Are you receptive to  emotive,  moral  or  aesthetic appeals, or common sense and straight talk, with little or no emotion.  I need to appraise your  limitations, your susceptibility and your desire and to see matters  my way.  This is essential.

The  processes by which each of us experiences and learns  to  trust  and distrust the logical and psychological  world  are  diverse.   No  two people experience in quite the  same  way.  Understanding  the mechanics of our  intuitions,  sensations,  and evaluations aids us in choosing whether we should  emphasize facts, opinion or emotion in our presentation.

There exists many models upon which we can pattern human behavior. One such model seems to work especially well for engendering a sensitivity to how we prefer to receive and evaluate what we see and hear. In this theory we classify our modes of perception and evaluation into 16 different categories or typologies.  These categories derive essentially from Jungian  psychology,  although current discoveries about how the brain functions in regards to  modes of cognition point to a strong neurobiological basis  for  these once purely psychoanalytical theories.

One ought to approach the business of persuasion with an open  mind, aware that experiences have predisposed us into behaving in fairly regular ways.  No two people are alike,  but  a tendency emerges towards acting and reacting to  persons,  places and things within certain consistency.  We shall look at three such norms,  generally  associated   with   attitudes  towards   power,   affiliation   and  achievement.   These attitudes manifest in  drives  towards control, freedom, togetherness,  isolation,  emotion,  reason,  achievement,  and desire.  Ultimately,  these states  determine  our dispositions towards such things as  survival,  love, esteem and self-actualization.

As one writer put it, we evoke a constellation of powers: interpersonal, intrapersonal and impersonal(E.D.-).  In exercising these powers, we act out attitudes and  behaviors  which  express  composites  of  drives for  power,  affiliation  and  achievement. Yet,  each of us also appears to prefer or spend more time and energy on one of  these states, qualities or lifestyles over the others.   These  modes represent a specific response to managing our  lives  and the lives of others.   As much as we  may  be aware of our specific tendency to prefer a particular  state,  we  may nevertheless be bound to act within a high degree  of  frequency in accordance with one of the basic three states.

Those who tend toward power drive to inveigle,  lure  or  force  a  significant other into definite  positions,  either  physically or psychologically or both.   Individuals in  this  category  will  value the power inherent in  a  relationship,  either  because they sense a feeling of control from the  acquisition of another's dependency or from the association the  relationship creates.  In its most obvious manifestation, one  individual  maintains control over another through an  overt,  coercive,  and authoritative power.  Often these  people  are  competitive and mistrusting.

A  less  obvious expression of power is exercised  through  a  charismatic  control.   In other cases the  individual  needs  to demonstrate a "one-upmanship"  or  perhaps  show off their competency.  But, regardless of the means, the  power person needs to affect his life and the lives of others  significantly and demonstrably.   The only way she has to measure his success is to gauge how much dominance or control she  has over others.

Another  major status is seen in those who try to  affiliate,  keeping  the world from exploding or trying to mediate.  They  have a need to bring people together.   We find these people  sociable,  friendly and often quickly trusting of others.   One  naturally  expects these people to be sensitive  to  emotions  and needs.   This class includes individuals prone to  approach  life from the point of wanting to be on good  terms  with others and demonstrating a need for belonging, togetherness,  cooperation  and conciliation.   We might refer to these  individuals as "people oriented".  Again,  an affiliator measures  his  well-being  in terms of relationships -- either  in  significance or numbers or both.

A  further dimension discussed in this category reflects  a life of relative achievement.  This life achieves a fair measure of artistic or intellectual growth.  For the Individual in  this category the ambition  to  accomplish often ranks above the need to form personal relations on a large scale.   Many times a somewhat solitary lifestyle refines  one's sense of reason and objectivity;  for one's gifted pursuits  often rely less on social contact than  on  individual  resources.  Someone in this category might be viewed as independent  and intelligent,  but almost always autonomous.   This person  might appear to ward off close relationships and be preoccupied with personal achievement.  Reaching one's intellectual or artistic goal  often requires a quiet atmosphere and a reflective  environment.   Ideally this allows time to think,  both  deeply  and  clearly.  This is best accomplished in seclusion.

SOCIAL OVERVIEW

Persuasion also depends  upon  more  than  individual   psychology.  Fact-finding, deliberation and decision-making are steps in a  process  which  itself is influenced by  our  collective  and  individual desires as express in our beliefs, values, attitudes, and intentions.  These  social  psychological states express the  roles we play and the norms and social values we live with.  Most decision making  forums  function  through  social processes;  the products of the thoughts  and  actions of groups of men and women.   Whether the forums  are  trials,  hearings,  meetings or political rallies,  social norms  and  social  rules governed influence.   These are the relatively unchanging, static patterns  that the advocate should be familiar with in order to be consistently  influential.  The advocate needs  to  familiarize  himself  with common values,  the signs and symbols of  these  values, and the process of socialization and acculturation.  One should express these values in attempting to  successfully  persuade.

Much  of what we term values are taught,  nurtured  and  preserved by our society and the particular group with which  we  associate.  Indeed, we turn to this group for its assessment  of  whether  we are safe, secure,  virtuous,  just,  sane  or  insane.   Regardless of what needs we have, and regardless of  our  experiential  mode,  attitudes based upon values  largely  determine  whether we can be moved to accept someone else's viewpoint.

In this section of the book we survey the social and cultural  effects of influence.   The organizations that we create  express our socio-economic and political ends.   Some  of these goals translate into bodies of common ideals or ideologies.  Society congeals and pulls apart on the  basis  of  political and economic ideologies.  Witness the support and dissent surrounding President George Bush’s invasion of Iraq, or creation  and  destruction of the Berlin Wall.   Socialistic or capitalistic  farms keep us fed, great privately and publicly run factories  assemble our modern machinery, great armies and lesser cadres  unite against diverse ideologies and battle to extinction  if  so commanded.

Although it does not always represent the best of human kind, it is an observable fact that we see whole peoples in some societies trying to maintain sameness  of race,  religion, and political origin. We grow neighborhoods on the basis of income, race, and age.   We create jobs  that inherently exclude on the basis of sex, handicap, intelligence,  beauty,  and on and on and on.  All this is done in  an  endless ritual to divide our differences  and  amalgamate  our ideals.

It is our social nature that manifests itself in a collective force to solidify relationships;  and it is our social nature  that manifests itself in a collective force to segregate into  class distinctions,  cultures,  and ideologies. Drives  for  solidarity on the one hand and for class status on the  other  are  discordant,  unyielding and antithetical  forces  within  society.  A reconciliation  of these  tensions  shapes  our  attitudes, attitudes that ultimately affect the future.

EVIDENTIARY OVERVIEW

The Romans used Aristotle’s ideas on argumentation to divide the process of persuasion into five canons: (1) Invention, (2) arrangement (organization of a speech or pleading), (3) style (use of language, tone), (4) memory (keeping in mind what would be said) and (5) delivery (physical presentation).

During the Renaissance, the rhetorician Ramus divided the five canons into two groups: Invention and arrangement were assigned to philosophy as the group that dealt with truth. The balance, style, memory and delivery were assigned to the study of rhetoric. This had the effect of separating the essential parts of an argument dealing with logic and reason away from the manner of making arguments. 

Descarte further moved the ideas dealing with logic and argumentation when he proclaimed that we should only consider facts which we know to be true and proceed to develop propositions only based upon such certainty. He believed we should systematically doubt all premises and only accept that which is self evident. Under the influence of his philosophy, invention and arrangement withered and formal logic flowered. Argumentation became subject to formal logic, which work well in the sphere of science and mathematics but fail as systems that deal with questions that cannot be expressed or resolved through syllogistic logic or mathematical reasoning. The Cartesian school eventually led to logical positivism, the idea that only words that could withstand the rigors of mathematical or pure logic could stand for anything meaningful. The approach left out much and dismissed as meaningless ideas that tried to solve the problems of modern life. It left debates such as whether democracy is good or abortion immoral with nothing more than the acceptance of things on the basis of values and in many instances dogmatic acceptance. This kind of scientism depreciated arguments based on uncertainty and among many educated individuals the belief that if a claim could not be determined scientifically there was no way to determine whether it was true, false, right or wrong or good or bad. This relegated all that was not reducible to formal deductive and inductive logic to the realm of relativism. Indeed, much of what is not reducible to scientific investigation depends on the social reality that a culture accepts through tradition and as such is relative to the culture. Nonetheless, the element of reasoned argument must play a role in advancing the causes of finding guilt and innocence, good policy versus bad policy, scientific grounding over the ignorant acceptance of ideologies.

Some of the most vital questions in life are not tractable through a system of formal logic, but require evidence, and inferences to provide answers to the best of our ability. We call this reasoning. The claims in every case need to be associated with evidence if we hope to convince the fact finder of the merits of our position. Inference provides the bridge that links the claim to the evidence. The theory and the art of suasion treat the structure, the interrelationships and the dynamics of how to recognize and apply objective problem solving as a means to establish the necessary inferences to prove the case. In fulfilling this requirement and a primary objective of this book requires that the advocate understand how to simplify complex information and present it an accurate manner. The advocate first needs to separate true data from false data, good opinion from bad opinion, and real emotions from fake emotions. We will also examine the role cause and effect, generalization, and prediction play in establishing sound inferences.

The advocate is required to separate problems and corresponding solutions to analyze what is important in bringing about a consensus on  both  a  psychological and logical plane. When high involvement, rational decision making bears upon a problem,  as it does  for  example in formal scientific or legal argument,  the advocate begins  with  an  awareness  of the sources upon which  the subject is grounded.  An open mind is essential and recognition of all facts pertinent to a particular issue is key.  This always involves the arduous  task  of learning new disciplines and then separating and reducing masses of information  to  a  manageable,  logical and convincing order.  The analytical eye  tries to see logical fallacies often lodged somewhere deep  within that "convincing order". However, one cannot begin to do this until she gains a mastery of the underlying subject. However, there may be some solutions that simplify the process such as building models that might adequately mirror our physical reality. We will reserve a discussion on how we do this for latter chapters.

RHETORICAL OVERVIEW

Rhetoric studies how we communicate knowledge and influence in the process. When we refer to the idea of effective argumentation that is dealing with establishing our claims producing evidence and drawing the inference between the evidence and our claim, we are in the realm of rhetoric. However, rhetoric is broader than argumentation because it not only considers reason, but also deals with persuasion as a consequence of personality, delivery, subject matter.

When we listen to arguments carefully, we can generally categorize the underlying proposition into broad issues dealing with specific types of resolutions.  Four categories stand out: (1) Issues of fact, (2) matters of definition, (3) determinations of value and (4) the affect of policy. When we spot the issue as one of fact it serves no purpose to argue matters of definitions, value or policy and the same holds true when the resolution of an issue depends on one of the other three as listed. 

The chapters on rhetoric address how to make a speech, opening argument, or closing argument more effective -- keeping in mind that the goal is winning  over  the  minds of non-believers and maintaining the allegiance of  the  true believers.   The advocate with the skills to make a  cogent and coherent argument conserves justice,  for at the core of justice are individuals who are perceptive,  creative, adaptive, and who use logic, as well as emotion, to pass judgment. The individual best able to move by argument or entreaty to a  desired  position through a planned course of  action  drives  from a power position,  and consequently,  stands the  better  chance of getting the essential point across.   After all,  this is the  essence of persuasion.

PREFACE

In advocacy we strive to influence others to accept our resolution or position rather than one in opposition through the process of providing evidence and arguing how the evidence connects to our claims or position. As we will learn, success depends not entirely on the evidence or the virtue of our cause, but on who we are perceived to be, the manner of presentation, and who or what we represent or advocate. Aristotle referred to this admixture of influence as ethos, pathos and logos. There is no first principle in advocacy, but if there were it might be that to be an effective advocate we need to understand our perceptions; and how we satisfy our desires, protect the values we cherish and the ends that we serve.

Advocacy always comes with a set of built-in tensions,  which bear upon the time and place we state our claim or respond in kind, may affect the choice of presentation, the story we tell, and the words and phrases, we use. If we appear in person these tensions dictate how we appear to others, whether unsure of ourselves, calculating, nervous, calm, or emotional, They cause the pauses, shifts and inflections in our voice, the way we turn our attention, maintain eye contact, and generally move towards or away from our audience, To the extent that we can understand the subtle and intimate side of ourselves and the way that we and others appear, hear and decide upon resolutions, we have the opportunity to change our focus, strategy, and point of attack.

Veteran lawyers say you need at least 25 jury trials before beginning to achieve competence as a trial attorney. Those that make speeches might tell you that a  25 speeches qualifies you as a novice, a hundred a  journeyman,  and  a thousand a master. Whether it requires a dozen or a hundred trials or speeches depends on many circumstances, not the least of which is motivation, careful presentation and talent. But, clearly experience teaches that rather  than having one script by which you play  to  judges,   juries,  or general audiences, one must practice many scripts to  adjust,  as required,  demeanor and  communication style. Perhaps this is why success may be in the numbers. The most effective way to put this into practice is to  try cases,  to engage in  debate,  to  make speeches, and most important be both the student and the participant. Experience  these  events not merely  as  a  participant,  but  as a student of suasion,  as an  outside  observer, while simultaneously playing the assigned role. Each experience should be critiqued to create and update strategies.

To  be  persuasive requires  using  powers  of reason to the extent that a  rational  environment   permits.  It  necessitates an understanding of  the  ploys  the   opponent  uses  either  knowingly,   or  as  in  most  cases, without conscious regard, instinctually or subconsciously as one might swing at a baseball. Those that practice the art will more likely commit good or effective habits to response systems that they engage at the right moment. Practice allows one to better anticipate the next move, or to detect the error  in  your   opponent's  argument. The advocate needs to train  to automatically  rank sources of doubt and error, to assess relevance,  and   weigh facts,  opinions, and emotion.

I shall make frequent reference to the role of the  speaker,   speechwriter,  lawyer and advocate. The latter is used in a   generic sense, since advocate includes anyone who argues in a formal setting. The advocate is often designated as  "he" but  in  every instance should be understood to  imply  "she". Most ideas of the advocate are associated  with  the  lawyer;  however,  negotiators,  politicians,  managers, or citizens who speak before committees  (for  example, a bargaining session, boards of directors, boards of education, tax review boards, state and local  legislatures)  are also advocates. Advocate then refers to anyone  who  presents  a position in a fairly formal  forum:   courtrooms,  administrative  boards,  boards  of  directors  meetings,  or  speeches before the local citizen's group.

What  follows presents an assimilation of research and  experience. Conclusions are largely in the nature of hypothesis. Although  science  has  long  since  invaded  the  study   of  psychology,  the  matter  of personal  influence  stems  from  interpersonal relationships and by necessity its tenets  must  integrate with one's psyche and manifest in one's persona. What may be written here will only serve as an aide to one’s success.

INTRODUCTION

Suasion: swa-zhen n [ME, fr. L suasion-. suasio, fr.  suasus,  suadere to urge,  persuade;  akin to L suavis] :  the act  of  influencing and persuading -- suasive adj -- suasively adv --suasivenss n.

Articles by psychologists, lawyers, salesmen, and  preachers  abound,  both for their brethren and for  the  lay  public   teaching the art of  advocating,   negotiating,    mediating    and  conciliating. What I refer to as suasion.  Dale  Carnegie's book,  How to  Win Friends and  Influence  People  competes  with the Bible for the greatest  number  of  books printed and sold. The subject is intriguing because so much of our personal success depends on how well we master the art of communications.

Many  of  us have fantasized about acquiring the  magic  that  would  enable us to get people to believe our beliefs,  think  our thoughts,  and act on our priorities; and many of us have  made,  at one time or another,  a serious effort at improving  our competency in this area. Practically everything we do in one way  or  another  exerts  influence over others;  and what others do exerts  an  influence over us. The skill to exert calculated and deliberate influence is a force to be reckoned with. All prominent leaders, benevolent and malevolent, just and unjust seem to have acquired it.

Having  the gift to read minds would be  extremely  valuable,  because  it would permit us to  control precisely what other’s hear and see.  Admittedly, we know that we cannot mind-read, but as  B.F. Skinner wrote:  "We must surely begin with the  fact  that human behavior is always controlled" (A.B.-p. 202). Although we cannot always know what others may need to come to a resolution in our favor, we can learn techniques that assist in knowing the messages and styles of presentation different people are apt to react to.

Salesmen,  teachers, parents, and managers all read people to  some degree.  In the conventional sense, we may not look upon  these people as controlling us, but they are;  for control is  really what has happened when someone causes us to do some thing that we otherwise might not have done, and often contrary to our initial intent. Some individuals have such a flare for this that we would not even suspect that they were instrumental in having us behave a certain way or  change our mind about something.

As an end, controlling others might suggest a Machiavellian coercion. In  the  context  of  this book, controlling  others  is  accomplished  through the process of stating our claim and presenting evidence, referred to as argument.  We convince others -- that  is,    allow   them   to   reach   their   own    independent  judgments -- under   our  influence.  Our power stems from our ability to know what we want, to develop an  influence  strategy to achieve our goal,  and  to  execute on that strategy. In the final analysis most of our success will depend upon our ability to provide reasons to justify our position or claims in order to gain assent from our audience.

One does not need to be a psychologist to know something about human behavior, capacities, limitations and motivations.  We can learn to decipher the likelihood of eliciting certain behaviors. First we need to learn a  language in which we can express many of behavioral  concepts  we  already know intuitively,  and then learn to  apply  that language to deal with influence patterns.

 The  make  up  or homogeneity of any audience may range from simple to  complex depending upon what the issue is.. If we were advocating a women’ right to abortion, we would find that a group made up of members from either Planned Parenthood or the National Organization for Women to be fairly homogeneous although one would be vastly polarized from the other on the basic issues. In either case the idea of homogeneity is simple. A complex level of homogeneity exists when there are vastly differing views on a range of issues that may touch upon the core issues one is advocating. Langdon Parvin, President Reagan's speech writer  during the  Iran-Contra affair faced an inordinately complex problem when  he  had  to  write Reagan's reply  to  the  Tower  Commission  Report,  which roundly criticized the President's  management  style.   Reagan's audience was world opinion,  congress,  his  right  and  center  political constituency  and  the  general  American public. Somehow he had to thread his way through the wants and needs of many different groups and powerful interests. Such complexity is not always found on the world stage. The complexity is a feature of not what we represent but the differing positions held by the very group from whom we may be seeking approval: our constituents in an election, a civic organization deciding where to spend its income,  the  local  zoning  board as to where to erect a power plant,  union or management,  an opposing attorney, a judge or a jury.

We  like  to believe that most people are swayed by  the virtue represented in a case. That is partly true, because as we will see certain  facts brought to light may change one’s attitudes such that the virtue once represented is lost, In some cases advocates win the day simply because they have the voice or demeanor that simply pulls others to their side. Arguments that appeal to moral  and  ethical beliefs sometimes outweigh clear scientific evidence that might point in another direction.  How all of this is mixed into  something called influence is not always obvious, but this is what makes the study of suasion interesting..

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Even the wisest and most  intelligent  among  us  is limited  in  what  is  consciously  observed and what is remembered.  The greater amount of  what  is  remembered  is colored by myriads  of  prior and subsequent experience,  experiences which themselves become pipelines for future perceptions.  It  is no wonder that experiences made up of facts,  opinions  and  emotions flowing into and out of this biological  bundle  called our brain create such turbulence of perceptions. Our perceptions and core beliefs cause us to  respond  to  situations in ways we do not, in a conscious sense, always fully understand.   We  are in effect conditioned to behave  in  certain  ways.   We also do not analyze everything we might do  or  say and upon reflection,  we are often surprised that  we  may  have done something or said something. But, the fact is that often we are not influencing one person at a time, but whole bodies of listeners. Together  they form opinions sometimes different from what one person might do without the group influencing the outcome. 

Regardless of having a predisposition to act or come to resolution in ways dependent on our past experiences and core beliefs, we need to recognize psychological and situational patterns the an audience might reveal. This obviously will help us tailor our presentation.   Knowledge  of these patterns permits us  to  put forth styles that might improve our success. The seasoned business person,  negotiator and  trial lawyer refers to strategies that that consider each of these in some detail before any important meeting between adverse interests.  

The effective advocate begins by asking many questions about what will motivate his audience to reach  a  particular decision?  Is it related to their formal station or power over deciding the matter? Are they sympathetic to a point of view? Are they cold hearted and not interested in the sympathies, but only looking to where the facts point them?  Is it the issue and how it is framed? What kind of evidence do we need to put forward? How do we arrange the proof? Do we need to concern ourselves with the social factors of culture, education, ideology,  race, ethnicity, economic class, political persuasion, religion, or age?  Is timing crucial to our success?  Will the situation itself have an influence or effect over the  advocate?  Will we improve our prospect for success if we present information at the  beginning  of our? What messages should we communicate visually. What are the first words we utter?  Will our audience make  up their minds early due  to  the subject, the interest or because of a limited  power to understand a complicated subject? Are we dealing with an audience that is unfamiliar with solving the kinds  of problems they are being asked to solve?

Regardless of forum, we present a case  by  putting forward our issues, evidence and warrants to back up our evidence. Eventually we expect that the audience will infer from what we have put forth an outcome, a solution, or will find that one side has the stronger argument. We do this by exacting  statements,  introducing facts,   drawing  inferences,  and   making  arguments  is  ultimately  for the purpose of informing  the  decisionmaker  about  what  occurred. This process is often referred to as argumentation.  The process  is one of exposing, clarifying,  analyzing,  and  integrating  how  people think,  act and value,  in an effort to  maintain  some  order in a civilized society.   The general form is  to  state our proposition (also referred to as a claim, resolution or allegation), produce evidence to support our position and explain why the evidence proves our proposition. Our aim is to convince someone else  to accept our perspective, our sense of why our point of view should be accepted or how and why something  happened.  

A THEORY OF SUASION

A Primer for the Student of Advocacy

Joseph R. Carvalko

Copyright 2008

A THEORY OF SUASION.............................................................................................................................................. 1

PREFACE...................................................................................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 7

LIMITS ON OUR ABILITY TO INFLUENCE.................................................................................................... 10

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................................. 11

CHAPTER 1................................................................................................................................................................ 15

AN APPROACH TO SUCCESSFUL ADVOCACY............................................................................................... 15

PSYCHOLOGICAL OVERVIEW.......................................................................................................................... 16

SOCIAL OVERVIEW............................................................................................................................................ 19

EVIDENTIARY OVERVIEW................................................................................................................................ 21

RHETORICAL OVERVIEW................................................................................................................................. 22

CHAPTER 2................................................................................................................................................................ 23

TRUST AND ITS EFFECT ON SUASION............................................................................................................. 23

IDENTITY............................................................................................................................................................... 25

CHARACTER........................................................................................................................................................ 26

RELIABILITY......................................................................................................................................................... 28

CREDIBILITY......................................................................................................................................................... 29

PHYSICAL AND MENTAL ENDOWMENTS.................................................................................................. 31

REVEALED DISPOSITION, DECORUM AND RESPECT............................................................................... 33

ATTAINMENTS AND ACHIEVEMENTS........................................................................................................ 38

PERCEPTION......................................................................................................................................................... 40

ATTENTION.......................................................................................................................................................... 42

HIGH INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITY..................................................................................................................... 44

ALIGNING THE AUDIENCE............................................................................................................................... 45

LOW INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITY..................................................................................................................... 47

PERSUASION UNDER STRESS......................................................................................................................... 50

LEARNING TO BEHAVE..................................................................................................................................... 54

LEARNED AND INHERITED BEHAVIOR........................................................................................................ 55

BEHAVIORAL REGULARITIES IN PERSUASION......................................................................................... 55

BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION............................................................................................................................. 56

CONDITIONING.................................................................................................................................................... 58

REWARD AND PUNISHMENT......................................................................................................................... 60

ATTITUDE AND CHANGE................................................................................................................................ 61

SUBJECTIVE NORMS.......................................................................................................................................... 65

RANGE OF ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION................................................................................................ 67

TWO-SIDED MESSAGE...................................................................................................................................... 69

ATTRACTIVENESS............................................................................................................................................. 71

FEAR AS A TOOL FOR CHANGE..................................................................................................................... 71

CHAPTER 3................................................................................................................................................................ 74

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS OF INFLUENCE..................................................................................... 74

SOLIDARITY AND STATUS............................................................................................................................. 74

INFORMAL JUDGMENTS.................................................................................................................................. 82

STORY LINES........................................................................................................................................................ 82

CHAPTER 4................................................................................................................................................................ 87

100OF OBJECTIVE REASONING............................................................................................................................ 87

PREDICTION BASED UPON UNCERTAINTY................................................................................................ 88

EMPIRICAL RELATIONSHIPS.......................................................................................................................... 91

CATEGORIZATION............................................................................................................................................. 93

ATTRIBUTION..................................................................................................................................................... 94

CRITERIA FOR LOGICAL CONNECTIVITY.................................................................................................... 97

STRUCTURE OF ARGUMENT AND INFLUENCE....................................................................................... 101

LIMITATIONS ON FORMING JUDGMENTS................................................................................................ 103

PATTERNS OF AUTOMATIC RESPONSE.................................................................................................... 105

ONE WAY TO REASON.................................................................................................................................... 110

THEORIZING THE SCIENCE............................................................................................................................ 111

DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION..................................................................................................................... 117

HYPOTHESIS IN THE CONTEXT OF PERSUASION................................................................................... 118

GENERALIZATIONS AND PREDICTION...................................................................................................... 121

THE MAXIM RULES: MACHINES, PROCESS AND MODELS................................................................. 130

TRANSFORMATIONS IN PROCESS.............................................................................................................. 136

UNDERLYING TRANSFORMING RULES...................................................................................................... 137

CHAPTER 5.............................................................................................................................................................. 141

COMMUNICATION EXCHANGES...................................................................................................................... 141

DRIVING FORCES............................................................................................................................................... 143

MOVING TOWARD OTHERS.......................................................................................................................... 145

MOVING AGAINST OTHERS.......................................................................................................................... 148

MOVING AWAY FROM OTHERS.................................................................................................................. 155

OUR DOUBLE BRAIN........................................................................................................................................ 161

PLAYING TO BOTH RIGHT & LEFT BRAIN................................................................................................. 165

KNOWING YOUR RIGHT FROM THE LEFT................................................................................................. 170

PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILING........................................................................................................................ 173

CHOOSING A FRAMEWORK FOR PERSONALITY DESCRIPTIONS...................................................... 175

JUNG'S PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPES.................................................................................................................. 177

CHOOSING AN APPROACH............................................................................................................................ 180

TYPING ATTITUDES AND FUNCTIONS...................................................................................................... 181

THE EXPERIENCE OF TIME............................................................................................................................. 188

UNMASKING ACTORS IN THE WORLD OF PERSUASION..................................................................... 189

SENSATION TYPE............................................................................................................................................. 191

INTUITIVE TYPE................................................................................................................................................ 195

THINKING AND FEELING................................................................................................................................ 200

AFFECTIVE COGNITIVE................................................................................................................................... 202

PERCEPTORS VERSUS JUDGERS................................................................................................................... 204

THE DIFFERING PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPES.................................................................................................. 206

THEORY, THEME AND PRESENTATION..................................................................................................... 235

OPENING STATEMENTS AND CLOSING ARGUMENTS.......................................................................... 238

PRIMARY MOMENTS...................................................................................................................................... 238

EYE CONTACT................................................................................................................................................... 239

DIRECT COMMUNICATION........................................................................................................................... 241

VOICE CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................................................................... 242

POSITION............................................................................................................................................................. 243

EMBLEMS AND ILLUSTRATIONS................................................................................................................ 245

DEMEANOR........................................................................................................................................................ 246

THE AUDIENCE’S WAVELENGTH................................................................................................................ 247

SUMMATION - CLOSING ARGUMENT IN A NUTSHELL........................................................................ 252

EPILOGUE............................................................................................................................................................ 261

ABOUT THE AUTHOR.......................................................................................................................................... 266

FOREWORD

Joseph R.Carvalko

Copyright 2005

The war well fought persists as the most poignant memory for my father, my uncles and many friends. I thank them for their success and sacrifice, but refrain from glorifying the combat they endured, that which we glimpse in the media and read about in books concerning one great generation or another. Some wars may have virtue, but we can never glorify the battle. Understandably we may desire only to assign meaning to the practice of war in virtue of the purpose served, but this implicitly credits an inherently evil episode. Such homage has a tendency to foster attitudes that perpetuate a righteousness that too often leads to political hegemony, or worse, other wars, ethnic cleansing and holocausts.   

Partly we accept maiming and killing in times of war, because we show a stiff upper lip to our adversaries and we give our beloved countries the benefit of the doubt, in their efforts to fight in our defense, for principles we uphold and the like. We accept maiming and killing in times of war as reasonable fallout in support of our leaders, our governments, and our sons and daughters in armed conflict. But, casually accepting the consequences of war also seems to engender a dearth of mercy or lack of empathy for those caught up in war’s wake. The United States government keeps confidential the statistics on civilians killed in places such as Afghanistan or Iraq. And, people do not ask. The nightly news about war becomes so familiar that it raises no more an emotion than do soap commercials. 

 A society that lacks compassion for those caught up in war, famine, disease and pestilence creates the predicate for alienation. And, alienation leads to hatreds that lead to cycles of retaliation. Indifference also marginalizes the downtrodden; puts them out of sight, so that otherwise good people do not have to look at them. I am taken by television programming these days that honor dead soldiers by showing their photographs and the towns they came from. However, I have not seen the face of one civilian casualty.

And, the law does not require empathy; certainly on more than one occasion, it has notably supported those that openly hated and those that showed indifference through their deafening silence. This happened when the Nazi’s executed on their final plan, when the United States burned villages during the Vietnam War, when Pol Pot harvested killing fields in Cambodia, when the United States backed the Contra in Central America (El Salvador law), when opposing tribes in Rwanda practically annihilated one another, and when the United States preemptively exacted retribution on both Iraq and Afghanistan for the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

Governments that retaliate in the spirit of “an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” must rationalize the innocent killing of civilians when it uses deadly force. The law, our cowardice and our detachment support nearly any rationalization a government chooses to proffer and propagandize for its actions in these circumstances. Such, in my view, has been the case to support the United States war against Iraq. Ultimately, we must test our intentions and actions against a moral and a legal standard. In respect of the later, a society’s law represents a social construct that plainly justifies a cultural and political predilection. But, Antigone reminds us that a standard for law does exist: “For me, it was not Zeus who made your order, nor did that justice who lives with the gods below mark out such laws to hold among mankind. Nor did I think your orders were so strong that you, a mortal man, could overrun the gods’ unwritten and unfailing laws. Not now, not yesterday: They always live, and no one knows their origins in time.”

So, by what authority do we transgress upon that which has the force of so fundamental a law? On what legal or moral grounds do we levy revenge and redemption? Perhaps the drum beat for nationalism, zealotry or patriotism beguiles us. Following the drummer leads to a deafness, where we fail to hear the mea culpa, “we were only following orders”. Perhaps not our hearing, but our vision clouds in times of war, a kind of blind obeisance, so that we fail to see those that do our bidding, those we send off to sacrifice life, mostly our youth, our proxies in khakis, who inevitably kill or die. What follows is not an anthem to glorify war, but a prayer to listen and to see the consequences of our action.