Just about everyone has some things they respond to positively and some things they respond to negatively on an emotional level. Even sociopaths have some emotion. It's part of being human. This makes it easy to be swayed by emotional arguments.
The pity we feel for the child depicted in poor and dirty conditions or for the caged, abused animal are natural and protective of our species. If the right music is scripted behind the image, the response is stronger. We thrive when everyone does well - and nowadays society attaches similar emotion to animals - but the appeal to emotion tells us little about the person or agency presenting it. Only that they are willing to present the image to gain our attention, or to overcome some of the reluctance we might otherwise feel in supporting them.
My mother is quite analytical. In her youth, she went to some holy roller revival meetings. In spite of the fact that she was not drawn in, her eyes still shine when she talks about it. She found them entertaining. Others were caught up in the emotion drawn in by , the enthusiasm of the followers, the music,the miraculous healings and the general 'out of the ordinary' in the experience. Under the influence of emotion, people did things they never would have done in public including, (yes) rolling on the floor and talking in tongues. Was what these people experienced true? It was true for them. Did they benefit? I do not know.
When an agency or person presents an emotional appeal, it is wise (reasonable) to ask for other arguments - unless you don't mind supporting people / agencies that may or may not actually be working toward what you really want to support. But sometimes emotion is enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment