There are numerous logical fallacies that make arguments presented in a text or a speech. Some of these fallacies are the appeal to authority, anecdotal evidence, hasty generalization, and the slippery slope. The present essay focuses on the fallacy of emotional appeal that is characterized by an attempt of an author, speaker, or debater to persuade the audience by provoking their emotional reaction. This type of fallacies that could easily be found in social media, commercials, newspapers, and speeches of politicians.
Emotions are an indispensable component of every person’s trait of character and life. In some cases, emotions could affect a person’s decisions, reactions, and behavior. However, emotions should be eliminated when it comes to arguments and judgments on a specific issue (Pirie, 2015). The Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume wrote that passion, i.e., emotions, is the reason why we act, whereas reason directs these actions (Pirie, 2015). Nonetheless, the application of an emotional appeal is an easy way to intimidate or motivate the audience.
An illustrative example of the fallacy of emotional appeal could be noted in Leonardo DiCaprio’s speech in the UN General Assembly during the opening of the Climate Summit in 2014. During the three minutes of the speech, the UN Messenger of Peace commits several emotional appeal fallacies. In most cases, during this performance, DiCaprio does not use proven facts or statistics to affirm the argument. Instead, he appeals to the emotions of the UN’s delegates and the general audience.
The first example of emotional appeal could be noted in the first minute of the speech. More precisely, DiCaprio says that “we all know better than that now every week we are seeing new and undeniable climate events” (United Nations, 2014, 1:01-1:14). The reason why this phrase could be considered a fallacy is that he says that people know better that something is going on. This way, he manipulates the audience and makes it possible for it to retort that his argument is not true. If a person claims that he does not know what everyone else knows better, he will look silly.
The second example is illustrated by the phrase “you can make history, or you will be vilified by it” (United Nations, 2014, 2:04-2:08). The word vilified has a strong emotional coloring, and it is used to threaten the audience. Another illustration of the fallacy of emotional appeal is the quote “the time to answer humankind’s greatest challenge is now” followed with the sentence “we beg of you to face it with courage and honesty” (United Nations, 2014, 3:35-3:44). As for the first phrase, humanity faces a lot of challenges, including poverty, famine, wars, and pandemics of various diseases. Therefore, it is an exaggeration to call climate change the greatest problem faced by humankind. In the second phrase, it is not clear who are “we” but the fact that “they” beg people to fight climate change makes it immensely emotional.
To conclude, the speech of Leonardo DiCaprio on climate change could be characterized as populistic and based on the appeal to the audience’s emotions. At the same time, this fallacy was applied because it is an easy and effective way to persuade the audience and emphasize the significance of the discussed topic. Nonetheless, the speech would seem more convincing if it contained evidence based on statistics and facts.
Reference
Pirie, M. (2015). How to win every argument: The use and abuse of logic. Bloomsbury Publishing.
United Nations (2014).Leonardo DiCaprio (UN Messenger of Peace) at the opening of Climate Summit 2014. [Video]. Web.