Discussion Question Number Two, Part Trois

Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion and Content Fallacies

Appeal to Emotion
The content fallacy of appealing to emotion deals with convincing another of their claim through their feelings, most likely feelings the other approves of, or feelings that go with their claim to prove their argument to them as right, strong, and in general. It can also be illustrated through means of associating something with more commonly good feelings (or bad) to get them on your side of the claim. "You should believe or do ___ because you feel ___", according to Epstein.


Example
Look, you don't even like to dance and hate being in overly crowded places anyway, so you'll hate going to this concert. Don't go.

The person making this claim uses the emotional pull of another's proclaimed dislike for dancing and largely crowded places to convince them in not going to the concert in order to prove that they are right, their claim is strong, and the person they are directing this claim to should, therefore, avoid attending the concert. They have no other argument or good reason for the other to believe that they shouldn't go, which makes this not as good of an argument it could be. By piling up negative, past experiences with concerts, they are more likely easily able to get their way, and to expect that because a certain experience resulted in a certain way, that it will happen the same way each and every time the other decides to re-experience that certain thing. There's too many variables that could vary the second time around that could change the other's mind about the certain thing, which could say even more about the person's claim and how it lacks more believability and good reason.