Glf:Credible and Persuasive Evidence

Introduction

This article discusses how we can make our evidence-based assertions more persuasive without sacrificing credibility. It is meant to provide guidance to those writing for the JFA Wiki, but we hope it will also prove useful to anyone writing to promote the philosophy of animal rights and the benefits of veganism.

In writing for the JFA Wiki or other media, we want to make a credible and non-hyperbolic case for the ideas we are presenting. We are, in a sense, wholesaling information that will then be passed on to others in discussions, presentations, and perhaps in writing. Often our audience is the proverbial choir, and we want to help the choir sing to others in a manner that will resonate with their audiences. We also want our information to be concisely summarized—if we are not brief and to the point, we may lose our audience. They are not expecting an opus.

Our content guidelines call for all factual statements which are not general knowledge to be accompanied by a citation or citations from a credible source or sources. This is not only a requirement for good scholarship, but it also plays into advocacy. When someone asks us where we got some bit of information, it's better to say "the National Resources Defense Council," than "I don't know—I read it somewhere on the internet." There will be tradeoffs between brevity and persuasiveness, but we should not trade away credibility.

We must also be mindful to choose the most powerful evidence amid a sea of possibilities. Then we should consider our choice of words in summarizing and presenting the evidence. Finally, we should be aware of the importance of our tone and demeanor when delivering the message.

Before we dive into the details, a few disclaimers of sorts:

• We are aware of the limitations of simply presenting facts in the process of trying to be convincing. Yet it's something that we all are called on to do at times, and we might as well make the best of it. The phycology of persuasion is a broader topic for which there is a wealth of resources, and is only hinted at here.

• We are also aware that some may see this as an exercise in confirmation bias—we are convinced of our positions and we look only for evidence supporting those positions. But most of the positions we hold were formed after seeing multiple reports from credible sources over time. The articles in this wiki only attempt to document that into a form useful for its stated purpose.

• Finally, the argument for veganism does not depend on environmental or human social justice concerns. It hinges on human health only to the extent of showing we can live a healthy life without animal products, and even that is nuanced. So while we emphasize the ethical issues with the exploitation of animals, we realize that concerns over health, the environment, or social justice might compel some to explore the broader topics surrounding veganism and eventually adopt an ethical stance.

For each of the following kinds of evidence, we discuss

• Its role in comparison to other forms of evidence
• How to choose the most powerful and convincing sources
• How to phrase a summarization of findings in the most convincing manner.

General Guidelines

Level of Detail

Provide as little detail as possible—enough to make a strong and convincing point without getting lost in the weeds.

Kinds of Evidence

Experts Assertions

recognizable institutions (Mayo Clinic)

dietary associations

organizations with powerful names (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine)

individuals with extraordinary credentials in a related field that can be named, i.e. "Dr. Jane Doe, past president of the American Heart Association, said that...."

Try to avoid using individuals with names that are not recognizable to the general public unless they have powerfully convincing credentials in the pertinent field.

Research Studies

Investigations

Testimonials