see file and require

When we engage in argumentation we tend to make the content of the message the most important element in the rhetorical situation. We also like to believe that we, as the author of the argument, are one of the most significant parts of the rhetorical situation. And, although both the message and the speaker are important, if the audience of the message isn't a priority, the argument is less likely to be effective. 

For this discussion response, you will pick an argument you had with someone else and use the reflective analysis of conflict to analyze how you created a hierarchy for this rhetorical situation. You will use this reflection to determine how the argument could have been more effective if the audience was the primary focus of the rhetorical situation. 

1. Identify an argument you had with someone else. You will need to provide some summary of the argument so we can understand the context. 

2. Using all five of the positions in the reflective analysis, evaluate your argumentative position and the effectiveness of each position. 

3. Rephrase your argument, making it audience-centered rather than message or speaker centered. How does your restructured argument put the audience at the top of the hierarchy? Why might this be more effective in persuading the audience to see your perspective and (possibly) comply?

4. Discuss (briefly) why this structure isn't used more when engaging in arguments. 

It should include appropriate citations and references (including proper APA citations for files).