When Phil Davison said "use it not only as a tool, but as a weapon," he violated which guideline of proactive speech delivery as he did everything opposite to the guidelines of a proactive speech rules.
Because these are the rules apply to proactive speech, the speech should be meaningful and your voice should be expressive. Reduce the number of pauses while delivering the speech like ums, uhs, likes, and y'knows. Spell words out loudly. Don't murmur or mispronounce them.
Use the proper volume and pace when speaking. Consider the topic, location, and audience. To make your point clearer and keep the audience's attention, vary your voice's pace, intonation, and power. But what Phil Davison did was Despite possessing a master's in communication, things just get worse from there.
His voice starts to grow, but not in the positive way we talked about in class. Davison starts shouting at the top of his lungs one minute and twenty-five seconds into the speech. If frightening the audience by screaming at them qualifies as pathos, Davison is making the most of pathos. I was unable to discover how Davison used pathos in any other way. And he did everything against the guidelines of proactive speech.
To know more about speech:
brainly.com/question/3743745
#SPJ4
There should be a comma after “failures”. hope that helped! :)
Alright, so amongst starters, you have a few you can use to show you'll have evidence:
According to text
According to the passage
According to the information provided
As the information shows
As the text mentioned, (include direct quote here)
Based on the information in the passage/text, (include reasoning here)
Etc. There are quite a few options, really, these are just a few. Based on whatever you are providing the information ON, the words information, text, and passage can be changed to suit your needs, such as article, newspaper, website, etc.
Do you have the context to this? This phrase could have several meaning without it.
