At the end of chapter four of Rhetoric, Aristotle writes, “These, then are the most important kinds of information a political speaker can possess. Let us now go back and state the premises from which he will have to argue in favour of adopting or rejecting measures regarding these and other matters.” According to Aristotle one of these premises is “will this make me happy?” In chapter five he states that happiness is the emotion behind what men choose and what they avoid. I read this as meaning that in order to persuade a man you must convince him that his happiness will increase.
Reading Aristotle’s point got me thinking about how logical and emotional appeals work together. Yes, happiness is an emotion, but it could be the end game of a logical appeal. For instance, a commercial shows a girl with a new bike smiling and laughing, her parents happily videotaping. The unstated logical argument is: girl has bike; she is happy; buying this bike will make you happy. This is an inductive argument, but it is also one that appeals to our desire to be happy.
As for Aristotle’s contention that happiness is the emotion behind what they choose and what they avoid—I don’t buy it. As a counterexample, a woman might be persuaded to a certain action if that action would decrease her own happiness but would increase her child’s happiness. I’d like to know what people think.