Brandon_3_I

Chapter three takes a look at facts… and discredits their potential when presented as a solitary type of evidence in a situation. Stories are important with facts, and do indeed aid with credibility of facts.

However, I do not think that stories are always necessary.

Although stories do aid when presenting facts, I think the facts themselves are more important than the story.

I think “personal experience” stories hold the most importance when trying to prove a point in conjunction with facts.

The chapter expands upon the idea that facts are not as important without stories, when are there times that facts. However, I think there are many situations that call for stories being less important in a situation.

One example of this is in a typical work atmosphere with a hierarchal employee ladder. In these situations, does the boss take the time to tell stories to his employees, or does the boss simply tell them what to do by stating facts? It may be seen as inefficiency in the workplace for a boss to have to explain their orders with stories.

As presented in chapter one, employees Simmons states that employees want to trust their superiors in these situations. What would happen if workers were to question their boss’s orders every time the boss gives an order by telling the worker facts?