How often have we fallen asleep in a lecture, or become angry at a soapbox like “incitement to riot”? The former is boring and the latter an intrusion on our will.
The contents of a talk, as our thoughts, do not interest an audience. The contents of a lecture as mere information puts an audience to sleep.
The content from the point of view of our will, what we would like the audience to do, annoys the listener. Even subtle “what you should do” talks annoy people, though the annoyance may be just below the surface of their consciousness.
Thus, our thoughts, as thoughts, do not interest an audience. Our will irritates them.
The affective contents (feelings) are the link between our thoughts and our will, but not in a crude way. Trying to engender sympathy logically and abstractly makes the speaker look pathetic, and gives the effect of stumbling over oneself. Reading a lecture gives lifeless words and dead thoughts. Delivering a memorized speech makes us like a machine with a recorded message.
Instead we should settle the thought content within ourselves well beforehand in such a way that we do not formulate the lecture word for word, though we might prepare the first and last sentences of the talk and use them as a frame as it were.
Then we sink our self into the feeling we had at the time we were in the situation, or at the level of our intended audience for the chosen topic.
In this mood we will our self to listen to our self inwardly lecturing on the thought content. We become our own audience. We listen attentively to these thoughts, and while we listen within ourselves we develop enthusiasm or aversion, sympathy or antipathy out of the arguments for and against.
This personal thinking through the thought content and propelling will into it in the meditative preparation metamorphoses later as a powerful and healthy affective talk that works strongly into the will of the audience.
For example if we are to deliver a talk on the need for a leading growth program, statistical results as proof will bore the listeners and make them sleepy. If I say, even very nicely: “When all is said and done if we do not do our utmost to realize a robust Leading Growth Program we are being irresponsible in denying to business its social and profit potential”, that would probably irritate the listeners.
However, a talk inwardly organized via the method above, so that it’s a kind of interesting Leading Growth Program technique in itself, becomes a statement of fact.
The same approach could be used in the preparation of items for publishing.

http://www.rsarchive.org/