Practical Argumentation

tive proof is that part of an argument which sets forth direct reasons for belief in a certain

ce unacquainted with his views or hostile towards them, he is not likely to make much progress in getting his own beliefs accepted until he has, at least in part, shattered

fferent circumstances; a debater must, therefore, hold himself in readiness to meet whatever contingencies arise. Debate may be likened to the play of two boys building houses with blocks; each boy builds the best house he can, and at times a

ime in refuting them and thus allow his main argument to go unscathed. When this stratagem succeeds, the one who made the mistakes can acknowledge that he was wrong in those unimportant details, and yet show that his fundamental arguments have not been overthrown. While arguing on a political question, an intercollegiate debater once laid considerable stress on an opinion expressed by Woodrow Wilson, "President," as he stated, "of Harvard University." His opponent, of course, might have held this statement up to ridicule, but such an exposure would have been impoliti

nderstand it or through design, and then refutes this misstatement. The folly of such procedure is made apparent by merely calling attention to the fact that the original argumen

s comparatively simple; if the argument is oral, the task will be harder but will still present no serious difficulties to one who is used to drawing briefs. When all the ideas have been arranged in the form

e way is to state that the headings are false and then bring on new proof to show their falsity; the second way is to call attention to the subheadings with which the opponent has bolstered up the main headin

ts in American colleges should be excused from final examinations in all subjects in which they have at

great intellectual benefi

er their work more

study harder d

an intellectual benefit would result from the adoption of such a rule; of the opinions of educators who have tried the rule and declare that it is an intellectual detriment; and of a course of reas

is not true; therefore (A) would be false,

uth of (1), but would deny that the truth of (A) is

affirmative that the eighty-five per cent. rule should be adopted because it would result in an intellectual improvement among college students, rests on the supposition that students would study harder during the term, and for that reason would more thoroughly master their subjects. This reasoning is

ists of discrediting evidence and attacking reasoning.

DEN

urse, if enough evidence for this purpose is lacking, one has only to call attention to this fundamental weakness in order to overthrow the argumen

in Chapter VI; a hasty review of them, h

the sources

ent to give a trustworth

willing to give an

any personal int

witness

ve a good reputation f

al tests o

a) with itself, (b) with known

first-han

e be classed as es

nsist of hurt

undesigne

negative

argument fr

edged authority on the subje

is possible. To accomplish this result, one may show that the witness spoke from insufficient knowledge of the matter, or was prejudiced, or had some personal interest in the cas

ention of the audience and the judges to the fact that since Prescott F. Hall is Secretary of the Immigration Restriction League, it would be to his interest to make this asserti

SON

nduc

nces of the class un

ablish the existenc

ances been investig

stence of a

Dedu

oth prem

premise an instance of the general

cedent pr

ause of sufficient s

ed ef

se intervene and prev

ned c

Si

from effec

cause adequate to p

fe

ed effect have resu

n the one

from effec

rgument from effect to cause

Exa

erence between the case in hand

LAC

other classification, demand separate treatment. This book follows the plan of most other texts on argumentation, and treats these errors under a separate head marked fallacies. To detect a fallacy in another's argument is

wever, consider the most common and insidious breaches of reasoning that are

QUESTION. (PETI

at he assumes the prisoner to be a criminal before the court has rendered a verdict. Those writers who have recently discussed "the brutal game of football" without having first adduced a particle of proof to show that the game is brutal, fall into the

ate ownership should be maintained, and that the impracticable system of government o

lities attributed to them, but the debater has no right to make

en in the midst of quantities of other material, they may produce an unwarranted effect upon one who is not a clear thinker, or who is off his guard. If, without showing that football is brutal, one calls it an extremely brutal game, and then urges its abolishment on the ground of its brutality, he has used an assumptio

without attempting to establish a suppressed premise whose truth is not admitted, he has argued fallaciously. This is a third method of begging the question. To illustrate: In advocating the abolishment of football from the list of college athletic sports, one might reason, "Footb

lusion that he has set out to establish seems incredible. Such a form of begging the question, however, does frequently occur. Sometimes the fallacy is so hidden in a mass of illustration and rhetorical embellishment that at first it is not apparent; but

an can afford to dawdle for four long years in acquiring a so-called "higher" education. Three-fourths of that time

this case consists of nothing more

quoting the proposition as proof of the assumption. Two assertions are made, neither of which is substantiated by any real proof,

stem of taxation is

makes you

ll be adopted by

o you kno

d system and our legisl

s by the testimony of the church. A similar fallacy has been pointed out in the works of Plato. In Phaedo, he demonstrates the immortality of the soul from

in accordance with

tic par

e Democratic party

rty, he naturally believes

. (EQUIVOCATION; C

trusted; engravers are by profession designers; therefore they ought not to be trusted," it is quite apparent that the term "design" means totally different things in the t

h another man's b

erferes with anot

nderselling

scusses the fallacy of ambiguous ter

or low, the rate of interest being meant. The consequence of this ambiguity is, that as soon as scarcity of money in the latter of these senses begins to be felt,-as soon as there is difficulty of obtaining loans, and the rate of interest is high,-it is concluded that this must arise from causes acting upon the quantity of money in the other and more popular sense; that

the confusion which this fallacy can cause. Some of the most common terms that are use

a rigid adherence to the one meaning wherever the term is used, a debater can easi

FALSE

ished is urged as its cause. This fallacy in its most obvious form is found only in the arguments of careless and

hould be of the sea-l

ype, b

ill do away with the

o

tified in keeping the

ro,

never have been

t to the Constitution oug

ns needs no explanation. There is one form of the fallacy of false cause, however

perstitions. If some one meets with an accident while taking a journey that began on Friday, many people will argue that the accident is the effect of the unlucky day. Some farmers believe their crops will not prosper unless the planting is done when the moon is

efs, even, are often generated in the same way; prosperity follows the passing of a certain law, and people jump to the conclusion that this one law has cau

a partial cause of what followed, and may not have been a cause at all. A medicine that could not have effected a cure may have been of some slight benefit. A law that could not possibly h

soning made by several college presidents who, after compiling statistics, stated that a col

ll, a much larger proportion of American college men win it than of men who don't go to college, but how much college training does for those successful men is still debatable. Remember that they are a picked lot, the likeliest children of parents whose ability or desire to send their c

ly the lazy ones who won't study. The colleges get nowadays a large proportion of the best boys of the strongest families. The

ly fallacious reasonin

tlantic Monthly

ecause event Z follows event W, as it follows events A and B and many besides A, therefore W is the sole cause of Z. Theory or no theory, the Republican says that we have in fact grown rich by protection, because in our country prosperity and protective duties have existed together. They ignore every inconvenient fact. They would have us forget that each of the industrial depressions of 1873-78 and 1893-96 followed long operation of a high protective tariff. They ignore the contribution of soil and climate to our prosperity, the vast increase which modern inventions and improved carrying f

ecedes it. There must be a connection between the alleged cause and the effect, and this connection must be causal; otherwise, both may be the result of the same

SITION AN

a whole, to reason from the existence of a few millionaires that the English nation is wealthy, would be to fall into this fallacy. Furthermore, it is fallacious to think that because something is true of each member of a class taken distributively, the same thing holds true of the class taken collectively. It is not logical to ar

lvania, but that fact by itself does not warrant the statement that any one particular farm is exceptionally fertile. Because the people of a country are suffering from famine, it does not follow that one particular person is

QUESTION. (IGN

hen unable to defend his position, will sometimes cunningly shift his ground and argue upon a totally new proposition, which is, however, so similar to the original one that in the heat of controversy the change is hardly noticeable. A discussion on the subject, "The boycott is a legitimate means of securing concessions from

y holds up to scorn certain argu

whom overwhelming evidence is produced, generally decline all controvers

most hot-headed and hard- hearted of prelates; and the defence is, that he took his little son on his knees and kissed him! We censure him for having violated the articles of the Pe

unsound because it is upheld by an untrustworthy advocate, or because it is inconsistent with the advocate's former beliefs and practices. Honesty is a worthy principle, even though advocated by a thief. The duty of industry is no less binding because it is advocated by an idler. Lawyers often

prejudices and partisan views, but which are not generally accepted facts and which would undoubtedly meet with strong opposition elsewhere. A speaker who brings in this kind of argument makes use neither of reasonin

is apparent to one who is arguing, yet it is not easily made apparent to the audience. In overcoming this difficulty, arguers often resort to certain pe

BSURDUM. (REDUCIN

ce contended that colleges should not seek to root out professionalism in athletic sports, because, by coming in contact with college life, professional players receive considerable benefit. His opponent answered him by showing that the sam

lders when the brokers did not have the money represented by the checks deposited in the bank. This was distinctly a criminal offense. The brokers failed, and, the bank ha

t, and that if the wrecked bank had not followed this law-breaking custom of its competitors the stock brokers would have withdrawn their account. The plea was successful, and the officer escaped with

to hold satisfactory examinations in English literature, since this is a subject which is studied for the purpose of cultivating the taste, educating the sympathies, and enlarging the mind. If this reasoning proves anything, it has been pointed out, it pro

how, with equal reason, that since drinking, stealing and cheating are prevalent in other colleges, these same practices should also be indulged in at the college in question. In the same way one may refute by reductio ad absurdum all such arguments as, "Custom

HE DI

x and y are both false, A is false. Once when it was believed in certain quarters that Japan was about to undertake a war against the United States, many people maintained that if Japan desired to go to war she was amply able to finance such an undertaking. In reply to this contention, a certain newspaper, making use of the dilemma, said that since Japan had no money in the treasury she could meet the expenses of war in only three ways: either by

ve the moral right to own and operate public utilit

that light, in order to pay the profit, not only to themselves, but also to those who do not use it. If the works are to be carried on at a loss, then the citizens who do not use the gas or electric light will pay taxes to furnish a convenience or economy to those citizens who do use it.

pponent, asks him a pertinent question which previous investigation has shown can possibly be answered in only two or three

s he that gave thee this authority? And he answered and said unto them, I also will ask you a question; and tell me: The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why did ye not beli

ois, Lincoln, wishing either to kill Douglas's senatorial prospects or to head him off from the presidency two

r sovereignty, which declared that the people of a territory should be left to regulate their domestic concerns in their own way subject only to the Constitution, and the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case that slaves, being property, could not under the

question, sought to destroy, and, as history shows, did destro

tempting to rebut the statement that college fraternities are harmful, said that his opponent must show that fraternities are either morally, socially, financially or intellectually detrimental to their members; he then proved as best he could that in these respects fraternities are beneficial rather than harmful, and sat down thinking that he had gone a long way toward winning the debate. His opponent then arose and adm

of evidence and reasoning, the first step for him to take in refuting an argument is to apply the tests for each, and if possible show where his opponent has erred. In the next place, he should see whether he can discover and point out any of the more important fallacies; the ones mentioned here are begging the question, ambiguous

RCI

arguments and point out t

tem, and only six of these were found guilty of "cribbing." This record shows

f the best players on last year's football team attai

more criminal by twenty- five per cent.; from 1880 to 1890, illiteracy decreased eighteen per cent., but crimi

iled at Franklin and Marshal

llege because they tend to take the stu

ctive in making a specialist, because the

se from the negro, because the Fifteenth Amendment

reat as that of most white people, he is of as high

efore she starves; she star

virtue, because every

t does not have opportunity to become acquainted with his duties, for j

cts of the Apostles, nor from the Epistles, nor from the Revelation

is man belongs to a band of lawless men, and this band has been taken in t

since this man presumes to believe his opinions

permanently enlarged, I will show that every nation

studies is preferable to th

ect those studies whi

d,

elect what

nefit the work

fit him fina

d not, he wou

ble together, one of them a

ifiable it is necessary to see if they have f

thick shade; this is one of them, the

ds in beggars; France is also a Catholic

he would have been so had he carried out Adam Smith's doc

y law. Prosecutions for theft are criminal acti

usement; a table of logarithms is a book; therefore

ents from authority write a parag

as demonstrated the wisdom of the mode o

relessness caused by the after effects of a 'spree,'" says Dr. Jesse K. Jo

stated that a six year Presidential term wo

many of the principal monopolies in the country, stat

ty, page fourteen, says that legislation against trusts has improved c

as said that the subsidizing of ships on a

to labor for his maintenance becom

e form of a brief and show exactly w

IGATE "CON

s" from the waters in which that historic

s up room at the Navy Yard which is ne

00,000-came out of the Federal Treasury, the people of distant States ought to have the p

avy Yard as declaring that "the ship in no way interferes with the work of the yard, taking up no space that is needed for other purposes." The Governor would not make such a statement in an offi

tism is removed. This idea has found crude and unmannerly expression in the words of one of the committee of Congress looking over our navy yards. "The agitation to keep the ship in Boston seems self

proposition to tow the ship around from place to place, as it may be wanted for

assachusetts has expended many times the cost of the repairs of "Old Ironsides" in preserving for the nation the revolutionary sites and monuments upon our soil. Payment for the repair and restora

of bureaucracy. It is a simple, reasonable, entirely practical demand of the historic senti