The Strategies for Argument
description
Transcript of The Strategies for Argument
The Strategies for Argument
“Rhetoric is the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion”
Aristotle
Mod
es o
f Per
suas
ion Aristotle listed three modes of persuasion as
part of the rhetorical situation Ethical (ethos) Logical (logos) Emotional (pathos)
Commonly, these names are referred to by their Greek names: ethos, logos, pathos There is also mythos (plot) in which Aristotle
asserts that understanding the source is important; the nature of the topic should be considered
Each of these work in tandem to produce effective arguments.
Etho
s
“The effective orator must possess the quality which…is in the very nature of things the greatest and most important, that is, he [or she] must be a good man [or woman].” ~Quintillian
Ethos refers to character, believability, trustworthiness, honesty, etc. It is how we convince our audience, by virtue of our
reputations, that we are to be taken seriously Oftentimes, ethos is determined before we even
present an argument. Ethos and logos are closely tied
Ethically based arguments imply that claims can be supported by evidence and clear thinking that has led to reasonable conclusions
Etho
s
We rely on ethos to allow us to make sound judgments before committing to an action Advertisers often use celebrity endorsements
because their ethos helps sell products Michael Jordan for Nike Consequently, once ethos is destroyed,
advertisers are likely to adopt new sponsorship Tiger Woods
How often is ethos involved in politics? Constantly.
Logo
s
Arguments can be logical, but logos demands a precise implementation of information and language
Favors fact and reason over emotion for the sake of objectivity
Types of evidence (hierarchically organized) Facts or statistics
Usually are undeniable and based on data Personal experience
The eye witness can usually provide compelling testimony(law)
Authority More opinion based, but credible only because of
the expertise of the testimony
Logo
s
All evidence, no matter the validity, is subject to interpretation and, therefore, must be employed with caution and strategy.
Patte
rns o
f Log
ic Two types of reasoning
Inductive Deductive
Inductive: presenting evidence and then coming to a conclusion In the morning, you look at outside: sun is
shining, sky is clear, the weather forecast calls for warm temperatures. You conclude that you should wear light clothing
Deductive: Having a conclusion and then presenting evidence to support it Based on fundamental truths All men are created equal; therefore, they have
certain inalienable rights The truth, right, or belief stemming deductive
reasoning is the premise
Patte
rns o
f Log
ic The premise of an argument can be worked with in two
different ways Syllogism: a three-part argument in which the conclusion
rests on two premises, major and minor. Major: all people have hearts Minor: John is a person Conclusion: John has a heart
Enthymeme: A rhetorical syllogism where logic can be derived from the way the argument is constructed I’d better close the windows, because the sky is getting
darker Major: A dark sky indicates rain Minor: The sky is getting darker Conclusion: Therefore, it will probably rain (and I
should close the windows)
Logi
cal F
alla
cies
In response to the 2002 federal appeals court ruling that “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional: “In light of the events of this past September (9/11), I
think it would be hypocritical to omit an acknowledgment of a divine being under which the ideals and beliefs of this nation were created. And if you don’t think so, ask everyone how many of them prayed to God that day.”
This is an example of a logical fallacy, a problem in reasoning that negates the truth of the claim
Sometimes they can be powerfully illustrative and, thus, still win arguments despite their flaws
They should be avoided in most occasions as most speaking instances are concerned with truth Also, the critical listener can detect and capitalize on
logical fallacies
Logi
cal F
alla
cies
Appealing to pity: structuring an argument solely to stir an audience’s emotions without the help of evidence Someone who has seldom come to class and fails the course argues, “I
deserve to pass this class because I’ve had a lot of problems at home.” Appealing to prejudice: structuring an argument centered around
the values of a certain group A newspaper may criticize or exploit the atrocities of a country we are
at war with simply to win the crowd at home Appealing to tradition: Letting the past speak for the present
without evidence to warrant a claim We cannot let women join our club because we’ve never let them join
in the past Arguing by analogy: using a comparison that does not considered
similarities on more than one level A politician tries to convince people to vote for him because of his
outstanding record as a football player, claiming that football involves teamwork. It does indeed, but there many other skills that politics involve that football does not
Logi
cal F
alla
cies
Attributing False Cause: assuming that an event is the result of something that occurred before it post hoc, ergo propter hoc: after this, therefore because
of this Someone is arrested for murder because they were seen
near the house of the victim shortly before the murder. This person is then later released. He was simply reading the electric meter.
Good logic distinguishes between cause and coincidence
Guilt by association Largely political A candidate is a member of a church, that church comes
under criticism, therefore, the candidate holds the same beliefs and must be criticized
Logi
cal F
alla
cies
Begging the Question: a conclusion similar to the premise Claim: required courses like first-year composition are a
waste of time Conclusion: first-year composition should not be required
The author has assumed what the argument should be devoted to proving
Had the conclusion yielded something greater than the claim, it could have been avoided
Jumping to conclusion Because one apple is sour, it does not mean that all apples
are sour Ad hominem
Making personal attacks on an opponent to draw attention away from the issue at hand
Logi
cal F
alla
cies
Opposing the straw man: easier to demolish a straw man than a live opponent This is when an author pretends to respond to the views of his
opponents by only responding to an extreme view Sets up an artificial opposition
An argument against abolishing Social Security, when they opponent has merely suggested that Social Security should be reformed
Reason that does not follow Non sequitor
Because the teacher likes Joe, he passed the quiz in calculus The Slippery Slope
Opening the door to gay marriage will promote beastiality No argument is free of logical fallacies
Path
os
Very powerful and very risky Appealing to fear, love, pity, and anger People process these emotions differently and
react differently when presented with them Use pathos ethically
“Pushing the emotional buttons” of the listeners may help win the argument, but will it solve the problem? Is it the right way to address the issue?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?
Etho
s, Pa
thos
, or L
ogos
?