William Atkinson - The Essential Works of William Walker Atkinson - 50+ Books in One Edition

Table of Content

ARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSE deals with the process of convincing or persuading of the understanding, by proofs or presentation of evidence, to the end that the opinion or will, or both, of the hearer may be influenced. “Argument,” in its popular usage, means: “The act or process of reasoning, contention, controversy; that about which arguing, debate, or reasoning takes place, or the reasons adduced; the reasons adduced in support of any assertion.”

In its technical usage in Logic, it is defined and explained by Whately as follows: “An expression in which, from something laid down as granted, something else is deduced, i. e ., must be admitted to be true as necessarily resulting from the other. Thus, reasoning expressed in words is argument, and an argument stated at full length is a syllogism. Every argument consists of two parts—that which is proved, and that by which it is proved. Before the former is established it is called ‘the question,’ and when established, the ‘conclusion’ or ‘inference,’ and that which is employed to effect this result, the ‘premises.’”

Watts says: “Argumentation is that operation of the mind whereby we infer one proposition from two or more propositions premised; or it is the drawing a conclusion, which before was unknown or doubtful, from some propositions more known and evident.” Another authority says: “Argumentation is the act or process of reasoning; that is, of drawing a deductive inference from premises given, or of inductively making a generalization from a multitude of facts carefully brought together and sifted.”

Hill says: “Argument, like exposition, addresses the understanding, but there is an important difference between the two. Exposition achieves its purpose if it makes the persons addressed understand what is said; argument achieves its purpose if it makes them believe that what is maintained is true ; exposition aims at explaining , argument at convincing . The difference between an argument and an exposition may be shown by a comparison between the address of an advocate to the jury, and the charge of the judge. The advocate tries to convince the jury that his client has the right on his side; the judge, if he has the truly judicial spirit, tries to make the jury understand the question at issue exactly as it is.”

As we have said in the preceding chapter, Exposition often invades the field of argument, and skilfully brings into relief certain sides of the general question, or else emphasizes certain aspects of the case, so that the explanation is transformed into an argument . And, likewise, Argument may clothe itself in the garb of Exposition, so that while to ordinary outward appearance it is merely an explanation , the effect of that explanation is really one of the most effective forms of argument. Moreover, in every lengthy argument, there must of necessity be more or less Exposition, or explanation of that which is to be proved. And, likewise, the majority of Arguments are preceded by Exposition, or explanation of that upon which the Argument is to be based.

Hyslop says: “Description, Explanation, and Exposition are processes by which we endeavor to narrate facts and thoughts in a systematic and orderly manner. They are designed to give an intelligible and methodical conception of the data that are connected with a particular theme. But they are not designed to convince the mind. They may incidentally do this, but it is not the primary object to create conviction. They are occupied with the formation and presentation of clear conceptions, systematic and methodical discourse, which does as much to make ideas intelligible as it does to please the sense of order. But Proof and Argumentation go beyond this. They endeavor to remove doubt, to give belief and knowledge to the intellect.”

The ancients, who placed the highest value upon Argumentative Discourse, particularly in the form of orations, and who reduced this form of expression to a fine art and almost to an exact science, divided the Formal Argument into six steps, as follows: (1) The Exordium or Introduction; (2) the Division; (3) the Statement; (4) the Reasoning; (5) the Appeal to the Emotions; and (6) the Peroration or Closing.

Modern authorities incline to the opinion that this arrangement is rather too artificial for effectiveness and easy expression, and the employment of it to-day is apt to produce the effect of pedantry or stiffness. But, a close analysis will show that these successive steps, or at least some of them, are employed to-day in every argument, long or short, from the address of the lawyer, or the sermon of the preacher, to the “selling talk” of the modern salesman. Whether or not this be recognized, it will be well for the student to consider these several steps of the ancients, in order that he may grasp the meaning of each and thus be able to employ any or all of them when occasion necessitates it. Accordingly, we shall follow this arrangement in considering the Principles of Argument.

The Exordium or Introduction of an Argument is generally conceded to be one of its most difficult steps. It is important that the person making the argument make a good impression upon his hearers so as to render them attentive, well-disposed, and open to persuasion as he proceeds. The following suggestions, representing the opinion of some of the best authorities, are offered regarding the Introduction:

I. Endeavor to create the impression of earnestness, dignity and self-respect. There is nothing so impressive or contagious as earnestness, and nothing so hurtful as an apparent lack of it. The speaker who can make his hearers feel at the start that he believes in what he is saying—in the cause he is about to undertake, has scored heavily at the beginning, and has paved the road to a successful progress in his argument. On the other hand, he who causes his hearers to doubt his earnestness, or his belief in the justice and strength of his cause, is handicapped from the beginning. But one should not commit the mistake of telling his hearers in words that he believes in his cause—he should convey the impression by the suggestion of his manner and mental attitude. The conviction and earnestness of a speaker need not be told in words to his hearers, any more than the virtue of a woman or the honesty of a man need be verbally asserted to those to whom they come in contact—they must be suggested to others by one’s acts and manner. The man who cries: “I am honest;” the woman who continually asserts, “I am virtuous;” or the speaker who tells his hearers, “I am in earnest,” himself raises the question and is in danger of being misunderstood and doubted. Some things must be left to the power of suggestion. Dignity and self-respect are qualities which favorably impress hearers, and the lack of them tend to lessen one’s influence. But, remember that dignity does not mean pomposity ; nor does self-respect mean manifest egotism or foolish pride!

II. Endeavor to attract the Attention of your hearers at the start. Attention is the first step in any mental process, and he who would persuade or convince his hearers must first manage to secure their attention. Attention may be secured by presenting the opening features of the subject in a novel, attractive manner. The unusual always attracts the attention. If the curiosity of the hearers can be aroused, attention results naturally. Attention depends largely upon interest. Interest may be aroused by presenting the subject in a novel, new manner, and may be held by changing the object or subject presented to it. Interest grows tired when the subject grows monotonous— it demands variety. It will be well to observe the following two rules of Attention and Interest, as given by Halleck: “(1) Attention will not attach itself firmly to uninteresting things; (2) It will soon decline in vigor, (a) if the stimulus is unvarying, or (b) if some new attribute is not discovered in the object.”