Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

fessor Baker puts it, "combine perfection of reasoning, complete convincingness, with perfection of persuasive power - excitement of just the right emotions to just the right extent to obtain the ends desired by the speaker or writer.”1

IOI. Persuasion. For the most part, the arts of persuasion are beyond the power of the rhetorician to teach. There is, as yet, neither a science nor an art of persuasion. Such persuasive arts and devices as are recognized and practiced depend for their efficacy mostly upon the personal gifts of those who use them. What is called "personal magnetism" will, in the case of one speaker, render effective what would, in the case of another, be a totally ineffective argument. In written discourse, to be sure, the personal magnetism which a speaker may exert does not count; nevertheless, there may still be an individuality in a writer's style whereby what he says may be able to win its way to the hearts of his readers, though the same arguments, differently expressed, would fall flat.

In general, the great thing in persuasion is the winning of the sympathy of the reader. The reader must be made to feel with the writer, to be willing not only to hear what he has to say, but to follow him in a spirit of open-mindedness, or readiness to be persuaded. This means that the writer himself must be fair-minded, earnest, and sincere. Nothing will more quickly breed distrust in the reader, and hence render 1 Principles of Argumentation, p. 7.

the task of winning assent from him difficult, if not impossible, than an appearance of unfairness or insincerity on the part of the writer. The reader cannot be made to believe what the writer himself does not believe. Nor can he be made to feel much enthusiasm about a subject if the writer displays no such feeling on his own part. The reader, in short, takes his cue from the writer. The argumentative writer who would succeed, therefore, should first try to get his readers into as favorable an attitude toward him as possible, then throw himself into his subject with as much vigor as he can. The rest will depend upon the cogency of his reasoning.

102. Conviction. In studying the methods of convincing the understanding, we are on much firmer ground than when dealing with persuasion. Logic, which is the science that treats of the nature and laws of thought, has investigated the process of thinking and has laid down the general conditions under which reasoning must proceed in order to be correct. We can call logic to our aid here, therefore, whereas in persuasion we have no such guide to fall back upon.

103. The proposition. The first point to note is that every argumentation implies a proposition. In arguing, we affirm or deny that something is true and then proceed to give reasons why it should or should not be regarded as true. In other words, we lay down a "proposition" and then "prove" it by adducing arguments in support of it. We cannot "argue a term"; we must have an assertion with re

gard to it before we can bring it within the scope of argumentation.

The point is well illustrated by the comment which Newman makes upon the composition of a certain student whose father had submitted it to him for criticism:

1

The subject is "Fortes fortuna adjuvat"; now this is a proposition; it states a certain general principle, and this is just what an ordinary boy would be sure to miss, and Robert does miss it. He goes off at once on the word "fortuna." "Fortuna" was not his subject; the thesis was intended to guide him for his own good; he refuses to be put into leading strings; he breaks loose, and runs off in his own fashion on the broad field and in wild chase of "fortuna," instead of closing with a subject, which, as being definite, would have supported him.

It would have been very cruel to have told a boy to write on "fortuna"; it would have been like asking him his opinion of things in general. Fortune is good, bad, capricious, unexpected, ten thousand things all at once. and one of them as much as the other. Ten thousand things may be said of it; give me one of them, and I will write upon it; I cannot write on more than one."

Logically considered, a proposition consists of two terms joined together by means of some part of the verb to be, which is thus called the copula. Not all propositions, of course, are so simply stated as to be readily reducible into subject, copula, and predicate. They may, however, be so stated. For example,

1 The writer of the essay.

2 The Idea of a University.

the proposition "To withdraw from the Philippine Islands at once is the duty of the United States," is the exact equivalent of the proposition, "The United States ought to withdraw from the Philippine Islands at once."

104. Importance of making clear the point at issue. Not only must every argumentation have its proposition, but that proposition should be made clear and definite to the reader. If there is any doubt as to the precise point or points at issue, any ambiguity in the terms of the proposition, that doubt should be cleared away in the beginning and the terms used in the proposition defined as accurately and as carefully as possible. The importance of this preliminary explanation is obvious. In argumentation there must · always be a certain common ground upon which both writer and reader may meet and agree, and from which they may proceed to the point in dispute. The larger the area of this common ground, the less, naturally, will be the distance to travel over debatable ground. A little explanation will often save a great deal of argument. In many cases, indeed, it may render argument almost, if not quite, superfluous. Especially is this true where what is called the "presumption" is strongly in favor of the writer, that is, where the reader, owing to his natural inclinations or prejudices, would be much more likely to agree with him than not.

[ocr errors]

105. Methods of reasoning. - Reasoning, or the attempt to convince the understanding, consists essen

tially in making inferences, that is, in pointing out a necessary connection between a new truth, or truth to be established, and some truth or fact already known and admitted. Inferences may be made in two ways: from the general to the particular, or from the particular to the general. The first is called deductive, the second, inductive reasoning. Thus, if I argue that A will try to pay his just debts because he is an honest man, I am assuming as a general truth that all honest men try to pay their just debts, and from that am inferring the particular truth I wish to establish. My reasoning in this case is said to be deductive. On the other hand, if from my observation of honest men I find that they invariably try to pay their just debts, and come to the conclusion that all honest men try to pay their just debts, I am inferring a general truth from a number of particular truths. In this case, my reasoning is said to be inductive.

We have thus two methods of reasoning, the deductive and the inductive, and each is the exact opposite of the other. They are by no means independent of each other, however. Rather, each is the complement of the other. A deduction implies a general truth to start with, and a general truth is the result of an inductive process of reasoning; moreover, induction must, at a certain stage of its progress, adopt the deductive method before it can finally establish its conclusion.

« AnteriorContinuar »