-duction of three hundred words, more or less, to fit the circumstances." "How would you modify your introduction if the audience were opposed to you?" "What change would you make if you learned that your audience would be composed of working men?" etc. The same procedure might be followed with the conclusion, the method of treatment being decided according to the attitude of the audience, the turn of the discussion, or the special end sought.
On the days when finished arguments are to be brought into class, some such list of questions as the following may be given to the students, according to which each man is to criticise the forensic of his neighbor.
A. Are the definitions clear and conclusive?
1. Are there any terms left undefined that call for definition?
B. Are the processes of finding the issues properly followed?
I. Are the issues stated clearly?
2. Could the issues be stated more narrowly?
C. Is the partition properly made?
D. Is the introduction phrased so as to arouse interest?
A. Is the connection between the main points and the proposition made perfectly apparent?
B. Is the arrangement in any way defective?
C. Are there well-managed transitions?
D. Is the English clear and forcible?
E. In reading the forensic, do you get a clear idea of the whole argument?
A. Is the conclusion clear, brief, and forcible?
B. Is the summary sufficient?
C. Does persuasion play a proper part in the conclusion?
The above suggestions are considered neither exclusive nor inclusive. They are merely given as some of the exercises that have proved useful to students and instructors during six or eight years of experience in college work.
Admissions, or declarations against
Ambiguous terms, fallacies of, 119.
Amplify and diminish, in the conclu-
sion, 240; in debate, 327.
Analogy, the argument from, 108.
Analysis, its work in finding the
proposition, 19; as an aid in refu-
tation in debate, 347.
Antecedent probability, the argument
from, 87; tests of the argument
from, 91.
Arguing beside the point, 121.
Arguing in a circle, 126.
Argumentation, definition of, I;
power and universality of, I; the
twofold nature of, 2, 181; the four
necessary steps in, 4; difference
between other kinds of composition
and, II.
Arguments, definition of, 59; from
authority, 79; desirability of know-
ing kinds of, 85; causal connection
in, 86; from antecedent probabil-
ity, 87; from sign, 95; ad homi-
nem, 123; ad ignorantiam, 124; ad
hominem, in debate, 315.
Arrangement, qualities necessary for
effective, 129; unity in, 129; co-
herence in, 133; subordination in,
133; sequence in, 135; emphasis
in, 137.
Assimilation in preliminary reading,
the importance and the method of,
54.
Brief, importance of, 140; relation
of the finished composition to the,
141, 142, 226; method of drawing
a, 143; the introduction of, 153;
example of a good, 169; explana-
tion of question in, 155; the con-
clusion of a, 168; rules for drawing
a, 179; use of, in debate, 342.
Burden of proof, 62.
Coherence, in arrangement, 133;
subordination necessary for, 133;
sequence necessary for, 135.
Composition and division, fallacies
of, 120.
Conclusion, importance of, 131; in
a brief, 169; functions of, 238;
conviction in, 238; summaries in,
238; amplify and diminish in, 240;
persuasion in, 243; the nature of,
in debate, 324.
Conviction, difference between per-
suasion and, 2; in presentation,
182; in introduction, 198.
Debate, difference between other
forms of argumentation and, 273;
preliminary reading for, 275; neces-
sity of studying both sides of the
question in, 275; importance of the
introduction in, 279; duties of an
opening speaker in, 280, 281; his-
tory of Lincoln-Douglas debates,
282; adaptation to circumstances
in, 288; definition of terms in, 293;
use of the issues and partition in,
294; selection of main heads in,
296; personal tone in, 303; sar-
casm, ridicule, in, 304; the argu-
ment ad hominem in, 315; the
stratagem of asking questions in,
319; nature of the conclusion in,
324; duties of closing speaker in,
324; use of summaries in, 325;
amplify and diminish in, 327; the
amount of written preparation de-
sirable in, 331; use of notes in, 332,
342; memorizing in, 334; extem-
pore method in, 337; refutation in,
343; value of practice in, 349.
Declarations against interest, or ad-
missions, 69.
Definition, in finding the proposition,
22; illustration of method of defin-
ing a term in a proposition, 22; in
introduction, 199; by authority,
200; by the etymological derivation
of the term, 202; from context, 203;
by analogy, 204; by illustration,
205; by exclusion, 207; by analy-
sis, 208; importance of, in debate,
293.
Dilemma, as method of refutation,
260.
Discussion, the need of variety in
presentation of, 227; digressions
in, 228; importance of unity in,
231; summaries, partitions, and
transitions in, 232; persuasion in,
237; peculiarities of, in debate, 296.
Emphasis, arrangement of materials
for, 134, 137; in the discussion, 228;
by repetition, 229; of main points
in debate, 299.
Evidence, difference between proof,
arguments, and, 59; definition of,
59; kinds of, 60; tests of the qual-
ity of, 62; hearsay, 66; especially
valuable kinds of, 69; undesigned,
70; tests of the sources of, 72; ex-
pert, 78; summary of the kinds
and the tests of, 81.
Example, the two classes of the argu-
ment from, 105; tests of the argu-
ment from, III.
Extemporaneous speaking, differ-
ence between impromptu and,
337; value of, in debate, 337; dan-
gers of, 339.
Fallacies, classification of" material,"
114; false cause, 114; ambiguous
terms, 119; composition and divi-
sion, 120; ignoring the question or
arguing beside the point, 121.
False cause, 114.
Generalization, the argument by,
105.
History of the question, value of, in
finding the issues, 39; value of, in
finding the proposition, 119.
Ignoring the question, 121.
Introduction, importance of, 130; in
a brief, 153, 163; work of conviction
in, 198; definition in, 199; explana-
tion of question, the issues, the par-
tition in, 209; work of persuasion
in, 216; if speaker is unknown to
audience, 220; if audience is hos-
tile, 221; if audience is inattentive,
224; in debate, 279.
Issues, definition of, 28; necessity
of knowing, 28, 31; difference be-
tween primary and subordinate,
30, 38; method of finding, 32; sum-
mary of method of finding, 43;
mistake of confusing partition with,
43; in introduction, 210; use of,
in debate, 294.
Logic, difference between formal
logic and argumentation, 84.
Partition, purpose and requisites of,
210; illustrations of, 212, 213; use
of, in the discussion, 235; use of,
in debate, 294, 302.
Personalities in debate, 303.
Persuasion, definition of, 183; what
emotions to appeal to in, 186;
adaptation to audience in, 186;
how to appeal to the emotions in,
193; knowledge of human nature
in, 193; personality in, 193; sin-
cerity in, 193; modesty in, 195;
relation of leadership between
speaker and audience necessary
in, 196; in the introduction, 216,
|