Practical Argumentation, George K. Pattee [reading the story of the txt] 📗

forms of persuasion that may enter into the finished argument are omitted, but the real proof is complete in the brief.

There are two possible systems of arranging proof. For the sake of convenience they may be called the “because” method and the “therefore” method. These methods derive their names from the connectives that are used. When the “because” method is used, the proof follows the statement being established, and is connected to this statement with some such word as: as, because, for, or since. To illustrate:—

I. Expenses at a country college are less than at a city college, because

A. At the country college room rent is cheaper.

B. Table board costs less.

C. Amusement places are less numerous.

Under the “therefore” method, the proof precedes the statement being established; the connectives are hence and therefore. The previous argument arranged in this form would read as follows:—

A. Since room rent is cheaper at the country college than at the city college, and

B. Since table board costs less, and

C. Since amusement places are less numerous, therefore.

I. Expenses at a country college are less than at a city college.

The student should always use the “because” method of arrangement. It is preferable to the “therefore” method since it affords a much easier apprehension of the argument advanced. If the reader of the brief has the conclusion in his mind at the very start, he can test the strength and adequacy of the proof very quickly, and can, perhaps, the first time he reads the argument form an opinion as to its worth. But he will almost always have difficulty in grasping the significance of evidence and reasoning before he knows what the proof is expected to prove. The “therefore” method usually obliges a careful reasoner, after finally reaching the conclusion, to go over the whole proof a second time.

To assist the student in carrying out the proper arrangement of his proof, two rules have been formulated. One rule deals with main headings, the headings marked with the Roman numerals; the other deals with subordinate headings.

Rule IX. Phrase each principal statement in the discussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth or the falsity of the proposition.

Rule X. Phrase each subordinate statement in the discussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth of the statement to which it is subordinate. The connectives to be used are: as, because, for, and since.

In connection with the first of these rules, notice that principal headings read as reasons for the truth or the falsity of the proposition. Obviously they read as reasons for the truth if the brief is on the affirmative side, and for the falsity if the brief is on the negative side. Headings and subheadings should always be supported, not demolished.

The error of making unsupported statements in a complete argument has already been discussed. Assertion in a brief is equally faulty. To insure belief, all statements must rest ultimately either upon the testimony of witnesses or upon statements admitted to be true.

Notice how unconvincing is the following portion of a brief:—

Proposition—American cities should own and operate all street-car lines within their limits.

I. The present system of operating street-car lines is efficient, for

A. The street-car service in the United States is the best in the world.

B. Street-car fare in the United States is remarkably low.

The insertion of testimony, however, to substantiate A and B turns this bit of brief into excellent proof.

I. The present system of operating street-car lines is efficient, for

A. The street-car service in the United States is the best in the world, because

1. It is best in respect to extent, since

a. James W. Garner says that England has less than a quarter of the street-car facilities found in the United States. (Dial, Feb. 1908, p. 20.)

b. In 1902, two hundred and ninety-five communities in the United Kingdom of from 8,000 to 25,000 inhabitants were without street cars; while in the United States there were only twenty-one such communities. (Municipal and Private Operation of Public Utilities, W. J. Clark, Vol. I, p. 445.)

2. It is best in regard to equipment and accommodation, since

a. The cars are the best equipped in the world. (Ibid.)

b. The cars are run with shorter intervals between them than anywhere else in the world. (Ibid.)

B. The fare in the United States is remarkably low, because

1. Although the fare in Glasgow, a leading exponent of municipal ownership, is but twopence, yet it will carry one only eight miles; but five cents in New York will carry one fifty miles.

Rule XI. Make no unsupported statements unless they are generally admitted to be true.

It has already been shown that the arguer must reveal to his audience the sources from which he gathered his evidence. If he gained certain information from magazines, he should state definitely the name, the volume, and the page; if he gained his information elsewhere, he should be equally explicit. Since this knowledge of the source of the evidence is essential to the success of the proof, a statement of the sources is a part of the work of conviction. Accordingly, these sources must be stated in the brief as well as in the expanded argument. Thus the rule:—

Rule XII. After all evidence state in parentheses the source from which it came.

In addition to establishing the side of the proposition which it advocates, a good brief almost invariably refutes the main arguments of the opposite side. The way in which this refutation is expressed is very important. A brief on the affirmative side of the proposition, “Resolved, That the Panama canal should be built at sea-level,” would be weak and ludicrous, if, when answering the argument for the negative that the cost of a sea-level canal would be enormous, it should contain the following reasoning:—

The Panama Canal should be built at sea-level, (for) I. The cost would not be much greater than for a lock canal.

One might think from this statement that the drawer of the brief considered the contention that the sea-level type would cost a little though not much more than the other type, a positive argument in favor of the sea-level canal. In reality it is nothing of the sort. The arguer is merely trying to destroy his opponent’s argument to the effect that expense is an obstacle in the way of the sea-level type. This refutation should be expressed in such a manner as to show that it is refutation and not positive proof. It might well read something like this:—

The Panama Canal should be built at sea-level, (for) I. The contention of the negative that a sea-level canal would cost enormously more than a lock-canal is unsound, since,

A. Etc.

Notice that this form of refutation states clearly the argument to be answered. No doubt can arise from such a statement as to the direction the argument is taking; no confusion can occur between refutation and positive proof. Hence the rule:—

Rule XIII. Phrase refutation so that the argument to be answered is clearly stated.

 

THE CONCLUSION.

As there is but one rule for brief-drawing that applies to the conclusion, it may well be given at this point. The purpose and the value of this rule are so apparent that no explanation is necessary.

Rule XIV. Put into the conclusion a summary of the essential points established in the discussion.

 

RULES FOR BRIEF-DRAWING.

GENERAL RULES.

I. Divide the brief into three parts, and mark them respectively, Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusion.

II. Express each idea in the brief in the form of a complete statement.

III. Make in each statement only a single assertion.

IV. Make each statement as concise as is consistent with clearness.

V. Indicate the relation between statements by indentation and by the use of symbols.

VI. Mark each statement with only one symbol.

 

RULES FOR THE INTRODUCTION.

VII. Put into the introduction sufficient explanation for a complete understanding of the discussion. This explanation usually involves (a) a definition of terms, (b) an explanation of the meaning of the proposition, (c) a statement of the issues, and (d) the partition.

VIII. Put into the introduction only statements admitted by both sides.

 

RULES FOR THE DISCUSSION.

IX. Phrase each principal statement in the discussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth or the falsity of the proposition.

X. Phrase each subordinate statement in the discussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth of the statement to which it is subordinate. The connectives to be used are: as, because, for, and since.

XI. Make no unsupported statements unless they are generally admitted to be true.

XII. After all evidence state in parentheses the source from which it came.

XIII. Phrase refutation so that the argument to be answered is clearly stated.

 

RULE FOR THE CONCLUSION.

XIV. Put into the conclusion a summary of the essential points established in the discussion.

 

MODEL BRIEF.

Resolved, That immigration to the United States should be further restricted by an educational test.

 

AFFIRMATIVE BRIEF.

INTRODUCTION.

I. The question of further restricting immigration to the United States by an educational test gains in importance from the alleged impairment of American institutions and standards by immigration.

II. The following explanations will aid in the discussion of the question:—

A. Immigration to the United States means the migrating of people into the United States for the purpose of permanent residence. (Century Dictionary.)

B. The restrictive measures now in force are as follows:—

1. Idiots, insane persons, paupers, convicts, diseased persons, anarchists, polygamists, women for immoral purposes, assisted aliens, contract laborers, and the Chinese are excluded. (Statutes of the United States.)

2. A head tax of four dollars is imposed. (Ibid.)

C. The proposed restrictive measure is as follows:—

1. Every immigrant to the United States between the ages of fifteen and fifty must be able to read and write a few sentences of some language. (Congressional Record, Vol. XXVIII, page 5421.).

III. The points to be determined seem to be:—

A. Is there a need for further restriction of immigration?

B. If there is such a need, would the educational test accomplish this further restriction in a proper manner?

DISCUSSION.

I. There is great need for further restriction of immigration, because

A. The character of the immigrants since 1880 has greatly changed for the worse, for

1. Before 1880 most of the immigrants were earnest, energetic people from northern and western Europe. (International Encyclopaedia, under Immigration.)

2. At the present time seventy and one-half per cent. of the total number of immigrants are from the unenergetic people of southern and eastern Europe. (Ibid.)

3. More immigrants have become paupers than was formerly the case, for

a. Prior to 1880 there were comparatively few paupers among the immigrants. (Ibid.)

b. At present the percentage of pauperism among the foreigners here is four times as great as among the natives. (Ibid.)

4. While the Germans, English, and other immigrants from northern Europe who came here before 1880 were moral and upright, the present immigrants from southern Europe have a low code of morals, for

a. The moral degeneracy of the races of southern Europe is well known. (Henry Rood, Forum, Vol. XIV, page 116.)

5. Crime among foreigners in this country has increased immensely, for

a. In 1905 twenty-eight per cent, of our criminals were of foreign birth. (Report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration for 1905.)

6. Illiteracy among immigrants has greatly increased, for

a. In 1905 the percentage of illiterates of foreign birth was twenty-six. (Ibid.)

b. Many of the present immigrants are illiterates