MAKING THE OUTLINE OR BRIEF
Orderly Arrangement. A speech should have an orderly arrangement. The
effect upon an audience will be more easily made, more deeply
impressed, more clearly retained, if the successive steps of the
development are so well marked, so plainly related, that they may be
carried away in a hearer's understanding. It might be said that one
test of a good speech is the vividness with which its framework is
discernible. Hearers can repeat outlines of certain speeches. Those
are the best. Of others they can give merely confused reports. These
are the badly constructed ones.
The way to secure in the delivered speech this delight of orderly
arrangement is by making an outline or brief. Most pupils hate to make
outlines. The reason for this repugnance is easily understood. A
teacher directs a pupil to make an outline before he writes a
composition or delivers a speech. The pupil spends hours on the list
of entries, then submits his finished theme or address. He feels that
the outline is disregarded entirely. Sometimes he is not even required
to hand it to the instructor. He considers the time he has spent upon
the outline as wasted. It is almost impossible to make him feel that
his finished product is all the better because of this effort spent
upon the preliminary skeleton, so that in reality his outline is not
disregarded at all, but is judged and marked as embodied in the
finished article. Most students carry this mistaken feeling about
outlines to such an extent that when required to hand in both an
outline and a finished composition they will write in haphazard
fashion the composition first, and then from it try to prepare the
outline, instead of doing as they are told, and making the outline
first. It is easier--though not as educating or productive of good
results--to string words together than it is to do what outline-making
demands--to think.
Professional Writers' Use of Outlines. Professional writers realize
the helpfulness of outline-making and the time it saves. Many a
magazine article has been sold before a word of the finished
manuscript was written. The contributor submitted an outline from
which the editor contracted for the finished production. Many a play
has been placed in the same form. Books are built up in the same
manner. The ubiquitous moving-picture scenario is seldom produced in
any other manner.
Macaulay advised a young friend who asked how to keep his brain active
to read a couple of solid books, making careful outlines of their
material at the same time. One of these should be--if possible--a work
in a foreign tongue, so that the strangeness of the language would
necessitate slow, careful reading and close thinking. All good
students know that the best way to prepare for an examination is to
make outlines of all the required reading and study.
It is just because the making of the outline demands such careful
thinking that it is one of the most important steps in the production
of a speech.
The Outline in the Finished Speech. If the outline really shows in the
finished speech, let us see if we can pick the entries out from a
portion of one. Edmund Burke in 1775 tried to prevent Great Britain
from using coercive measures against the restive American colonies.
Many Englishmen were already clamoring for war when Burke spoke in
Parliament upon conciliating the Colonies.
I am sensible, Sir, that all which I have asserted in my
detail, is admitted in the gross; but that quite a different
conclusion is drawn from it. America, gentlemen say, is a
noble object. It is an object well worth fighting for.
Certainly it is, if fighting a people be the best way of
gaining them. Gentlemen in this respect will be led to their
choice of means by their complexions and their habits. Those
who understand the military art, will of course have some
predilection for it. Those who wield the thunder of the
state, may have more confidence in the efficacy of arms. But
I confess, possibly for want of this knowledge, my opinion is
much more in favor of prudent management, than of force;
considering force not as an odious, but a feeble instrument,
for preserving a people so numerous, so active, so growing,
so spirited as this, in a profitable and subordinate
connexion with us.
First, Sir, permit me to observe, that the use of force alone
is but _temporary_. It may subdue for a moment; but it does
not remove the necessity of subduing again; and a nation is
not governed which is perpetually to be conquered.
My next objection is its _uncertainty_. Terror is not always
the effect of force; and an armament is not a victory. If you
do not succeed, you are without resource; for, conciliation
failing, force remains; but, force failing, no further hope
of reconciliation is left. Power and authority are sometimes
bought by kindness; but they can never be begged as alms by
an impoverished and defeated violence.
A further objection to force is, that you _impair the object_
by your very endeavors to preserve it. The thing you fought
for is not the thing which you recover; but depreciated,
sunk, wasted, and consumed in the contest. Nothing less will
content me, than _whole America_. I do not choose to consume
its strength along with our own; because in all parts it is
the British strength that I consume. I do not choose to be
caught by a foreign enemy at the end of this exhausting
conflict, and still less in the midst of it. I may escape;
but I can make no assurance against such an event. Let me
add, that I do not choose wholly to break the American
spirit; because it is the spirit that has made the country.
Lastly, we have no sort of _experience_ in favor of force as
an instrument in the rule of our colonies. Their growth and
their utility has been owing to methods altogether different.
Our ancient indulgence has been said to be pursued to a
fault. It may be so. But we know if feeling is evidence that
our fault was more tolerable than our attempt to mend it; and
our sin far more salutary than our penitence.
These, Sir, are my reasons for not entertaining that high
opinion of untried force, by which many gentlemen, for whose
sentiments in other particulars I have great respect, seem to
be so greatly captivated. But there is still behind a third
consideration concerning this object, which serves to
determine my opinion on the sort of policy which ought to be
pursued in the management of America, even more than its
population and its commerce, I mean its _temper and
character_.
EDMUND BURKE: _Conciliation with America_, 1775
Reconstructing the Outline. In the preliminary arrangement Burke knew
that he was going to give his reasons against the use of military
force. In his first plan he may not have decided just where he was
going to place his four arguments. So they very likely appeared as
four topic entries:
Against use of force.
1. temporary
2. uncertain
3. damages America
4. no experience
Notice that these are jottings to suggest the germs of the arguments.
When Burke revised this section he may have changed the expression to
indicate more certainty.
Force should not be used against the colonies, because:
1. it is only temporary
2. it is uncertain in its results
3. it would damage the wealth of the colonies
4. it is based on no experience of Great Britain with
colonies
Of course, a practised statesman would not have to analyze farther,
perhaps not so far, but to illustrate for a student how he might build
up his outline, let us analyze one degree farther. Just what is meant
by such terms as _temporary, uncertain?_ Under each statement, then,
might be added a detailed explanation. The finished part of the
outline would then appear somewhat like this.
Force should not be used against the colonies, because:
1. it is only temporary, for
_a._ though it subdue for a time, it would have to
be used again.
2. it is uncertain in its results, for
_a._ Great Britain might not subdue the colonies.
3. it would damage the wealth of the colonies, for
_a._ we would fight to retain a wealthy land, yet
after the war we should have a ruined one.
4. it is based on no experience of Great Britain with
colonies, for
_a._ Great Britain has always been indulgent
rather than severely strict.
Speaking or writing from such a detailed outline as this, consider how
much thinking has already been done. With these entries under his eye
the speaker need think only of the phrasing of his remarks. He would
feel perfectly certain that he would not wander from his theme. Notice
how the ideas can be emphasized. The suggestion of damage can be
expressed in _impair the object_, and in _depreciated, sunk, wasted,
consumed_.
So far this outline--though it covers all its own material--does not
indicate the place at which it shall be used in the speech. It could
be used near the conclusion where Burke planned to answer all the
supporters of plans other than his own. That would be a good place for
it. But Burke found a better one. He separated this from his other
remarks against his opponents, and brought it in much earlier, thereby
linking it with what it most concerned, emphasizing it, and disposing
of it entirely so far as his speech was concerned. He had just
enumerated the wealth of the colonies as represented by their
commerce. He knew that the war party would argue, "If America is so
wealthy, it is worth fighting for." That was the place, then, to
refute them. To introduce his material he had to make clear the
transition from the colonial wealth to his arguments. Notice how
plainly the first paragraph quoted here does this. Having given his
four reasons against the use of force, notice that he must bring his
audience back to the theme he has been discussing. The last paragraph
does this in a masterly manner. He has cited two facts about the
colonies. To make understanding doubly certain he repeats
them--population and commerce--and passes to the next, plainly
numbering it as the third.
This recital of the process is not an account of what actually took
place in Burke's preparation, but it will give to the student the
method by which great speakers _may_ have proceeded; we do know that
many did follow such a scheme. No amateur who wants to make his
speeches worth listening to should omit this helpful step of outline
or brief making. Whether he first writes out his speeches in full, or
composes them upon his feet, every speaker should prepare an outline
or brief of his material. This is a series of entries, so condensed
and arranged as to show the relative significance of all the parts of
the speech in the proper order of development.
Outline, Brief, Legal Brief. An outline contains entries which are
merely topics, not completed statements or sentences.
A brief contains completed statements (sentences).
A legal brief is a formally prepared document (often printed)
submitted to a certain court before a case is tried, showing the
material the lawyer intends to produce, citing all his authorities,
suggesting interpretations of laws and legal decisions to support his
contentions, and giving all his conclusions. It is prepared for the
use of the court, to reduce the labor in examining records, etc.
Practice in the drawing up of such briefs is an important phase of
legal study.
The Outline. An outline may recall to a person's mind what he already
has learned, but it is seldom definite and informative enough to be as
helpful as a brief. A good distinction of the two--besides the one
respecting the forms already given--is that the outline represents the
point of view of the speaker while the brief represents that of the
hearer. Consider again the analyses of Burke in this chapter. Notice
that the first list does not give nearly so clear an idea of what
Burke actually said as the third. A person seeing only the first might
_guess_ at what the speaker intended to declare. A person who looked
at the third could not fail to _know exactly_ the opinions of the
speaker and the arguments supporting them.
Pupils frequently make this kind of entry:
Introduction--Time
Place
Characters
The main objections to such an outline are that it tells nothing
definite, and that it might fit a thousand compositions. Even an
outline should say more than such a list does.
In one edition of Burke's speech the page from which the following is
quoted is headed "Brief." Is it a brief?
Part II. How to deal with America.
A. Introduction.
B. First alternative and objections.
C. Second alternative and objections.
D. Third alternative.
E. Introduction.
F. Considerations.
1. Question one of policy, not of abstract right.
2. Trade laws.
3. Constitutional precedents.
4. Application of these.
The Brief. One of the shortest briefs on record was prepared by
Abraham Lincoln for use in a suit to recover $200 for the widow of a
Revolutionary veteran from an agent who had retained it out of $400
pension money belonging to her. It formed the basis of his speech in
court.
No contract.--Not professional services.--Unreasonable
charge.--Money retained by Def't not given to
Pl'ff.--Revolutionary War.--Describe Valley Forge
privations.--Pl'ff's husband.--Soldier leaving for
army.--_Skin Def't_.--Close.
The following will give some idea of the form and definiteness of
briefs for debate.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
_Resolved:_ That capital punishment should be abolished.[1]
_Brief for the Affirmative_
I. Capital punishment is inexpedient.
(_a_) It is contrary to the tendency of civilization.
(_b_) It fails to protect society.
(1) It does not prevent murder.
(2) New crimes follow hard on executions.
(_c_) It makes punishment uncertain.
(1) Many criminals are acquitted who would
be convicted if the penalty were imprisonment.
(_d_) It is not reformatory.
II. Capital punishment is immoral.
(_a_) It rests on the old idea of retribution.
(_b_) It tends to weaken the sacredness of human life.
(_c_) It endangers the lives of innocent people.
(_d_) Executions and the sensational newspaper
accounts which follow have a corrupting influence.
III. Capital punishment is unjust.
(_a_) Its mistakes are irremediable.
(_b_) Many men are criminals from force of
circumstances.
(1) From heredity.
(2) From environment.
(_c_) Inequalities in administration are marked.
(1) In some states men are hung, in others
imprisoned for the same crime.
[Footnote 1: Taken from Brookings and Ringwalt: _Briefs for Debate_,
Longmans, Green and Co., where specific references of material for
many of the topics are given, as well as general references for the
entire subject.]
(2) Many jurors have conscientious scruples
against condemning a man to death.
(3) Men of wealth and influence are rarely
convicted.
IV. The abolition of capital punishment has been followed
by satisfactory results,
(_a_) In Europe.
(1) Russia.
(2) Switzerland.
(3) Portugal.
(4) Belgium.
(5) Holland.
(6) Finland.
(_b_) In the United States.
(1) Michigan.
(2) Rhode Island.
(3) Maine.
(4) Wisconsin.
_Brief for the Negative_
I. Capital punishment is permissible.
(_a_) It has the sanction of the Bible.
(1) Genesis ix, 2-6.
(_b_) It has the sanction of history.
(1) It has been in vogue since the beginning
of the world.
(_c_) It has the sanction of reason.
(1) The most fitting punishment is one equal
and similar to the injury inflicted.
II. Capital punishment is expedient.
(_a_) It is necessary to protect society from anarchy
and private revenge.
(1) Death is the strongest preventative of
crime.
(_b_) No sufficient substitute has been offered.
(1) Life imprisonment is a failure.
(2) Few serve the sentence.
(_c_) Its abolition has not been successful.
(1) In Rhode Island.
(2) In Michigan.
III. The objections made to capital punishment are not
sound.
(_a_) Prisons are not reformatory.
(_b_) The fact that crimes have decreased in some
places where executions have stopped is
not a valid argument.
(1) All causes which increase the moral well-being
of the race decrease crime.
(_c_) The objection that the innocent suffer is not
strong.
(1) The number of innocent thus suffering is
inconsiderable when compared with the
great number of murders prevented.
(_d_) The objection that the penalty is uncertain may
be overcome by making it certain.
A few paragraphs back it was said that an outline or brief shows the
relative significance of all the parts of a speech. This is done by a
systematic use of margins and symbols. From the quoted forms in this
chapter certain rules can easily be deduced.
Margins. The speech will naturally divide into a few main parts. These
can be designated by spaces and general titles such as introduction,
body, development, main argument, answer to opposing views,
conclusion. Other captions will be suggested by various kinds of
material. Main topics next in importance are placed the farthest to
the left, making the first margin. A reader can run his eye down this
line and pick out all the main topics of equal importance. Entries
just subordinate to these are put each on a separate line, starting
slightly to the right. This separation according to connection and
value is continued as long as the maker has any minor parts to
represent in the brief. It should not be carried too far, however, for
the purpose of the entries is to mark clearness and accuracy. If the
helping system becomes too elaborate and complicated it destroys its
own usefulness.
It is perfectly plain that such an outline might be made and be quite
clear, without the addition of any symbols at all, especially if it
was short.
Discrimination in the use of words is secured by
The study of synonyms
antonyms
homonyms
and care in employing them.
Symbols. Some scheme of marking the entries is a great help. There is
no fixed system. Every student may choose from among the many used. If
there are many main topics it might be a mistake to use Roman numerals
(I, XVIII) as few people can read them quickly enough to follow their
sequence. Capital letters may serve better to mark the sequences, but
they do not indicate the numerical position. For instance, most of us
do not know our alphabets well enough to translate a main topic marked
N into the fourteenth point. By combinations of Roman numerals,
capitals, usual (Arabic) numerals, small letters, parentheses, enough
variety to serve any student purpose can easily be arranged.
The following are samples of systems used.
_Specimen_ 1
Introduction
Argument
I--------------------------------------------------
A------------------------------------------------
1----------------------------------------------
_a_--------------------------------------------
_b_--------------------------------------------
_c_--------------------------------------------
(1)----------------------------------------
(2)----------------------------------------
(3)----------------------------------------
2----------------------------------------------
B------------------------------------------------
1----------------------------------------------
2----------------------------------------------
II-------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
_Specimen_ 2
A--------------------------------------------------
I------------------------------------------------
_a_----------------------------------------------
1--------------------------------------------
2--------------------------------------------
_b_----------------------------------------------
II-----------------------------------------------
_a_----------------------------------------------
_b_----------------------------------------------
_c_----------------------------------------------
1--------------------------------------------
2--------------------------------------------
3--------------------------------------------
_Specimen_ 3
1--------------------------------------------------
1^1----------------------------------------------
2^1----------------------------------------------
_a_^1--------------------------------------------
_b_^1--------------------------------------------
_c_^1--------------------------------------------
2--------------------------------------------------
1^2----------------------------------------------
2^2----------------------------------------------
_a_^2--------------------------------------------
_b_^2--------------------------------------------
_c_^2--------------------------------------------
3--------------------------------------------------
1^3----------------------------------------------
2^3----------------------------------------------
Tabulations. With unusual kinds of material and for special purposes
there may be value in evolving other forms of outlines. A technically
trained person accustomed to reading tabulated reports with hosts of
figures to interpret might find a statistical statement at times
better suited to his needs. Such tabulations are not any easier to
prepare than the regular brief. In fact to most people they are
infinitely more difficult to get into form and almost beyond speedy
comprehension afterwards. The following is a good illustration of a
simple one well adapted to the speaker's purpose--a report of the
objections to the first published covenant of the League of Nations.
He knew the material of his introduction and conclusion so well that
he did not represent them in his carefully arranged sheet. The form
was submitted as regular work in a public speaking class and was
spoken from during more than forty minutes.
CRITICISMS OF PROPOSED COVENANT OF LEAGUE OF NATIONS
1.--Draft indefinite and loosely written. Lg Lo Sp Tt Br Hu
2.--Should have clause-limiting powers
to those specifically granted. Lo
3.--Proportion of votes required for
action of Council not generally
stated--should be unanimous. Lg Sp Tt Hu
4.--Should have clause reserving the
Monroe Doctrine. Lg Lo Sp Tt Br Hu
5.--Should state that no nation can be
required to become a mandatory
without its consent. Lg Lo Br Hu
6.--Should have provision for
withdrawals. Lg Lo Sp Tt Hu
7.--Jurisdiction of League over internal
affairs (immigration, tariffs,
coastwise trade) should be
expressly excluded. Lg Br Hu
8.--Terms of admission of other nations
too strict. Br
9.--Basis of representation not fair. Br
10.--Provision should be made for
expansion of nations by peaceable
means. Br
11.--Each nation should have right to
decide whether it will follow
advice of Council as to use of
force. Br
12.--Each nation should have right to
determine whether it will boycott
delinquent nations. Br
Note:--items 11 and 12 are apparently
directed against Art.
XVI containing the Ipso Facto
clause and Art. X.
13.--Should not guarantee the integrity
and independence of all members
of the league. Lg Hu
Above criticisms taken from published statements of
Messrs. Lodge
Lowell
Spencer
Taft
Bryan
Hughes
(denoted respectively Lg, Lo, Sp, Tt, Br and Hu).
Authorities in the Brief. Authorities for the statements made in the
brief may be put into parentheses, if they are to be included. Such
further devices will suggest themselves to students. In addition to
such markings as here listed, some men who use many outlines emphasize
upon them details which they may have to find quickly by underlining
the symbol or first word with colored pencil. Such a device is
especially valuable to a technical expert whose system could be
uniform through the outlines of all his reports, etc. Or a lecturer
with so much time to fill may mark upon the outline 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, to
indicate to himself that his material is being covered at a proper
rate to correspond with the time. He might put in _15 min._ or _30
min._ or _45 min._ if he was to speak for an hour. The first division
is the better, for he might be required to condense a twenty-minute
speech to ten.
Selections for Briefing. Before the student makes many briefs of his
own he should work in the other direction by outlining material
already in existence so that he can be assured he knows main topics
from minor ones, important issues from subordinate reasons, headings
from examples. If all the members of the class outline the same
material the resulting discussion will provide additional exercise in
speaking in explanation or support of an interpretation. After the
teacher and class together have made one, the students should work
independently.
EXERCISES
Besides the extracts quoted here others should be supplied. Editorials
from a single issue of a newspaper can easily be secured by the entire
class for this work. A chapter from a book may be assigned.
1. INCIDENTS OF GOVERNMENT TRADING
An expert before the President's street railway commission of
inquiry testified that he disapproved of public ownership and
operation theoretically, but approved it practically, because
it was the quickest and surest way of making people sick of
it. Otherwise he thought that education of the public out of
its favor for high costs and low profits by public utilities
would require a generation, and the present emergency calls
for prompt relief.
New York City has just resolved to build with its own funds a
Coney Island bathhouse, and has on file an offer to build it
with private money at a cost of $300,000, with a guarantee of
15-cent baths. Accepting no responsibility for the merits of
the private bidder's proposal, it does not appear likely that
the city can supply cheaper baths or give more satisfaction
to bathers than a management whose profits were related to
its efforts to please patrons. On the other hand, it is sure
that the city's financial embarrassment is due to supplying
many privileges at the cost of the taxpayers, which might
have been supplied both more cheaply and better by private
enterprise with profit than by the city without profit, and
with the use of ill-spared public funds.
New York does not stand alone in these misadventures, which
are warnings against trading by either local or national
government. Take, for example, the manner in which the army
is disposing of its surplus blankets, as reported from
Boston. A Chicago firm which wished to bid was permitted to
inspect three samples of varying grades, but a guarantee that
the goods sold would correspond to the samples was refused.
The bales could neither be opened nor allowed to be opened,
nor would information be given whether the blankets in the
bales were cotton, wool, or mixed, whether single or double,
whether bed blankets or regulation army blankets. The
likelihood that the Government will get the worth of its
blankets is small. There may be unknown reasons for such
uncommercial procedure, but what shall be said of the fact
that at the same time that these blankets are being sold the
Interior Department is asking for bids to supply 10,000
blankets for the Indians? The reason for buying more when
there is an embarrassing over-supply is that the
specifications call for the words "Interior Department" to be
woven into the blankets. To an outsider it would seem that
the words might be indelibly stamped on the old blankets of
similar description, and that the departure from custom would
be better than the loss on the old blankets and the increased
expenditure for the new blankets.
The reason for mentioning such incidents is that there are so
many more of which the public never hears. Their combined
educative effect would be great, but it is wasted without
publicity. Since the public is not unanimous against public
ownership and operation, there must be a considerable number
of persons who are proof against anything but a catastrophe
greater than the prostration of the railway and utility
industries. That is an expansive way of education, but
perhaps Dr. Cooley, Dean of the University of Michigan, is
right in his view that the method is necessary to prevent a
greater calamity by persistence in the error.
_New York Times_, July 21, 1919
2. Fourscore and seven years ago our Fathers brought forth on
this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and
dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that
nation or any nation so conceived or so dedicated, can long
endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We
have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final
resting place for those who here gave their lives that that
nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that
we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate--we cannot
consecrate--we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men,
living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far
above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little
note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never
forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather,
to be here dedicated to the unfinished work which they who
fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for
us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before
us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion
to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of
devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall
not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall
have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the
people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from
the earth.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: _Gettysburg Address_, 1865
3. Every thoughtful and unprejudiced mind must see that such an
evil as slavery will yield only to the most radical
treatment. If you consider the work we have to do, you will
not think us needlessly aggressive, or that we dig down
unnecessarily deep in laying the foundations of our
enterprise. A money power of two thousand millions of
dollars, as the prices of slaves now range, held by a small
body of able and desperate men; that body raised into a
political aristocracy by special constitutional provisions;
cotton, the product of slave labor, forming the basis of our
whole foreign commerce, and the commercial class thus
subsidized; the press bought up, the pulpit reduced to
vassalage, the heart of the common people chilled by a bitter
prejudice against the black race; our leading men bribed, by
ambition, either to silence or open hostility;--in such a
land, on what shall an Abolitionist rely? On a few cold
prayers, mere lip-service, and never from the heart? On a
church resolution, hidden often in its records, and meant
only as a decent cover for servility in daily practice? On
political parties, with their superficial influence at best,
and seeking ordinarily only to use existing prejudices to the
best advantage? Slavery has deeper root here than any
aristocratic institution has in Europe; and politics is but
the common pulse-beat, of which revolution is the
fever-spasm. Yet we have seen European aristocracy survive
storms which seemed to reach down to the primal strata of
European life. Shall we, then, trust to mere politics, where
even revolution has failed? How shall the stream rise above
its fountain? Where shall our church organizations or parties
get strength to attack their great parent and moulder, the
slave power? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed
it, Why hast thou made me thus? The old jest of one who
tried to lift himself in his own basket, is but a tame
picture of the man who imagines that, by working solely
through existing sects and parties, he can destroy slavery.
Mechanics say nothing, but an earthquake strong enough to
move all Egypt can bring down the pyramids.
Experience has confirmed these views. The Abolitionists who
have acted on them have a "short method" with all
unbelievers. They have but to point to their own success, in
contrast with every other man's failure. To waken the nation
to its real state, and chain it to the consideration of this
one duty, is half the work. So much have we done. Slavery has
been made the question of this generation. To startle the
South to madness, so that every step she takes, in her
blindness, is one step more toward ruin, is much. This we
have done. Witness Texas and the Fugitive Slave Law.
WENDELL PHILLIPS: _The Abolition Movement_, 1853
4. Until just a few years ago flying was popularly regarded as a
dangerous hobby and comparatively few had faith in its
practical purposes. But the phenomenal evolutions of the
aircraft industry during the war brought progress which would
otherwise have required a span of years. With the cessation
of hostilities considerable attention has been diverted to
the commercial uses of aircraft, which may conveniently be
classified as mail-and passenger-service.
Men who first ventured the prediction that postal and express
matter would one day be carried through the air were branded
as dreamers. Parts of that dream became a reality during
1918, and a more extensive aerial-mail program will be
adopted this year. The dispatch with which important
communications and parcels are delivered between large cities
has firmly established its need.
Large passenger-carrying aircraft are now receiving
pronounced attention. Lately developed by the Navy is a
flying-boat having a wing area of 2,400 square feet, equipped
with three Liberty motors and weighing 22,000 pounds with a
full load. It is the largest seaplane in the world, and on a
recent test-trip from Virginia to New York carried fifty-one
passengers. At the present moment the public is awaiting the
thrilling details of the first flight between Europe and
America, which has just occurred as a result of the keen
international rivalry involved between the various entrants.
The British are now constructing a super-triplane fitted with
six 500 horse-power engines. Originally intended to carry
10,000 pounds of bombs and a crew of eight over a distance of
1,200 miles, the converted machine is claimed to be able to
carry approximately one hundred passengers. It has a wing
span of 141 feet and a fuselage length of 85 feet.
What about the power plants of the future aircraft? Will the
internal-combustion engine continue to reign supreme, or will
increasing power demands of the huge planes to come lead to
the development of suitable steam-engines? Will the use of
petroleum continue to be one of the triumphs of aviation, or
will the time come when substitutes may be successfully
utilized?
For aerial motive-power, the principal requirements are:
great power for weight with a fairly high factor of safety,
compactness, reliability of operation under flying
conditions, and safety from fire. Bulk and weight of
steam-driven equipment apparently impose severe restrictions
upon its practical development for present aircraft purposes,
but who is willing to classify its future use as an
absurdity?
Steam operation in small model airplanes is no innovation.
Langley, in 1891-1895, built four model airplanes, one driven
by carbonic-acid gas and three by steam-engines. One of the
steam-driven models weighed thirty pounds, and on one
occasion flew a distance of about three thousand feet. In
1913 an Englishman constructed a power plant weighing about
two pounds which consisted of a flash boiler and
single-acting engine. This unit employed benzolin, impure
benzine, as fuel, and propelled a model plane weighing five
pounds.
_Power Plant Engineering_, Chicago, June 1, 1919
Making a Brief. The next step after making outlines or briefs of
material already organized is to make your own from material you
gather. Speeches you have already prepared or considered as fit for
presentation will supply you with ideas if you cannot work up new
material in a short time. At first you will be more concerned with the
form than the meaning of the entries, but even from the first you
should consider the facts or opinions for which each topic or
statement stands. Weigh its importance in the general scheme of
details. Consider carefully its suitability for the audience who may
be supposed to hear the finished speech. Discard the inappropriate.
Replace the weak. Improve the indefinite. Be sure your examples and
illustrations are apt.
Be wary about statistics. In listening to an address many people begin
to distrust as soon as figures are mentioned. Statistics will
illustrate and prove assertions, but they must be used judiciously. Do
not use too many statistics. Never be too detailed. In a speech,
$4,000,000 sounds more impressive than $4,232,196.96. Use round
numbers. Never let them stand alone. Show their relationship. Burke
quotes exact amounts to show the growth of the commerce of
Pennsylvania, but he adds that it had increased fifty fold. A hearer
will forget the numbers; he will remember the fact.
Similar reasons will warn you concerning the use of too many dates.
They can be easily avoided by showing lapses of time--by saying,
"fifty years later," or "when he was forty-six years old," or "this
condition was endured only a score of months."
The chapters on introductions, conclusions, and planning material will
have suggested certain orders for your briefs. Glance back at them for
hints before you attempt to make the general scheme. Let two factors
determine your resultant development--the nature of the material
itself and the effect you want to produce.
In argumentative speeches a usual, as well as excellent, order is
this:
1. Origin of the question. The immediate cause for discussion.
2. History of the question.
3. Definition of terms.
4. Main arguments.
5. Conclusion.
Why is the proposition worth discussing at this present time? Why do
you choose it? Why is it timely? What is its importance? Why is a
settlement needed? Any of these would fall under the first heading.
Has the matter engaged attention prior to the present? Has it changed?
Was any settlement ever attempted? What was its result?
Are any of the words and phrases used likely to be misunderstood? Are
any used in special senses? Do all people accept the same meaning?
Good illustrations of this last are the ideas attached to _socialism_,
_anarchist_, _soviet_, _union_.
To illustrate: the question of woman suffrage was brought into public
interest once more by the advance woman has made in all walks of life
and by the needs and lessons of the great war. To make clear how its
importance had increased a speaker might trace its history from its
first inception. As applied to women, what does "suffrage" mean
exactly--the right to vote in all elections, or only in certain ones?
Does it carry with it the right to hold office? Would the voting
qualifications be the same for women as for men? Then would follow the
arguments.
How could this scheme be used for a discussion of the Monroe Doctrine?
For higher education? For education for girls? For child working laws?
For a league of nations? For admitting Asiatic laborers to the United
States? For advocating the study of the sciences? For urging men to
become farmers? For predicting aerial passenger service? For a
scholarship qualification in athletics? For abolishing railroad grade
crossings? For equal wages for men and women?
EXERCISES
Make the completed brief for one or more of the preceding.
Briefs should be made for propositions selected from the following
list.
1. The President of the United States should be elected by the direct
vote of the people.
2. The States should limit the right of suffrage to persons who can
read and write.
3. The President of the United States should be elected for a term of
seven years, and be ineligible to reëlection.
4. A great nation should be made the mandatory over an inferior
people.
5. Students should be allowed school credit for outside reading in
connection with assigned work, or for editing of school papers, or for
participation in dramatic performances.
6. This state should adopt the "short ballot."
7. The present rules of football are unsatisfactory.
8. Coaching from the bench should be forbidden in baseball.
9. Compulsory military drill should be introduced into all educational
institutions.
10. Participation in athletics lowers the scholarship of students.
11. Pupils should receive credit in school for music lessons outside.
12. The United States should abandon the Monroe Doctrine.
13. In jury trials, a three-fourths vote should be enough for the
rendering of a verdict.
14. Strikes are unprofitable.
15. Commercial courses should be offered in all high schools.
16. Employers of children under sixteen should be required to provide
at least eight hours of instruction a week for them.
17. Current events should be studied in all history or civics courses.
18. The practice of Christmas giving should be discontinued.
19. School buildings should be used as social centers.
20. Bring to class an editorial and an outline of it. Put the outline
upon the board, or read it to the class. Then read the editorial.
Speaking from the Brief. Now that the brief is finished so that it
represents exactly the material and development of the final speech,
how shall it be used? To use it as the basis of a written article to
be memorized is one method. Many speakers have employed such a method,
many today do. The drawbacks of such memorizing have already been
hinted at in an early chapter. If you want to grow in mental grasp,
alertness, and power as a result of your speech training avoid this
method. No matter how halting your first attempts may be, do not get
into the seemingly easy, yet retarding habit of committing to memory.
Memorizing has a decided value, but for speech-making the memory
should be trained for larger matters than verbal reproduction. It
should be used for the retention of facts while the other brain
faculties are engaged in manipulating them for the best effect and
finding words to express them forcefully. Memory is a helpful faculty.
It should be cultivated in connection with the powers of understanding
and expression, but it is not economical to commit a speech verbatim
for delivery. The remarks will lack flexibility, spontaneity, and
often direct appeal. There is a detached, mechanical air about a
memorized speech which helps to ruin it.
With the outline before you, go over it carefully and slowly, mentally
putting into words and sentences the entries you have inserted. You
may even speak it half aloud to yourself, if that fixes the treatment
more firmly in your mind. Then place the brief where you can reach it
with your eye, and speak upon your feet. Some teachers recommend doing
this before a mirror, but this is not always any help, unless you are
conscious of awkward poses or gestures or movements, or facial
contortions. Say the speech over thus, not only once but several
times, improving the phraseology each time, changing where convenient
or necessary, the emphasis, the amount of time, for each portion.
Self-criticism. Try to criticize yourself. This is not easy at first,
but if you are consistent and persistent in your efforts you will be
able to judge yourself in many respects. If you can induce some friend
whose opinion is worth receiving either to listen to your delivery or
to talk the whole thing over with you, you will gain much. In
conference with the teacher before your delivery of the speech such
help will be given. As you work over your brief in this manner you
will be delighted to discover suddenly that you need refer to it less
and less frequently. Finally, the outline will be in your mind, and
when you speak you can give your entire attention to the delivery and
the audience.
Do not be discouraged if you cannot retain all the outline the first
times you try this method. Many a speaker has announced in his
introduction, "I shall present four reasons," and often has sat down
after discussing only three. Until you can dispense entirely with the
brief keep it near you. Speak from it if you need it. Portions which
you want to quote exactly (such as quotations from authorities) may be
memorized or read. In reading be sure you read remarkably well. Few
people can read interestingly before a large audience. Keep your
papers where you can get at them easily. Be careful not to lose your
place so that you will have to shuffle them to get the cue for
continuing. Pauses are not dangerous when they are made deliberately
for effect, but they are ruinous when they betray to the audience
forgetfulness or embarrassment on the part of the speaker. Anticipate
your need. Get your help before you actually need it, so that you can
continue gracefully.
Results. This method, followed for a few months, will develop speaking
ability. It produces results suited to modern conditions of all kinds
of life. It develops practically all the mental faculties and personal
attributes. It puts the speaker directly in touch with his audience.
It permits him to adapt his material to an occasion and audience. It
gives him the opportunity to sway his hearers and used legitimately
for worthy ends, this is the most worthy purpose of any speech.
CHAPTER IX
EXPLAINING
The part which explanation plays in all phases of life is too apparent
to need any emphasis here. It is to a great extent the basis of all
our daily intercourse, from explaining to a teacher why a lesson has
not been prepared, to painstakingly explaining to a merchant why a
bill has not been paid. An instructor patiently explains a problem to
a class, and a merchant explains the merits of an article or the
operation of a device to his customers. The politician explains why he
should be elected. The financier explains the returns from stock and
bond purchases. The President explains to the Senate the reason for
treaty clauses. The minister explains the teachings of his faith to
his congregation. You can make this list as long as the varied
activities of all life.
Exposition. This kind of discourse, the purpose of which is
explanation, is also called exposition. Has it any relation to the
underlying idea of the term _exposition_ as applied to a great
exhibition or fair? Its purpose is plainly information, the
transmission of knowledge. While description and narration exist
primarily to entertain, exposition exists to convey information.
Description and narration may be classed as literature of
entertainment; exposition as literature of knowledge. It answers such
questions as how? why? for what purpose? in what manner? by what
method? It can sometimes be used to convince a person with opposing
views, for frequently you hear a man to whom the explanation of a
belief has been made, exclaim, "Oh, if that's what you mean, I agree
with you entirely." All instruction, all directions of work, all
scientific literature, are in foundation expository. In its simplest,
most disconnected form, exposition gives its value to that most
essential volume, the dictionary.
Make a list of other kinds of books which are mainly or entirely
expository in character.
Difficulties in Exposition. Such are the purpose and use of
exposition. The difficulty of producing good exposition is evident
from those two factors. As it, exists everywhere, as it purposes to
inform, its first requisite is clearness. Without that quality it is
as nothing. When you direct a stranger how to reach a certain building
in your town, of what value are your remarks unless they are clear?
When a scientist writes a treatise on the topic of the immortality of
man, of what value are his opinions unless his statements are clear?
All the other qualities which prose may and should possess sink into
subordinate value in exposition when compared with clearness. Because
of all three phases of exposition--its universal use, its informative
purpose, its essential clarity--exposition is an all-important topic
for the consideration and practice of the public speaker. In its
demand for clearness lies also its difficulty. Is it easy to tell the
exact truth, not as a moral exercise, but merely as a matter of
exactness? Why do the careless talkers speak so often of "a sort of
pink" or "a kind of revolving shaft" or tack on at the end of phrases
the meaningless "something" or "everything" except that even in their
unthinking minds there is the hazy impression--they really never have
a well-defined idea--that they have not said exactly what they want to
say?
Clear Understanding. Here then is the first requisite for the public
speaker. He must have no hazy impressions, no unthinking mind, no
ill-defined ideas, no inexactness. He must have a clear understanding
of all he tries to tell to others. Without this the words of a speaker
are as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. Or he may deliver a great
roar of words signifying nothing. This is the fault with most
recitations of pupils in school--they do not get a clear understanding
of the material assigned to them for mastery. As a test of the degree
of understanding, the recitation method serves admirably. The lecture
method of instruction--clear though the presentation may be--offers no
manner of finding out, until the final examination, how much the pupil
actually understands. So far, in public speaking, the only way of
learning that the student understands the principles and can apply
them is to have him speak frequently to indicate his ability. Can you
not name among your associates and friends those whose explanations
are lucid, concise, direct, unconfusing, and others whose attempts at
exposition are jumbled, verbose, unenlightening?
Have you not criticized certain teachers by remarking "they may know
their own subjects all right, but they couldn't impart their knowledge
to the class"?
Command of Language. What was lacking in their case? Certainly, to be
charitable, we cannot say they lacked a clear understanding of their
own topic. It must have been something else. That second element,
which is at times almost entirely absent when the first is present, is
the command of language. Many a man knows a great deal but is
incapable of transmitting his knowledge. He lacks the gift of
expression. He has not cultivated it--for it can be cultivated. The
man whose desire or vocation forces him to make the effort to speak
will train himself in methods of communication, until he arrives at
comfort and fluency.
The district manager of a large electric company related that as he
would sit at a meeting of the directors or committee of a large
corporation and realized that the moment was approaching when he would
be called upon to speak he would feel his senses grow confused, a
sinking feeling amounting almost to faintness would sweep over him.
Strong in his determination to do the best he could for his company he
would steady his nerves by saying to himself, "You know more about
this matter than any of these men. That's why you are here. Tell them
what you know so plainly that they will understand as well as you do."
There was, you see, the reassurance of complete understanding of the
subject coupled with the endeavor to express it clearly. These two
elements, then, are of supreme significance to the public speaker.
Even to the person who desires to write well, they are all-important.
To the speaker they are omnipresent. The effect of these two upon the
intellectual development is marked. The desire for clear
understanding will keep the mind stored with material to assimilate
and communicate. It will induce the mind continually to manipulate
this material to secure clarity in presentation. This will result in
developing a mental adroitness of inestimable value to the speaker,
enabling him to seize the best method instantaneously and apply it to
his purposes. At the same time, keeping always in view the use of this
material as the basis of communicating information or convincing by
making explanations, he will be solicitous about his language. Words
will take on new values. He will be continually searching for new ones
to express the exact differences of ideas he wants to convey. He will
try different expressions, various phrases, changed word orders, to
test their efficacy and appropriateness in transferring his meaning to
his hearers. Suggestions offered in the chapter of this book on words
and sentences will never cease to operate in his thinking and
speaking. There will be a direct result in his ability as a speaker
and a reflex result upon his ability as a thinker. What is more
encouraging, he will realize and appreciate these results himself, and
his satisfaction in doing better work will be doubled by the delight
in knowing exactly how he secured the ends for which he strove.
Methods of Explaining. In order to make a matter clear, to convey
information, a speaker has at his disposal many helpful ways of
arranging his material. Not all topics can be treated in all or even
any certain one of the following manners, but if the student is
familiar with certain processes he will the more easily and surely
choose just that one suited to the topic he intends to explain and
the circumstances of his exposition.
Division. One of these methods is by division. A speaker may separate
a topic or term into the parts which comprise it. For instance, a
scientist may have to list all the kinds of electricity; a Red Cross
instructor may divide all bandages into their several kinds; an
athletic coach may have to explain all the branches of sports in order
to induce more candidates to appear for certain events; a banker may
have to divide financial operations to make clear an advertising
pamphlet soliciting new lines of business, such as drawing up of
wills.
The ability to do this is a valuable mental accomplishment as well as
an aid to speaking. In dividing, care must be taken to make the
separations according to one principle for any one class. It would not
result in clearness to divide all men according to height, and at the
same time according to color. This would result in confusion. Divide
according to height first, then divide the classes so formed according
to color if needed--as might be done in military formation. Each
group, then, must be distinctly marked off from all other groups. In
scientific and technical matters such division may be carried to the
extreme limit of completeness. Complete division is called
classification.
Partition. In non-scientific compositions such completeness is seldom
necessary. It might even defeat the purpose by being too involved, by
including too many entries, and by becoming difficult to remember.
Speakers seldom have need of classification, but they often do have
to make divisions for purposes of explanation. This kind of grouping
is called partition. It goes only so far as is necessary for the
purpose at the time. It may stop anywhere short of being complete and
scientifically exact. All members of the large class not divided and
listed are frequently lumped together under a last heading such as
_all others, miscellaneous, the rest, those not falling under our
present examination_.
EXERCISES
1. Classify games. Which principle will you use for your first main
division--indoor and outdoor games, or winter and summer games, or
some other?
2. Classify the races of men. What principle would you use?
3. How would you arrange the books in a private library?
4. Classify the forms of theatrical entertainments. Is your list
complete?
5. Classify branches of mathematics. The entries may total over a
hundred.
6. Classify the pupils in your school.
7. Classify the people in your school. Is there any difference?
8. Classify the following:
The political parties of the country.
Methods of transportation.
Religions.
Magazines.
The buildings in a city.
Aircraft.
Desserts.
Canned goods.
Skill in division is valuable not only as a method of exposition but
it is linked closely with an effective method of proving to be
explained in the next chapter--the method of residues. Can you recall
any extracts given in this book in which some form of division is
used? Is this form of material likely to be more important in
preparation or in the finished speech? Explain your opinion--in other
words, present a specimen of exposition.
Definition. One of the simplest ways of explaining is to define a
term. Dictionary definitions are familiar to everyone. In a great
many instances the dictionary definition is by means of synonyms.
While this is a convenient, easy method it is seldom exact. Why?
Recall what you learned concerning the meanings of synonyms. Do they
ever exactly reproduce one another's meanings? There is always a
slight degree of inaccuracy in definition by synonym, sometimes a
large margin of inexactness. Is the following a good definition?
A visitor to a school began his address: "This morning,
children, I propose to offer you an epitome of the life of
St. Paul. It may be perhaps that there are among you some too
young to grasp the meaning of the word _epitome_. _Epitome_,
children, is in its signification synonymous with synopsis!"
London Tid-Bits
Logical Definition. An exact definition is supplied by the logical
definition. In this there are three parts--the term to be defined,
the class (or genus) to which it belongs, and the distinguishing
characteristics (differentia) which mark it off from all the other
members of that same class. You can represent this graphically by
inclosing the word _term_ in a small circle. Around this draw a larger
circle in which you write the word _class_. Now what divides the term
from the class in which it belongs? Indicate the line around the
_term_ as _distinguishing characteristics_, and you will clearly see
how accurate a logical definition is. The class should be just larger
than the term itself. The main difficulty is in finding exact and
satisfying distinguishing characteristics. There are some terms which
are so large that no classes can be found for them. Others cannot be
marked by acceptable distinguishing characteristics, so it is not
possible to make logical definitions for all terms. Consider such
words as _infinity, electricity, gravity, man_.
The words of the definition should be simple, more readily understood
than the term to be defined.
Term Class Distinguishing characteristics
A biplane is an airplane with two sets of supporting
surfaces.
A waitress is a woman who serves meals.
Narration is that form of discourse which relates events.
A word is a combination of suggesting an idea.
letters
A dictionary is a book of definitions.
A corporal is an army officer just higher than a private.
EXERCISES
1. Make logical definitions for the following:
A dynamo A circle A hammer
A curiosity Lightning A trip-hammer
Moving picture camera Democracy A lady
Curiosity An anarchist A Lady
A door A sky-scraper Man
2. Analyze and comment on the following definitions:
Man is a two-legged animal without feathers.
Life is an epileptic fit between two nothings.
Genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains.
The picture writings of the ancient Egyptians are called hieroglyphics.
A fly is an obnoxious insect that disturbs you in the morning when you
want to sleep.
Real bravery is defeated cowardice.
A brigantine is a small, two-masted vessel, square rigged on both
masts, but with a fore-and-aft mainsail and the mainmast considerably
longer than the foremast.
A mushroom is a cryptogamic plant of the class _Fungi_; particularly
the agaricoid fungi and especially the edible forms.
Language is the means of concealing thought.
A rectangle of equal sides is a square.
Hyperbole is a natural exaggeration for the purpose of emphasis.
Amplified Definition. While such definitions are the first positions
from which all interpretations must proceed, in actual speech-making
explanations of terms are considerably longer. Yet the form of the
true logical definition is always imbedded--in germ at least--in the
amplified statement.
Again, democracy will be, in a large sense, individualistic.
That ideal of society which seeks a disciplined, obedient
people, submissive to government and unquestioning in its
acceptance of orders, is not a democratic ideal. You cannot
have an atmosphere of "implicit obedience to authority" and
at the same time and in the same place an atmosphere of
democratic freedom. There is only one kind of discipline
that is adequate to democracy and that is self-discipline.
An observant foreigner has lately remarked, somewhat
paradoxically, that the Americans seemed to him the best
disciplined people in the world. In no other country does a
line form itself at a ticket office or at the entrance to a
place of amusement with so little disorder, so little delay,
and so little help from a policeman. In no other country
would an appeal of the government for self-control in the use
of food or fuel, for a restriction of hours of business, for
"gas-less Sundays," have met with so ready, so generous and
so sufficient a response. Our American lads, alert,
adaptable, swiftly-trained, self-directed, have been quite
the equal of the continental soldiers, with their longer
technical training and more rigorous military discipline. In
these respects the English, and especially the British
colonial soldiers have been much like our own. Democracy,
whether for peace or for war, in America or in England,
favors individuality. Independence of thought and action on
the part of the mass of the people are alike the result of
democracy and the condition of its continuance and more
complete development, and it is visibly growing in England as
the trammels of old political and social class control are
being thrown off.
EDWARD P. CHEYNEY: _Historical Tests of Democracy_
What is a constitution? Certainly not a league, compact, or
confederacy, but a fundamental law. That fundamental
regulation which determines the manner in which the public
authority is to be executed, is what forms the constitution
of a state. Those primary rules which concern the body
itself, and the very being of the political society, the form
of government, and the manner in which power is to be
exercised--all, in a word, which form together the
constitution of a state--these are the fundamental laws.
This, Sir, is the language of the public writers. But do we
need to be informed, in this country, what a constitution
is? Is it not an idea perfectly familiar, definite, and well
settled? We are at no loss to understand what is meant by the
constitution of one of the States; and the Constitution of
the United States speaks of itself as being an instrument of
the same nature.
DANIEL WEBSTER: _The Constitution Not a Compact
between Sovereign States_, 1833
Particulars of a General Statement. A general statement made at the
beginning of a paragraph or section, serving as the topic sentence,
may then be explained by breaking the general idea up into details and
particulars. This may partake of the nature of both definition and
partition, as the terms may be explained and their component parts
listed. Note that in the following selection the first sentences state
the topic of the passage which the succeeding sentences explain by
discussing the phrase _variety of evils_.
So likewise a passionate attachment of one nation for another
produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite
nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common
interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and
infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the
former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the
latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It
leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of
privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure
the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting
with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting
jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the
parties from whom equal privileges are withheld, and it gives
to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote
themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray, or
sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium,
sometimes even with popularity; gilding with the appearances
of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference
for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the
base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption or
infatuation.
GEORGE WASHINGTON: _Farewell Address_, 1796
Examples. A statement may be explained by giving examples. The speaker
must be sure that his example fits the case exactly; that it is
typical--that is, it must serve as a true instance of all cases under
the statement, not be merely an exception; that it is perfectly clear;
that it impresses the audience as unanswerable. The example may be
either actual or suppositious, but it must illustrate clearly and
accurately. The use of examples is a great aid in explanation. John C.
Calhoun expressed the value very distinctly in one of his speeches.
I know how difficult it is to communicate distinct ideas on
such a subject, through the medium of general propositions,
without particular illustration; and in order that I may be
distinctly understood, though at the hazard of being
tedious, I will illustrate the important principle which I
have ventured to advance, by examples.
By the use of an example he does make himself distinctly understood.
Let us, then, suppose a small community of five persons,
separated from the rest of the world; and, to make the
example strong, let us suppose them all to be engaged in the
same pursuit, and to be of equal wealth. Let us further
suppose that they determine to govern the community by the
will of a majority; and, to make the case as strong as
possible, let us suppose that the majority, in order to
meet the expenses of the government, lay an equal tax, say
of one hundred dollars on each individual of this little
community. Their treasury would contain five hundred
dollars. Three are a majority; and they, by supposition,
have contributed three hundred as their portion, and the
other two (the minority), two hundred. The three have the
right to make the appropriations as they may think proper.
The question is, How would the principle of the absolute and
unchecked majority operate, under these circumstances, in
this little community?
JOHN C. CALHOUN: _Speech on The Force Bill_, 1833
The example should be taken from the same phase of life as the
proposition it explains. As Calhoun was discussing governmental
regulation he supposed an example from majority rule. In the next the
topic is copyright, so the illustration is not taken from patents. In
introducing your own examples avoid the trite, amateurish expression
"take, for instance."
Now, this is the sort of boon which my honorable and learned
friend holds out to authors. Considered as a boon to them,
it is a mere nullity; but, considered as an impost on the
public, it is no nullity, but a very serious and pernicious
reality. I will take an example. Dr. Johnson died fifty-six
years ago. If the law were what my honorable and learned
friend wishes to make it, somebody would now have the
monopoly of Dr. Johnson's works. Who that somebody would be
it is impossible to say; but we may venture to guess. I
guess, then, that it would have been some bookseller, who
was the assign of another bookseller, who was the grandson
of a third bookseller, who had bought the copyright from
Black Frank, the doctor's servant and residuary legatee, in
1785 or 1786. Now, would the knowledge that this copyright
would exist in 1841 have been a source of gratification to
Johnson? Would it have stimulated his exertions? Would it
have once drawn him out of his bed before noon? Would it
have once cheered him under a fit of the spleen? Would it
have induced him to give us one more allegory, one more life
of a poet, one more imitation of Juvenal? I firmly believe
not. I firmly believe that a hundred years ago, when he was
writing our debates for the _Gentleman's Magazine_, he would
very much rather have had twopence to buy a plate of shin of
beef at a cook's shop underground.
THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY: _Copyright_, 1841
Comparison. Unfamiliar matter may be made plain by showing how it
resembles something already clearly understood by the audience. This
is comparison. It shows how two things are alike. The old geographies
used to state that the earth is an oblate spheroid, then explain that
term by comparison with an orange, pointing out the essential
flattening at the poles. In any use of comparison the resemblance must
be real, not assumed. Many a speaker has been severely criticized for
his facts because he asserted in comparison similarities that did not
exist.
Contrast. When the _differences_ between two things are carefully
enumerated the process is termed contrast. This is often used in
combination with comparison, for no two things are exactly alike. They
may resemble each other in nearly all respects, so comparison is
possible and helpful up to a certain limit. To give an exact idea of
the remainder the differences must be pointed out; that requires
contrast.
In contrast the opposing balance of details does not have to depend
necessarily on a standard familiar to the audience. It may be an
arrangement of opposite aspects of the same thing to bring out more
vividly the understanding. In his _History of the English People_,
Green explains the character of Queen Elizabeth by showing the
contrasted elements she inherited from her mother, Anne Boleyn, and
her father, Henry VIII. Such a method results not only in added
clearness, but also in emphasis. The plan may call for half a
paragraph on one side, the second half on the other; or it may cover
two paragraphs or sections; or it may alternate with every detail--an
affirmative balanced by a negative, followed at once by another pair
of affirmative and negative, or statement and contrast, and so on
until the end. The speaker must consider such possibilities of
contrast, plan for his own, and indicate it in his brief.
Nearly any speech will provide illustrations of the methods of
comparison and contrast. Burke's _Conciliation with America_ has
several passages of each.
Cause to Effect. Explanations based on progressions from cause to
effect and the reverse are admirably suited to operations, movements,
changes, conditions, elections. An exposition of a manufacturing
process might move from cause to effect. A legislator trying to secure
the passage of a measure might explain its operation by beginning with
the law (the cause) and tracing its results (the effect). So, too, a
reformer might plead for a changed condition by following the same
method. A speaker dealing with history or biography might use this
same plan.
Effect to Cause. In actual events, the cause always precedes the
effect, but in discussion it is sometimes better not to follow natural
or usual orders. Many explanations gain in clearness and effect by
working backwards. A voter might begin by showing the condition of a
set of workmen (an effect), then trace conditions backward until he
would end with a plea for the repeal of a law (the cause). A student
might explain a low mark on his report by starting with the grading
(the effect) and tracing backwards all his struggles to an early
absence by which he missed a necessary explanation by the teacher. A
doctor might begin a report by stating the illness of several persons
with typhus; then trace preceding conditions step by step until he
reached the cause--oysters eaten by them in a hotel were kept cool by
a dealer's letting water run over them. This water in its course had
picked up the disease germs--the cause. Many crimes are solved by
moving from effect to cause. A lawyer in his speeches, therefore,
frequently follows this method.
Both these methods are so commonly employed that the student can cite
instances from many speeches he has heard or books he has read.
Time Order. Somewhat similar to the two preceding arrangements of
exposition are the next two based on time. The first of these is the
natural time order, or chronological order. In this the details follow
one another as events happened. It is to be noted, however, that not
any group of succeeding details will make a good exposition of this
sort. The parts must be closely related. They must be not merely
_sequential_ but _consequential_. Dictionary definitions will explain
the difference in meaning of those two words. This method is somewhat
like the order from cause to effect, but it is adapted to other kinds
of topics and other purposes of explanation. It is excellently suited
to historical material, or any related kind. It is the device usually
employed in explaining mechanical or manufacturing processes. In mere
frequency of occurrence it is doubtlessly the most common.
Time Order Reversed. The student who starts to cast his expositions
into this scheme should judge its fitness for his particular purpose
at the time. It will often become apparent upon thought that instead
of the natural chronological order the exact opposite will suit
better. This--time order reversed--explains itself as the arrangement
from the latest occurrence back through preceding events and details
until the earliest time is reached. It is quite like the arrangement
from effect back to cause. It might be used to explain the legal
procedure of a state or nation, to explain treaty relations, to
explain the giving up of old laws. The movements of a man accused of
crime might be explained in this way. An alibi for a person might be
built up thus. The various versions of some popular story told over
and over again through a long period of years might be explained after
such a manner.
Although the time order reversed is not so common as the chronological
order it does occur many times.
Place. Certain material of exposition demands the order of place. This
means that the details of the explanation are arranged according to
the position of objects. If you have written many descriptions you
are familiar with the problems brought up by such an order. A few
illustrations will make it clear. A man on the street asks you how to
reach a certain point in the city. On what plan do you arrange your
directions? According to their place? You start to explain to a friend
the general lay-out of New York, or Chicago, or San Francisco. How do
you arrange the details of your exposition? You attempt to convey to
another person the plan of some large building. What arrangement is
inevitable? How do books on sports explain the baseball field, the
football gridiron, the tennis court, the golf links? When
specifications for a building are furnished to the contractor, what
principle of arrangement is followed? If an inventor gives
instructions to a pattern-maker for the construction of a model, what
plan does he follow? Would a man discussing drawings for a new house
be likely to formulate his explanations on this scheme?
You see, then, how well suited such an arrangement is to a variety of
uses. In such expository passages the transition and connecting words
are mainly expressions of place and relative position such as _to the
right, above, below, to the rear, extending upwards at an angle of
sixty degrees, dividing equally into three sections._ Such indications
must never be slighted in spoken explanations. They keep the material
clear and exact in the hearer's comprehension. The speaker, remember,
can never assume that his audience is bound to understand him. His
task is to be so clear that no single individual can fail to
understand him.
Importance. It has already been stated--in the chapter on
planning--that topics may be arranged in the order of their
importance. This same scheme may be used in delivery of expository
matter. A hearer will follow the explanation if he be led gradually up
the ascent; he will remember most clearly the latter part of the
passage. If this include the prime factor of the information he will
retain it longest and most clearly. You should listen to speeches of
explanations critically to judge whether the plans are good. Should
you make a list of the number of times any of the plans here set down
appears you will be struck by the fact that while other orders are
quite frequent, this last principle of leading up to the most
important outranks all the others. It may be simply a form of one of
the others previously enumerated in which time order, or contrast, or
cause to effect is followed simply because that does bring the most
important last in the discussion. Such an arrangement answers best to
the response made to ideas by people in audiences. It is a principle
of all attempts to instruct them, to appeal to them, to stimulate
them, to move them, that the successive steps must increase in
significance and impressiveness until the most moving details be laid
before them. Analyze for yourself or for the class a few long
explanations you have listened to, and report whether this principle
was followed. Does it bear any relation to concluding a speech with a
peroration?
Combinations of Methods. While any one of the foregoing methods may be
used for a single passage it is not usual in actual practice to find
one scheme used throughout all the explanatory matter of the speech.
In the first place, the attention of the audience would very likely
become wearied by the monotony of such a device. Certain parts of the
material under explanation seem to require one treatment, other
portions require different handling. Therefore good speakers usually
combine two or more of these plans.
Partition could hardly be used throughout an entire speech without
ruining its interest. It occurs usually early to map out the general
field or scope. Definition also is likely to be necessary at the
beginning of an explanation to start the audience with clear ideas. It
may be resorted to at various times later whenever a new term is
introduced with a meaning the audience may not entirely understand.
Both partition and definition are short, so they are combined with
other forms. Examples, likewise, may be introduced anywhere.
The two most frequently closely combined are comparison and contrast.
Each seems to require the other. Having shown how two things or ideas
are alike, the speaker naturally passes on to secure more definiteness
by showing that with all their likenesses they are not exactly the
same, and that the differences are as essential to a clear
comprehension of them as the similarities. So usual are they that many
people accept the two words as meaning almost the same thing, though
in essence they are opposites.
The other orders cannot be used in such close combinations but they
may be found in varying degrees in many extended speeches of
explanation as the nature of the material lends itself to one
treatment or another. A twelve-hundred word discussion of _The Future
of Food_ uses examples, contrasted examples, effect to cause, cause to
effect (the phrase beginning a paragraph is "there is already evidence
that this has resulted in a general lowering "), while the succeeding
parts grow in significance until the last is the most important. A
great English statesman in a speech lasting some three hours on a
policy of government employed the following different methods at
various places where he introduced expository material--partition (he
claimed it was classification, but he listed for consideration only
three of the essential five choices), contrast, comparison, time,
example, place, cause to effect. Some of these methods of arranging
explanatory matter were used several times.
EXERCISES
1. Explain a topic by giving three examples. The class should comment
upon their value.
2. Explain to the class some mechanical operation or device. The class
after listening should decide which method the speaker used.
3. Explain some principle of government or society following the time
order.
4. With a similar topic follow time reversed.
5. With a similar topic use comparison only.
6. Follow an arrangement based on contrast only.
7. In explaining a topic combine comparison and contrast.
8. Explain some proverb, text, or quotation. The class should discuss
the arrangement.
9. Choose some law or government regulation. Condemn or approve it in
an explanation based on cause to effect.
10. With the same or a similar topic use effect to cause.
11. Explain to the class the plan of some large building or group of
buildings. Is your explanation easily understood?
12. Explain why a certain study fits one for a particular vocation.
Use the order of importance.
13. Give an idea of two different magazines, using comparison and
contrast.
14. Explain some game. Time order?
15. How is a jury trial conducted?
16. Explain the principles of some political party.
17. Speak for four minutes upon exercise in a gymnasium.
18. Tell how a school paper, or daily newspaper, or magazine is
conducted.
19. What is slang?
20. Explain one of your hobbies.
21. Classify and explain the qualities of a good speaker. Order of
importance?
22. Explain some natural phenomenon.
23. Explain the best method for studying.
24. Contrast business methods.
25. From some business (as stock selling) or industry (as automobile
manufacturing) or new vocation (as airplaning) or art (as acting) or
accomplishment (as cooking) choose a group of special terms and
explain them in a connected series of remarks.
26. Why is superstition so prevalent? The class should discuss the
explanations presented.
27. "The point that always perplexes me is this: I always feel that if
all the wealth was shared out, it would be all the same again in a few
years' time. No one has ever explained to me how you can get over
that." Explain clearly one of the two views suggested here.
28. Explain the failure of some political movement, or the defeat of
some nation.
29. Select a passage from some book, report, or article, couched in
intricate technical or specialized phraseology. Explain it clearly to
the class.
30. Ben Jonson, a friend of Shakespeare's, wrote of him, "He was not
of an age, but for all time." What did he mean?
CHAPTER X
PROVING AND PERSUADING
What Argumentation Is. It is an old saying that there are two sides to
every question. Any speaker who supports some opinion before an
audience, who advances some theory, who urges people to do a certain
thing, to vote a certain way, to give money for charitable purposes,
recognizes the opposite side. In trying to make people believe as he
believes, to induce them to act as he advises, he must argue with
them. Argumentation, as used in this book, differs widely from the
informal exchange of opinions and views indulged in across the dinner
table or on the trolley car. It does not correspond with the usual
meaning of argue and argument which both so frequently suggest
wrangling and bickering ending in ill-tempered personal attacks.
Argumentation is the well-considered, deliberate means employed to
convince others of the truth or expediency of the views advocated by
the speaker. Its purpose is to carry conviction to the consciousness
of others. This is its purpose. Its method is proof. Proof is the body
of facts, opinions, reasons, illustrations, conclusions, etc.,
properly arranged and effectively presented which makes others accept
as true or right the proposition advanced by the speaker. Of course,
argumentation may exist in writing but as this volume is concerned
with oral delivery, the word speaker is used in the definition. So
much for the purpose and nature of argumentation.
Use of Argumentation. Where is it used? Everywhere, in every form of
human activity. Argumentation is used by a youngster trying to induce
a companion to go swimming and by a committee of world statesmen
discussing the allotment of territory. In business a man uses it from
the time he successfully convinces a firm it should employ him as an
office boy until he secures the acceptance of his plans for a
combination of interests which will control the world market. Lawyers,
politicians, statesmen, clergymen, live by argumentation. In the life
of today, which emphasizes so markedly the two ideas of individuality
and efficiency, argumentation is of paramount importance.
Any person can argue, in the ordinary sense of stating opinions and
views, in so far as any one can converse. But to produce good,
convincing argumentation is not so easy as that. The expression of
personal preferences, opinions, ideas, is not argumentation, although
some people who advance so far as to become speakers before audiences
seem never to realize that truth, and display themselves as pretending
to offer argumentation when they are in reality doing no more than
reciting personal beliefs and suggestions.
Cite instances of speakers who have indulged in such personal opinions
when they might or should have offered arguments.
While argumentation is not so easily assembled as running conversation
is, it may be made quite as fascinating as the latter, and just as
surely as a person can have his conversational ability developed so
can a person have his argumentative power strengthened.
Conviction. What should be the first requisite of a speaker of
argumentation? Should it be conviction in the truth or right of the
position he takes and the proposition he supports? At first thought
one would answer emphatically "yes." A great deal of discredit has
been brought upon the study of argumentation by the practice of
speakers to pretend to have opinions which in reality they do not
sincerely believe. The practical instance is the willingness of paid
lawyers to defend men of whose guilt they must be sure. Such criticism
does not apply to cases in which there are reasonable chances for
opposing interpretations, nor to those cases in which our law decrees
that every person accused of crime shall be provided with counsel, but
to those practices to which Lincoln referred when he recommended the
lawyer not to court litigation. Nor should this criticism deter a
student of public speaking from trying his skill in defense of the
other side, when he feels that such practice will help him in weighing
his own arguments. In every instance of this highly commendable double
method of preparation which the author has seen in classrooms, the
speaker, after his speech has been commented upon, has always declared
his real position and explained why he advocated the opposite. Even
school and college debating has been criticized in the same way for
becoming not an attempt to discover or establish the truth or right of
a proposition, but a mere game with formal rules, a set of scoring
regulations, and a victory or defeat with consequent good or bad
effects upon the whole practice of undergraduate debating. If such
contests are understood in their true significance, as practice in
training, and the assumption of conviction by a student is not
continued after graduation so that he will in real life defend and
support opinions he really does not believe, the danger is not so
great. The man who has no fixed principles, who can argue equally
glibly on any side of a matter, whose talents are at any man's command
of service, is untrustworthy. Convictions are worthy elements in life.
A man must change his stand when his convictions are argued away, but
the man whose opinions shift with every new scrap of information or
influence is neither a safe leader nor a dependable subordinate.
For the sake of the training, then, a student _may_ present arguments
from attitudes other than his own sincere conviction, but the practice
should be nothing more than a recognized exercise.
Because of its telling influence upon the opinion of others let us,
without further reservation, set down that the first essential of a
good argument is the ability to convince others. Aside from the
language and the manner of delivery--two elements which must never be
disregarded in any speech--this ability to convince others depends
upon the proof presented to them in support of a proposition. The
various kinds and methods of proof, with matters closely related to
them, make up the material of this chapter.
The Proposition. In order to induce argument, there must be a
proposition. A proposition in argument is a statement--a declarative
sentence--concerning the truth or expediency of which there may be
two opinions. Notice that not every declarative statement is a
proposition for argument. "The sun rises" is not a statement about
which there can be any varying opinions. It is not a proposition for
argument. But "Missionaries should not be sent to China," and "John
Doe killed Simon Lee," are statements admitting of different opinions
and beliefs. They are propositions for argument. No sane person would
argue about such a statement as "Missionaries are sent to China," nor
would any one waste time on such a statement as "Some day a man named
John Doe will kill a man named Simon Lee."
Although in common language we speak of arguing a question the student
must remember that such a thing is impossible. You cannot argue about
a question. Nor can you argue about a subject or a topic. The only
expression about which there can be any argument is a proposition. The
question must be answered. The resulting statement is then proved or
disproved. The topic must be given some definite expression in a
declarative sentence before any real argument is possible. Even when
the matter of argument is incorrectly phrased as a topic or question
you will find almost immediately in the remarks the proposition as a
sentence. "Should women vote?" may be on the posters announcing an
address, but the speaker will soon declare, "Women should vote in all
elections in the United States upon the same conditions that men do."
That is the proposition being argued; the question has been answered.
Kinds of Propositions. Certain kinds of propositions should never be
chosen for argumentation. Many are incapable of proof, so any speech
upon them would result in the mere repetition of personal opinions.
Such are: The pen is mightier than the sword; Business men should not
read poetry; Every person should play golf; Ancient authors were
greater than modern authors. Others are of no interest to contemporary
audiences and for that reason should not be presented. In the Middle
Ages scholars discussed such matters as how many angels could stand on
the point of a needle, but today no one cares about such things.
Propositions of Fact. Propositions fall into the two classes already
illustrated by the statements about missionaries in China and the
killing of Simon Lee. The second--John Doe killed Simon Lee--is a
proposition of fact. All argument about it would tend to prove either
the affirmative or the negative. One argument would strive to prove
the statement a fact. The other argument would try to prove its
opposite the actual fact. Facts are accomplished results or finished
events. Therefore propositions of fact refer to the past. They are the
material of argument in all cases at law, before investigation
committees, and in similar proceedings. Lincoln argued a proposition
of fact when he took Douglas's statement, "Our fathers, when they
framed the government under which we live, understood this question
just as well, and even better, than we do now," and then proved by
telling exactly how they voted upon every measure dealing with slavery
exactly what the thirty-nine signers of the Constitution did believe
about national control of the practice. Courts of law demand that
pleadings "shall set forth with certainty and with truth the matters
of fact or of law, the truth or falsity of which must be decided to
decide the case."
Propositions of Policy. Notice that the other proposition--Missionaries
should not be sent to China--is not concerned with a fact at all. It
deals with something which should or should not be done. It deals with
future conduct. It depends upon the value of the results to be secured.
It looks to the future. It deals with some principle of action. It is a
question of expediency or policy. It induces argument to show that one
method is the best or not the best. Propositions of expediency or policy
are those which confront all of us at every step in life. Which college
shall a boy attend? What kind of work shall a woman enter? How large
shall taxes be next year? Which candidate shall we elect? How shall we
better the city government? How shall I invest my money? What kind of
automobile shall I buy? What kind of will shall I make?
The answers to all such questions make propositions of expediency or
policy upon which arguments are being composed and delivered every
day.
In choosing propositions for argument avoid, 1, those which are
obviously truth; 2, those in which some ambiguous word or term covers
the truth; 3, those in which the truth or error is practically
impossible of proof; 4, those involving more than one main issue; 5,
those which do not interest the audience.
Wording the Proposition. The proposition should be accurately worded.
In law if the word _burglary_ is used in the indictment, the defense,
in order to quash the charge, need show merely that a door was
unlocked. The phrasing should be as simple and concise as possible.
The proposition should not cover too wide a field. Although these
directions seem self-evident they should be kept in mind continually.
When the proposition is satisfactory to the maker of the argument he
is ready to begin to build his proof. In actual speech-making few
arguments can be made as convincing as a geometrical demonstration but
a speaker can try to make his reasoning so sound, his development so
cogent, his delivery so convincing, that at the end of his speech, he
can exclaim triumphantly, "Quod erat demonstrandum."
Burden of Proof. Every argument presupposes the opposite side. Even
when only one speaker appears his remarks always indicate the
possibility of opposite views in the minds of some of the hearers. The
affirmative and negative are always present. It is frequently asserted
that the burden of proof is on the negative. This is no more correct
than the opposite statement would be. The place of the burden of proof
depends entirely upon the wording of the proposition and the statement
it makes. In general the burden of proof is upon the side which
proposes any change of existing conditions, the side which supports
innovations, which would introduce new methods. With the passage of
time the burden of proof may shift from one side to the other. There
was a time when the burden of proof was upon the advocates of woman
suffrage; today it is undoubtedly upon the opponents. At one period
the opponents of the study of Latin and Greek had the burden of proof,
now the supporters of such study have it. Other topics upon which the
burden of proof has shifted are popular election of Senators,
prohibition, League of Nations, self-determination of small nations,
the study of vocations, civics, and current topics in schools, an
all-year school term, higher salaries for teachers, the benefits of
labor unions, Americanization of the foreign born.
Evidence. One of the best ways of proving a statement is by giving
evidence of its truth. Evidence is made up of facts which support any
proposition. In court a witness when giving testimony (evidence) is
not allowed to give opinions or beliefs--he is continually warned to
offer only what he knows of the fact. It is upon the facts marshaled
before it that the jury is charged to render its verdict.
Direct Evidence. Evidence may be of two kinds--direct and indirect.
This second, especially in legal matters, is termed circumstantial
evidence. Direct evidence consists of facts that apply directly to the
proposition under consideration. If a man sees a street car passenger
take a wallet from another man's pocket and has him arrested at once
and the wallet is found in his pocket, that constitutes direct
evidence. Outside criminal cases the same kind of assured testimony
can be cited as direct evidence.
Circumstantial Evidence. In most cases in court such direct evidence
is the exception rather than the rule, for a man attempting crime
would shun circumstances in which his crime would be witnessed.
Indirect evidence--circumstantial evidence--is much more usual. It
lacks the certainty of direct evidence, yet from the known facts
presented it is often possible to secure almost the same certainty as
from direct evidence. In serious crimes, such as murder, juries are
extremely cautious about convicting upon circumstantial evidence.
There are many chances of error in making chains of evidence. In
indirect evidence a group of facts is presented from which a
conclusion is attempted. Suppose a boy had trouble with a farmer and
had been heard to threaten to get even. One day the man struck him
with a whip as he passed on the road. That night the farmer's barn was
set on fire. Neighbors declared they saw some one running from the
scene. Next day the boy told his companions he was glad of the loss.
Circumstantial evidence points to the boy as the culprit. Yet what
might the facts be?
In presenting arguments get as much direct evidence as possible to
prove your statements. When direct evidence cannot be secured, link
your indirect evidence so closely that it presents not a single weak
link. Let the conclusion you draw from it be the only possible one.
Make certain no one else can interpret it in any other way.
When you present evidence be sure it completely covers your
contention. Be sure it is clear. Be sure it fits in with all the other
facts and details presented. Do not let it conflict with usual human
experience. Consider the sources of your evidence. If you do not, you
can be certain your audience will. Are your sources reliable? Is the
information authoritative? Is it first-hand material, or merely
hearsay? Is it unprejudiced? Many of the other facts for evidence have
already been suggested in the chapter on getting material.
Two General Methods of Reasoning. Frequently the evidence to be used
in argumentation must be interpreted before it can be of any value,
especially when dealing with propositions of expediency or policy.
There are two general methods of reasoning. One is the inductive
method, the other the deductive.
Inductive Reasoning. When we discover that a certain operation
repeated many times always produces the same result we feel justified
in concluding that we can announce it as a universal law. After
thousands of falling bodies have been measured and always give the
same figures, scientists feel that they may state the law that all
falling bodies acquire an acceleration of 32.2 feet per second. This
illustrates the inductive method of reasoning. In this system we
reason from the specific instance to the general law, from the
particular experiment to the universal theory, from the concrete
instance to the wide principle.
All modern science is based upon this method--the experimental one.
All general theories of any kind today must--to be accepted--be
supported by long and careful consideration of all possible and
probable circumstances. The theory of evolution as applied to the
living things upon the earth is the result of countless observations
and experiments.
Hasty Generalization. The speaker cannot himself examine all the
specific instances, he cannot consider all the illustrations which
might support his position, but he must be careful of a too hasty
generalization. Having talked with a dozen returned soldiers he may
not declare that all American army men are glad to be out of France,
for had he investigated a little further he might have found an equal
number who regret the return to this land. He must base his general
statement on so many instances that his conclusion will convince not
only him, but people disposed to oppose his view. He must be better
prepared to show the truth of his declaration than merely to dismiss
an example which does not fit into his scheme by glibly asserting that
"exceptions prove the rule." He must show that what seems to
contradict him is in nature an exception and therefore has nothing at
all to do with his rule. Beginning speakers are quite prone to this
fault of too hasty generalization.
EXERCISES
1. Write down five general theories or statements which have been
established by inductive reasoning.
2. Is there any certainty that they will stand unchanged forever?
3. Under what circumstances are such changes made?
4. Can you cite any accepted laws or theories of past periods which
have been overturned?
Deductive Reasoning. After general laws have been established, either
by human experience or accepted inductive reasoning, they may be cited
as applying to any particular case under consideration. This passing
from the general law to the particular instance is deductive
reasoning. Deductive reasoning has a regular form called the
syllogism.
Major premise. All men are mortal.
Minor premise. Socrates is a man.
Conclusion. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
If the three parts of a syllogism are correct it has absolute
convincing power. Most attempts to disprove its statement attack the
first two statements. Although it carries such an air of certainty it
is likely to many errors in use. An error like this is common:
All horses are animals.
All cows are animals.
Therefore, all cows are horses.
Explain the fallacy in this syllogism.
Quite as frequently the incorrect syllogism is of this kind.
The edge of a stream is a bank.
A bank is a financial institution.
Therefore, the edge of a stream is a financial institution.