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 reelection.

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.

You will comment upon this that its evident silliness would prevent any speaker from using such a form in serious argument. But recall that in the discussion of any idea a term may get its meaning slightly changed. In that slight change of meaning lurks the error illustrated here, ready to lead to false reasoning and weakening of the argument. Certain words of common use are likely to such shifting meanings—republic, equality, representative, monarchy, socialistic. Any doubtful passage in which such an error is suspected should be reduced to its syllogistic form to be tested for accuracy.

A representative of the people must vote always as they would vote. A Congressman is a representative of the people. Therefore, Congressmen must vote always as the people who elect them would vote.

Is not the expression, representative of the people, here used in two different senses?

When an argument is delivered, one of the premises—being a statement which the speaker assumes everyone will admit as true—is sometimes omitted. This shortened form is called an enthymeme.

Smith will be a successful civil engineer for he is a superior mathematician.

Supply the missing premise. Which is it?

In the bald, simple forms here set down, the syllogism and enthymeme are hardly suited to delivery in speeches. They must be amplified, explained, emphasized, in order to serve a real purpose. The following represent better the way a speaker uses deductive reasoning.

The appointing power is vested in the President and Senate; this is the general rule of the Constitution. The removing power is part of the appointing power; it cannot be separated from the rest.

DANIEL WEBSTER: The Appointing and Removing Power, 1835

Then Daniel Webster stated in rather extended form the conclusion that the Senate should share in the removing proceedings.

Sir, those who espouse the doctrines of nullification reject, as it seems to me, the first great principle of all republican liberty; that is, that the majority must govern. In matters of common concern, the judgment of a majority must stand as the judgment of the whole.

DANIEL WEBSTER: Reply to Calhoun, 1853

Then, he argues, as these revenue laws were passed by a majority, they must be obeyed in South Carolina.

Methods of Proof. In extended arguments, just as in detailed exposition, many different methods of proof may be employed.

Explanation. Often a mere clear explanation will induce a listener to accept your view of the truth of a proposition. You have heard men say, "Oh, if that is what you mean, I agree with you entirely. I simply didn't understand you." When you are about to engage in argument consider this method of exposition to see if it will suffice. In all argument there is a great deal of formal or incidental explanation.

Authority. When authority is cited to prove a statement it must be subjected to the same tests in argument as in explanation. Is the authority reliable? Is he unprejudiced? Does his testimony fit in with the circumstances under consideration? Will his statements convince a person likely to be on the opposing side? Why has so much so-called authoritative information concerning conditions in Europe been so discounted? Is it not because the reporters are likely to be prejudiced and because while what they say may be true of certain places and conditions it does not apply to all the points under discussion? The speaker who wants the support of authority will test it as carefully as though its influence is to be used against him—as indeed, it frequently is.

Examples. Where examples are used in argumentation they must serve as more than mere illustrations. In exposition an illustration frequently explains, but that same example would have no value in argument because while it illustrates it does not prove. A suppositious example may serve in explanation; only a fact will serve as proof. The more inevitable its application, the more clinching its effect, the better its argumentative value. Notice how the two examples given below prove that the heirs of a literary man might be the very worst persons to own the copyrights of his writings since as owners they might suppress books which the world of readers should be able to secure easily. While these examples illustrate, do they not also prove?

I remember Richardson's grandson well; he was a clergyman in the city of London; he was a most upright and excellent man; but he had conceived a strong prejudice against works of fiction. He thought all novel-reading not only frivolous but sinful. He said—this I state on the authority of one of his clerical brethren who is now a bishop—he said that he had never thought it right to read one of his grandfather's books.

I will give another instance. One of the most instructive, interesting, and delightful books in our language is Boswell's Life of Johnson. Now it is well known that Boswell's eldest son considered this book, considered the whole relation of Boswell to Johnson, as a blot in the escutcheon of the family.

THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY: Copyright, 1841

Analogy. In argument by analogy the speaker attempts to prove that because certain things are known to be true in something that can be observed they are likely to be true in something else which in so far as it can be observed is quite like the first. We continually argue by analogy in daily life. Lincoln was really using analogy when he replied to the urging to change his army leaders during the Civil War, that he didn't think it wise to "swap horses while crossing a stream." Scientists use this method to draw conclusions when it is impossible to secure from actual observation or experiment a certain last step in the reasoning. The planet Mars and the earth are similar in practically all observable matters; they are about the same distance from the sun, they have the same surface conditions. The earth has living creatures upon it. Hence—so goes the reasoning of analogy—Mars is probably inhabited. Reasoning by analogy is used to prove that universal suffrage is good for the United States because it has been good for one particular state. A student may argue by analogy that the elective system should be introduced into all high schools, because it has been followed in colleges. It may be asserted that a leading bank president will make a good university president, because he has managed one complex institution. The essence of all good reasoning by analogy is that the two things considered must be so nearly alike in all that is known that the presumption of belief is that they must also be alike in the one point the arguer is trying to establish. This is the test he must apply to his own analogy arguments.

Our community frowns with indignation upon the profaneness of the duel, having its rise in this irrational point of honor. Are you aware that you indulge the same sentiment on a gigantic scale, when you recognize this very point of honor as a proper apology for war? We have already seen that justice is in no respect promoted by war. Is true honor promoted where justice is not?

CHARLES SUMNER: The True Grandeur of Nations, 1845

Residues. The method of residues is frequently employed when the speaker is supporting a policy to be carried out, a measure to be adopted, a change to be instituted, or a law to be passed. Granting the assumption that something must be done he considers all the various methods which may be employed, disposes of them one by one as illegal, or unsuited, or clumsy, or inexpedient, leaving only one, the one he wants adopted, as the one which must be followed.

This is a good practical method of proof, provided the speaker really considers all the possible ways of proceeding and does show the undesirability of all except the one remaining.

A speaker pleading for the installation of a commission form of city control might list all the possible ways of city government, a business manager, a mayor, a commission. By disposing completely of the first two, he would have proven the need for the last. A good speaker will aways go farther than merely to reach this kind of conclusion. He will, in addition to disproving the unworthy choices, strongly support his residue, the measure he wants adopted. In supporting amounts of taxes, assessments, etc., this method may be used. One amount can be proven so large as to cause unrest, another so small as to be insufficient, a third to produce a total just large enough to meet all anticipated expenses with no surplus for emergencies; therefore the correct amount must be just larger than this but not reaching an amount likely to produce the result caused by the first considered. Used in trials of criminal cases it eliminates motives until a single inevitable remainder cannot be argued away. This may be the clue to follow, or it may be the last one of all suspected persons. Burke considered several possible ways of dealing with the American colonies; one he dismissed as no more than a "sally of anger," a second could not be operated because of the distance, a scheme of Lord North's he proved would complicate rather than settle matters, to change the spirit of America was impossible, to prosecute it as criminal was inexpedient, therefore but one way remained, to conciliate the spirit of discontent by letting the colonies vote their own taxes. It is interesting that what Burke described as the sally of anger was the way the matter was actually settled—Great Britain had to give up the American colonies.

This method is also called elimination.

Cause to Effect. Just as the explainer may pass from cause to effect so may the arguer. Other names for this method are antecedent probability and a priori argument. In argument from a known cause an effect is proven as having occurred or as likely to occur. In solving crime this is the method which uses the value of the motives for crime as known to exist in the feelings or sentiments of a certain accused person. A person trying to secure the passage of a certain law will prove that it as the cause will produce certain effects which make it desirable. Changed conditions in the United States will be brought forward as the cause to prove that the Federal government must do things never contemplated by the framers of the Constitution. Great military organization as the cause of the recent war is used now in argument to carry on the plea for the securing of peace by disarmament.

The main difficulty in reasoning from cause to effect is to make the relationship so clear and so close that one thing will be accepted by everybody as the undisputed cause of the alleged effect.

Effect to Cause. In reasoning from effect to cause the reverse method is employed. This is also termed argument from sign or the a posteriori method. In it, from some known effect the reasoning proves that it is the result of a certain specified cause. Statistics indicating business prosperity might be used as the effect from which the arguer proves that they are caused by a high protective tariff. A speaker shows the good effects upon people to prove that certain laws—claimed as the causes—should be extended in application. Arguments from effect to cause may be extremely far reaching; as every effect leads to some cause, which is itself the effect of some other cause, and so on almost to infinity. The good speaker will use just those basic causes which prove his proposition—no more.

In actual practice the two forms of reasoning from cause to effect and from effect to cause are frequently combined to make the arguments all the more convincing. Grouped together they are termed causal relations.

Persuasion. When a speaker has conclusively proven what he has stated in his proposition, is his speech ended? In some cases, yes; in many cases, no. Mere proof appeals to the intellect only; it settles matters perhaps, but leaves the hearer cold and humanly inactive. He may feel like saying, "Well, even if what you say is true, what are you going to do about it?" Mathematical and scientific proofs exist for mere information, but most arguments delivered before audiences have a purpose. They try to make people do something. A group of people should be aroused to some determination of purposeful thought if not to a registered act at the time. In days of great stress the appeal to action brought the immediate response in military enlistments; in enrollment for war work; in pledges of service; in signing membership blanks and subscription blanks; in spontaneous giving.

Persuasion Produces a Response. The end of most argumentative speaking is to produce a response. It may be the casting of a vote, the joining of a society, the repudiation of an unworthy candidate, the demonstrating of the solidarity of labor, the affiliating with a religious sect, the changing of a mode of procedure, the purchasing of a new church organ, the wearing of simpler fashions, or any of the thousand and one things a patient listener is urged to do in the course of his usual life.

When the speaker passes on from mere convincing to appealing for some response he has passed from argumentation to persuasion. Nearly every argumentative speech dealing with a proposition of policy shows first what ought to be done, then tries to induce people to do it, by appealing as strongly as possible to their practical, esthetic, or moral interests. All such interests depend upon what we call sentiments or feelings to which worthy—note the word worthy—appeals may legitimately be addressed. Attempts to arouse unworthy motives by stirring up ignorance and prejudice are always to be most harshly condemned. Such practices have brought certain kinds of so-called persuasion into well-deserved contempt. The high sounding spell-binder with his disgusting spread-eagleism cannot be muzzled by law, but he may be rendered harmless by vacant chairs and empty halls. Real eloquence is not a thing of noise and exaggeration. Beginning speakers should avoid the tawdry imitation as they would a plague.

Elements of Persuasion. What elements may aid the persuasive power of a speech? First of all, the occasion may be just the right one. The surroundings may have prepared the audience for the effect the speaker should make if he knows how to seize upon the opportunity for his own purpose. The speaker must know how to adapt himself to the circumstances present. In other cases, he must be able to do the much more difficult thing—adapt the circumstances to his purpose.

Secondly, the subject matter itself may prepare for the persuasive treatment in parts. Everyone realizes this. When emotional impulses are present in the material the introduction of persuasion is inevitable and fitting, if not overdone.

Thirdly, the essence of persuasion depends upon the speaker. All the good characteristics of good speaking will contribute to the effect of his attempts at persuasion. A good speaker is sincere to the point of winning respect even when he does not carry conviction. He is in earnest. He is simple and unaffected. He has tact. He is fair to every antagonistic attitude. He has perfect self-control. He does not lose his temper. He can show a proper sense of humor. He has genuine sympathy. And finally—perhaps it includes all the preceding—he has personal magnetism.

With such qualities a speaker can make an effective appeal by means of persuasion. If upon self-criticism and self-examination, or from outside kindly comment, he concludes he is lacking in any one of these qualities he should try to develop it.

EXERCISES

Prepare and deliver speeches upon some of the following or upon propositions suggested by them. If the speech is short, try to employ only one method of proof, but make it convincing. Where suitable, add persuasive elements.

1. Make a proposition from one of the following topics. Deliver an argumentative speech upon it. The next election. Entrance to college. Child labor. The study of the classics. The study of science.

2. Recommend changes which will benefit your school, your club or society, your church, your town, your state.

3. The Japanese should be admitted to the United States upon the same conditions as other foreigners.

4. Men and women should receive the same pay for the same work done.

5. All church property should be taxed.

6. All laws prohibiting secular employment on Sunday should be repealed.

7. The purely protective tariff should be withdrawn from goods the manufacture of which has been firmly established in this country.

8. Large incomes should be subject to a graduated income tax.

9. Employers should not be forced to recognize labor unions.

10. Immigration into the United States of persons who cannot read or write some language should be prohibited, except dependents upon such qualified entrants.

11. An amendment should be added to the Constitution providing for uniform marriage and divorce laws throughout the entire country.