Accent Reduction | Public Speaking | Influencing By Argument. Part 3 Previous   Up   Next   

Influencing By Argument. Part 3

Licenses may be properly required in the pursuit of many professions and avocations, which require peculiar skill and training or supervision for the public welfare. The profession or avocation is open to all alike who will prepare themselves with the requisite qualifications or give the requisite security for preserving public order. This is in harmony with the general proposition that the ordinary pursuits of life, forming the greater per cent of the industrial pursuits, are and ought to be free and open to all, subject only to such general regulations, applying equally to all, as the general good may demand.

All such regulations are entirely competent for the legislature to make and are in no sense an abridgment of the equal rights of citizens. But a license to do that which is odious and against common right is necessarily an outrage upon the equal rights of citizens.

14. What method did Jesus employ in the following:

Ye are the salt of the earth; but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

Behold the fowls of the air; for they sow not, neither do they reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field; how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin; And yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?

Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

15. Make five original syllogisms1 on the following models:

Major Premise: He who administers arsenic gives poison.

1 For those who would make a further study of the syllogism the following rules are given: 1. In a syllogism there should be only three terms. 2. Of these three only one can be the middle term. 3. One premise must be affirmative. 4. The conclusion must be negative if either premise is negative. 5. To prove a negative, one of the premises must be negative.

Summary of Regulating Principles: 1. Terms which agree with the same thing agree with each other; and when only one of two terms agrees with a third term, the two terms disagree with each other. 2. "Whatever is affirmed of a class may be affirmed of all the members of that class," and "Whatever is denied of a class may be denied of all the members of that class."

Minor Premise: The prisoner administered arsenic to the victim. Conclusion: Therefore the prisoner is a poisoner.

Major Premise: All dogs are quadrupeds. Minor Premise: This animal is a biped. Conclusion: Therefore this animal is not a dog.

16. Prepare either the positive or the negative side of the following question for debate: The recall of judges should be adopted as a national principle.

17. Is this question debatable? Benedict Arnold was a gentleman. Give reasons for your answer.

18. Criticise any street or dinner-table argument you have heard recently.

19. Test the reasoning of any of the speeches given in this volume.

20. Make a short speech arguing in favor of instruction in public speaking in the public evening schools.

21. (a) Clip a newspaper editorial in which the reasoning is weak. (b) Criticise it. (c) Correct it.

22. Make a list of three subjects for debate, selected from the monthly magazines.

23. Do the same from the newspapers.

24. Choosing your own question and side, prepare a brief suitable for a ten-minute debating argument. The following models of briefs may help you:

Debate

Resolved: That armed intervention is not justifiable on the part of any nation to collect, in behalf of private individuals, financial claims against any American nation.1

Brief Of Affirmative Argument

First Speaker - Chafee

Armed intervention for collection of private claims from any American nation is not justifiable, for

1. It is wrong in principle, because

(a) It violates the fundamental principles of international law for a very slight cause

(b) It is contrary to the proper function of the State, and

(c) It is contrary to justice, since claims are exaggerated.

Second Speaker - Hurley

2. It is disastrous in Us results, because

(a) It incurs danger of grave international complications

(b) It tends to increase the burden of debt in the South American republics

(c) It encourages a waste of the world's capital, and

(d) It disturbs peace and stability in South America.

Third Speaker - Bruce

3. It is unnecessary to collect in this way, because

(a) Peaceful methods have succeeded

(b) If these should fail, claims should be settled by The Hague Tribunal

1 All the speakers were from Brown University. The affirmative briefs were used in debate with the Dartmouth College team, and the negative briefs were used in debate with the Williams College team. From The Speaker, by permission.

(c) The fault has always been with European States when force has been used, and

(d) In any case, force should not be used, for it counteracts the movement towards peace.

Brief Of Negative Argument

First Speaker - Branch

Armed intervention for the collection of private financial claims against some American States is justifiable, for

1. When other means of collection have failed, armed intervention against any nation is essentially proper, because

(a) Justice should always be secured

(b) Non-enforcement of payment puts a premium on dishonesty

(c) Intervention for this purpose is sanctioned by the best international authority

(d) Danger of undue collection is slight and can be avoided entirely by submission of claims to The Hague Tribunal before intervening

Second Speaker - Stone

2. Armed intervention is necessary to secure justice in tropical America, for

(a) The governments of this section constantly repudiate just debts

(b) They insist that the final decision about claims shall rest with their own corrupt courts (c) They refuse to arbitrate sometimes.

Third Speaker - Dennett

3. Armed intervention is beneficial in its results, because

(a) It inspires responsibility

(b) In administering custom houses it removes temptation to revolutions

(c) It gives confidence to desirable capital Among others, the following books were used in the preparation of the arguments:

N. "The Monroe Doctrine," by T. B. Edgington. Chapters 22-28. "Digest of International Law," by J. B. Moore. Report of Penfield of proceedings before Hague Tribunal in 1903. "Statesman's Year Book" (for statistics). A. Minister Drago's appeal to the United States, in Foreign Relations of United States, 1903. President Roosevelt's Message, 1905, pp. 33-37. And articles in the following magazines (among many others):

"Journal of Political Economy," December, 1906. "Atlantic Monthly," October, 1906. "North American Review," Vol. 183, p. 602. All of these contain material valuable for both sides, except those marked "N" and "A," which are useful only for the negative and affirmative, respectively.

Note: - Practise in debating is most helpful to the public speaker, but if possible each debate should be under the supervision of some person whose word will be respected, so that the debaters might show regard for courtesy, accuracy, effective reasoning, and the necessity for careful preparation. The Appendix contains a list of questions for debate.

25. Are the following points well considered?

The Inheritance Tax Is Not A Good Social Reform Measure

A. Does not strike at the root of the evil

1. Fortunes not a menace in themselves

A fortune of $500,000 may be a greater social evil than one of $500,000,000

2. Danger of wealth depends on Us wrong accumulation and use

3. Inheritance tax will not prevent rebates, monopoly, discrimination, bribery, etc.

4. Laws aimed at unjust accumulation and use of wealth furnish the true remedy.

B. It would be evaded

1. Low rates are evaded

2. Rate must be high to result in distribution of great fortunes.

26. Class exercises: Mock Trial for (a) some serious political offense; (b) a burlesque offense.


  • Previous: Influencing By Argument. Part 2
  • Table of Contents
  • Next: Chapter XXIV. Influencing By Persuasion
  • Previous   Up   Next   

    About  |   Accent  |   TOEFL®  |   TOEIC®  |   IELTS  |   GMAT  |   GRE®  |   Online Degrees  |   Buy Now  |   Partners