The Strategies for Argument

“Rhetoric is the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion”

Aristotle

Mod

es o

f Per

suas

ion Aristotle listed three modes of persuasion as

part of the rhetorical situation Ethical (ethos) Logical (logos) Emotional (pathos)

Commonly, these names are referred to by their Greek names: ethos, logos, pathos There is also mythos (plot) in which Aristotle

asserts that understanding the source is important; the nature of the topic should be considered

Each of these work in tandem to produce effective arguments.

Etho

s

“The effective orator must possess the quality which…is in the very nature of things the greatest and most important, that is, he [or she] must be a good man [or woman].” ~Quintillian

Ethos refers to character, believability, trustworthiness, honesty, etc. It is how we convince our audience, by virtue of our

reputations, that we are to be taken seriously Oftentimes, ethos is determined before we even

present an argument. Ethos and logos are closely tied

Ethically based arguments imply that claims can be supported by evidence and clear thinking that has led to reasonable conclusions

Etho

s

We rely on ethos to allow us to make sound judgments before committing to an action Advertisers often use celebrity endorsements

because their ethos helps sell products Michael Jordan for Nike Consequently, once ethos is destroyed,

advertisers are likely to adopt new sponsorship Tiger Woods

How often is ethos involved in politics? Constantly.

Logo

s

Arguments can be logical, but logos demands a precise implementation of information and language

Favors fact and reason over emotion for the sake of objectivity

Types of evidence (hierarchically organized) Facts or statistics

Usually are undeniable and based on data Personal experience

The eye witness can usually provide compelling testimony(law)

Authority More opinion based, but credible only because of

the expertise of the testimony

Logo

s

All evidence, no matter the validity, is subject to interpretation and, therefore, must be employed with caution and strategy.

Patte

rns o

f Log

ic Two types of reasoning

Inductive Deductive

Inductive: presenting evidence and then coming to a conclusion In the morning, you look at outside: sun is

shining, sky is clear, the weather forecast calls for warm temperatures. You conclude that you should wear light clothing

Deductive: Having a conclusion and then presenting evidence to support it Based on fundamental truths All men are created equal; therefore, they have

certain inalienable rights The truth, right, or belief stemming deductive

reasoning is the premise

Patte

rns o

f Log

ic The premise of an argument can be worked with in two

different ways Syllogism: a three-part argument in which the conclusion

rests on two premises, major and minor. Major: all people have hearts Minor: John is a person Conclusion: John has a heart

Enthymeme: A rhetorical syllogism where logic can be derived from the way the argument is constructed I’d better close the windows, because the sky is getting

darker Major: A dark sky indicates rain Minor: The sky is getting darker Conclusion: Therefore, it will probably rain (and I

should close the windows)

Logi

cal F

alla

cies

In response to the 2002 federal appeals court ruling that “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional: “In light of the events of this past September (9/11), I

think it would be hypocritical to omit an acknowledgment of a divine being under which the ideals and beliefs of this nation were created. And if you don’t think so, ask everyone how many of them prayed to God that day.”

This is an example of a logical fallacy, a problem in reasoning that negates the truth of the claim

Sometimes they can be powerfully illustrative and, thus, still win arguments despite their flaws

They should be avoided in most occasions as most speaking instances are concerned with truth Also, the critical listener can detect and capitalize on

logical fallacies

Logi

cal F

alla

cies

Appealing to pity: structuring an argument solely to stir an audience’s emotions without the help of evidence Someone who has seldom come to class and fails the course argues, “I

deserve to pass this class because I’ve had a lot of problems at home.” Appealing to prejudice: structuring an argument centered around

the values of a certain group A newspaper may criticize or exploit the atrocities of a country we are

at war with simply to win the crowd at home Appealing to tradition: Letting the past speak for the present

without evidence to warrant a claim We cannot let women join our club because we’ve never let them join

in the past Arguing by analogy: using a comparison that does not considered

similarities on more than one level A politician tries to convince people to vote for him because of his

outstanding record as a football player, claiming that football involves teamwork. It does indeed, but there many other skills that politics involve that football does not

Logi

cal F

alla

cies

Attributing False Cause: assuming that an event is the result of something that occurred before it post hoc, ergo propter hoc: after this, therefore because

of this Someone is arrested for murder because they were seen

near the house of the victim shortly before the murder. This person is then later released. He was simply reading the electric meter.

Good logic distinguishes between cause and coincidence

Guilt by association Largely political A candidate is a member of a church, that church comes

under criticism, therefore, the candidate holds the same beliefs and must be criticized

Logi

cal F

alla

cies

Begging the Question: a conclusion similar to the premise Claim: required courses like first-year composition are a

waste of time Conclusion: first-year composition should not be required

The author has assumed what the argument should be devoted to proving

Had the conclusion yielded something greater than the claim, it could have been avoided

Jumping to conclusion Because one apple is sour, it does not mean that all apples

are sour Ad hominem

Making personal attacks on an opponent to draw attention away from the issue at hand

Logi

cal F

alla

cies

Opposing the straw man: easier to demolish a straw man than a live opponent This is when an author pretends to respond to the views of his

opponents by only responding to an extreme view Sets up an artificial opposition

An argument against abolishing Social Security, when they opponent has merely suggested that Social Security should be reformed

Reason that does not follow Non sequitor

Because the teacher likes Joe, he passed the quiz in calculus The Slippery Slope

Opening the door to gay marriage will promote beastiality No argument is free of logical fallacies

Path

os

Very powerful and very risky Appealing to fear, love, pity, and anger People process these emotions differently and

react differently when presented with them Use pathos ethically

“Pushing the emotional buttons” of the listeners may help win the argument, but will it solve the problem? Is it the right way to address the issue?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Ethos, Pathos, or Logos?

Etho

s, Pa

thos

, or L

ogos

?