1

Unit III

Lesson 1: The Traditions of Argumentation

Introduction

One of the greatest joys in academics is learning how to establish an argument and to defend it. All of academics is based on arguments, and much of academic thought and theory influences the world around us. Oftentimes, when we use the word argument, we are thinking of a heated disagreement between individuals. While this is the most commonly understood definition, the word argument (in the academic sense) means something different: a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. In this lesson, we will discuss more about argumentation and how we can come to understand it better in order to write a better argumentative research paper.

Throughout this course, you will be learning the art of argumentation, which is the action or process of reasoning systematically in support of an idea, action, or theory. Argumentation has a long history in deciding not only what we might be able to know about the world, but also what we might do about it. In the Western world, our understanding of argumentation comes from the Greco-Roman tradition.

The Three Appeals: Pathos, Ethos, and Logos

In ancient Greece and Rome, the rhetor was often literally a speaker, meaning that his or her delivery was through oratory, not written composition. Rhetors used three primary means of persuasion when speaking to a crowd, to a court, or to the senate: pathos, ethos,and logos. These three appeals, as they are often called, are still used today to persuade people to adopt a belief, to buy a product, or to move to action.

The appeal of pathosloosely translates to pathetic, in this case meaning “emotional” appeal. In this appeal, the content of the speech or writing would appeal mainly to the emotions of the audience. For example, if a person were arguing for more money to be donated to the local animal shelter, then the best way to appeal to the emotions of the audience in order to persuade them would be to show pictures of lost, scared, or hurt animals. The appeal of ethosis an appeal to the character of the person who is delivering the speech. If we consider the above example of the animal shelter, then the appeal of ethos might be used when a musician or actor is used in a commercial to promote the cause of donating to the shelter. Both the appeals of pathos and ethos are not considered to be as strong as the appeal of logos, which is the appeal to logic; part of the reason for this distinction is that people can be persuaded by emotion and character even when the argument is not a solid one. If a student wanted to make a logical argument about donating more funding to the animal shelter, then he or she would need to include statistics, illustrative accounts, projections for what the money could be used for, and more. These types of evidence support a logical appeal through the benefit of solid reasoning.

Rhetoric as a Civic Art

Both Plato (ca. 428-348 BC), philosopher and mathematician in Greece, and Aristotle (384-322 BC), Greek philosopher and scientist, were famous for criticizing rhetoric because of this ability of people to be persuaded by appeals other than logic. Instead, Aristotle focused on logic and how it could be used to understand the truth of matters and to make an argument. Perhaps as a result of Aristotle’s great influence upon our Western educational systems, the academy still respects logic and reasoning over emotion and character. The emphasis on logic and reasoning is one of the reasons that you are engaged in the process of creating a research project. Additionally, Aristotle devised three categories of civic rhetoric:

  • Forensic: Courtroom rhetorics were mostly concerned with issues of justice and innocence versus guilt.
  • Deliberative: These rhetorics were mostly concerned with what actions should be taken (or not taken) to ensure the stability of the state. These are sometimes known as political rhetorics.
  • Epideictic: These rhetorics were associated with ceremonies, like eulogies, in which there might be some great praise of the individual. Speeches that lay blame or establish values might also fall into this category.

Isocrates (436-338 BC), an ancient Greek rhetorician, and Aristotle thought that rhetoric, the art of persuasion, was fundamental to civic life, and that in order for a society to be good and just, its citizens should be empowered with the ability to speak and write well. Likewise, both Isocrates and Aristotle believed rhetoric is foundational to the construction of a society and to its success. Aristotle even considered rhetoric to be a necessity when teaching morality and character. Cicero (106-43 BC), considered by many to be Rome’s greatest orator, contended that a rhetor should have good character; similarly, the Roman rhetorician Quintilian famously stated that a rhetor must be “a good man speaking well,” rather than just an eloquent speaker.

Into more modern times, the sentiments of these influential thinkers continued with United States rhetorical theorists like John Quincy Adams (1767-1848), sixth President of the U.S. and professor of rhetoric at Brown University and Harvard, agreeing with Cicero that not only is logic and composition an art form, but it is also tied to the continuation of democracy, which depends upon the participation of its citizens in order to function. Students were often expected to engage in forensics;like Aristotle’s category of civic rhetoric, the term refers toa type of organized debate that often focuses on political and social issues. Forensics teams were competitive and sharpened the argumentation skills of students, who oftentimes would become lawyers, politicians, or statesmen of another kind.

TheWestern Tradition of Argumentation

In ancient Greece, the rhetorloves his or her city-state so much that he or she is compelled to speak about it. In other words, the rhetor sees that there is a need, and he or she transforms into the mouthpiece of the people. The speaker acts to persuade in the social or political sphere, motivate in times of devastation or war, and inform in times that the public needs to know. As such, the rhetor can take many forms and serve many purposes, but all of his or her efforts are towards the improvement of the city-state. As you have read, throughout time, the art of rhetoric as a civic art has been maintained. In this course, you are asked to locate a controversy that affects your society and to formulate an argument about that controversy. In this way, you are being compelled to write because of your passion for the subject matter and for the necessity of each individual’s contribution to the larger critical conversation. Learning about how to argue is, in part, about learning how to participate in these conversations, an important skill in any democracy.

Review

  1. The word argument (in the academic sense) isa reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
  2. The art of argumentationis the action or process of reasoning systematically in support of an idea, action, or theory.
  3. The three appeals are pathos, ethos, and logos.
  4. Pathos is the emotional appeal.
  5. Ethos is the appeal to the character of the speaker.
  6. Logos is an appeal to the logic and reason of the audience.
  7. Aristotle’s three categories of civic rhetorics are forensic, deliberative, and epideictic.
  8. Forensic rhetoric focuses on justice.
  9. Deliberative rhetoric focuses on politics and the social good.
  10. Epideictic rhetoric is ceremonial speech.
  11. Rhetoric, the art of persuasion, is closely linked with civic participation.
  12. The rhetor was the mouthpiece of the people and spoke or wrote when the civic need arose.
  13. Learning about argumentation calls for students to become like the rhetors of ancient Greece who made arguments about controversial topics in order to improve their society.