Thank You for Arguning Chatper 25

Chapter 25

Summery

    This last chapter was about Cicero’s five canons of persuasion which are invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. These methods were made for more formal settings but they work amazingly in a less formal environment. These tactics are in a very specific order for a reason because this is how you should order your speeches. First you should come up with what you want to say then decide what order you want to say it in. then determine how you should style your speech to your specific audience and put it down in writing to keep things in order and finally get up and talk to you audience.Another classical outline is introduction, narration,division,proof,refutation,and conclusion.  Another technique is named “modest name-dropping” which is where you refer to a respectable source so that the audience understands that you have knowledge and then you subtle ask who are you to question authority. The best bragging hides itself in modestly. Now with anything you have to invented what you are going to say. Now sometimes sitting down and just trying to write a speech can work but sometimes walking outside and just trying to think about what everybody wants and start with yourself. What do you want to happen or inspire because of your speech what is your goal? Next ask if your problem is complex or simple. If it is complex you should break the problem down into smaller issues. If simple just address the problem head on. What you should do next is imagine what your opponent might say. This can help you form your argument if you can combat the problems your opponent might have against you. Next you have to form your argument using ethos, logos, and pathos. This specific order has the best results you need to start by winning over your audience by getting them to like you through your values and your concern for their issues. You must make them identify with you. Now you are ready to apply logos by going into facts and making your case proving your point logically. By the end you will have gotten your audience all charged up and passionate about your issue. Logic rarely makes people do anything so if you can get them passionate about your issue using logic you can really change the state of the argument. One of the more popular tactics is the reluctant conclusion which is where you pretend that you came to your conclusion reluctantly. At the end of your speech you should restart your strongest points and the describe what you want.

Reflection

    This chapter was great I loved reading the different ways to form your argument. Cicero is one of my favorite characters and I love using his five canons to form a good argument. It was also very interesting learning about the specific order of ethos, logos, and pathos because they are the basic principles and putting them in this specific order really helped me see how they can be used in full effect. I also looked back on other historically successful speeches and they for the most part follow this platform of invention, arrangement, style, memory,and delivery. I personally like the art of rhetoric because of all the history that is in the subject. I love that this subject has art, history, and public speaking. It is everything that I am looking for in a subject and it is also very intense, anything could happen during a debate. I also like seeing that there is so many different ways to form an argument not only with the new tricks but with the multiple classic ways we can do it. This was an amazing book and I would recommend it to everyone who likes history, art and public speaking. It really touches so many subjects and it does not stand still, it never gets stale.

Thank You for Arguing Chapter 14

Chapter 14

Summery

    Chapter 14 is all about how to spot and what is a fallacy. The book starts off with the very common concept of the seven deadly sins but he says the seven deadly fallacies. He also states that every logical fallacies come down to bad logic. There is a checklist you can use to determine if it is a fallacy. The checklist is:

1.Does the proof hold up?

2.Am I given the right number of choices?

3.Does the proof lead to the conclusion?

4.Who cares?

All of these questions should be asked anytime you feel like something doesn't add up? An ability to see a fallacy will help you protect yourself. Each step correlates to fallacies such as bad proof, wrong number of choices and disconnect between proof and conclusion. Bad choices include false comparison which is putting examples into wrong categories and bad examples and ignorance as proof. The wrong number of choices is where you are offering just two choices when there are actually more available. Disconnect between proof and conclusion is where the proof and conclusion are the same thing. The red herring is a distraction tactic that is part of the disconnect between proof and conclusion along with the wrong ending where the proof fails to lead to any conclusion.  The first deadly sin is the false comparison which is about putting two things right next to each other that don’t compare. A common fallacy is the all natural fallacy where it assumes that the members of the same family share all the same traits. Kids use this fallacy a lot when they say things along the lines of. “But everyone else is going...” and “ Mom the other parents are driving their kids there!”. This type of fallacy almost very works because of how absurd and over used it is. Clearly not every parent can drive their kids and everyone can’t go to the party. This is also can be considered reductio ad absurdum which is reducing an argument to absurdity. When you do this you become completely untrustworthy and you lose credibility. The second deadly sin is the bad example such as a hasty generalization. A hasty generalization is the argument that offers too few examples to prove their point. The third deadly sin is ignorance as proof which is more commonly known as the fallacy of ignorance. This fallacy states that what we cannot prove, then it must not exist or if we can’t disprove it,then it must exist. This fallacy does not go over super well with devout religious people or UFO believers. The fourth deadly sin is the tautology which is basically just repeats the premise. Logicians call this fallacy “begging the question” is a better term. You are basically saying the same thing twice and sometimes you need repetition and sometimes it is just too much. The fifth deadly sin is the false choice this is where it looks like you are talking about one thing b ut it really is multiple things at once.It is very deceitful to the audience but sometimes it is your only choice. You have to make the audience believe that two of more issues can get merged into one. The other one was the false dilemma which is when you think you have two choices but you really have a lot more. This is used a lot in politics where they show you one side and hide the other ones. The sixth deadly sin is the red herring which is where the speaker brings up a completely unrelated issue to distract the audience. This a very common and if not done right it can be pointed out in an instant. The seventh and final deadly sin is the wrong ending which can be known as the slippery slope where if we allow this reasonable thing to happen then it will inevitably lead to an extreme version of it. This chapter was very interesting with its talk of deadly sins and fallacies but in the end it really helped inform me of the mistakes people make.

Reflection

    This chapter was much longer than any from before but it was just as good. It really opened my eyes to all the types of fallacies and to protect yourself from fallacies you must know them. I also saw how many of them I use without even knowing it. Some of them I was already aware of such as the red herring because of how popular it is. It is also very easy and can be spotted just as easy if not done right, just like with anything. If you only do half of a job and not the other both halfs look false and deceitful and people don’t like that. Either do it with everything you have or don’t do it at all. You should also try and keep yourself updated on the latest fallacies to protect yourself because no one likes being tricked.

Thank You for Arguing Chapter 13

Chapter 13

Summery

    Chapter 13 was about applying some logos to get what you want out of a discussion. The main point of the chapter was on starting with a commonplace, this is something everyone knows and can relate too. One of the biggest problems in most arguments is someone feeling like they don’t know enough about the issue. If you are in an argument and you suddenly feel like you are less informed than you will become less confident in your argument there for you lose your standing ground. Now a commonplace is a good place to start but sometimes you don't need to use such a hand fed message. You can use logos to skip the fact when you have to, focusing your attention on the rational strategies. This does not mean only use logic in an argument. This is something the book likes to call Spock Theory, the theory states that anything in emotion or values is “illogical”. This strategy is actually called dialectic, it is mathematical and formulaic. This is not true in rhetoric we need emotions and values in our arguments to help persuade the audience. Logic rarely gets people to do anything.  Logos in the biblical translation means “word”.  But the Greeks applied logos to logic in everything, logos lets you put in facts, values, and attitudes to your discussion. In your discussion you are trying to convince your audience of something but their beliefs are as important as the facts. An audience is as good as what it knows and what it thinks is true is true. This chapter also talks about syllogism, which Jay says he thinks Aristotle tried to make as boring as possible. Syllogism is basically the “well, duh” that is stated in your argument. It’s almost like an “if-then”, where you state something true and then follow it with something else true and you can reach the conclusion that must also be true. This can be a sort of fallacy because sometimes the conclusion you reach is not true, they use this a lot in politics. But sometimes to conclusion you reach is true and example is “ No dogs are cats, All pitbulls are dogs, therefore,no pit bulls are cats.” This type of argument you take something the audience knows or truth or a commonplace and apply it to your argument. This chapter was mainly on focusing on logos and how you can apply it to your argument and it still have emotion and values.

Reflection:

    This chapter right from the get go states how this subject of syllogism is boring and dry but it was bearable. It was not painfully boring it was interesting but it had its stale moments. One thing that really opened my eyes was when he started talking about using only logic and how you would think only using logic would be the best argument because it would have no flaws. Because we are predisposed to think that emotions and values are “illogical”. When it is something we can all relate to and a purely logical argument like what Spock and the rest of the Vulcans have is boring and a repellent for persuasion. The subject of syllogism is very interesting and after reading this chapter I can see how people draw wrong conclusions from the truth. I remember seeing it in the modern remake of Sherlock. In this series Moriarty sets but through the whole tv show little truths about Sherlock and in the end it leads everyone to believe something not true. He says “ To make a lie that’s more preferable to the truth, a big lie, wrap it up in a truth to make it more palatable”. This is how I see syllogism, wrapping up a lie inside a truth.

Thank You for Arguing: Chapter 8

Chapter 8:

Summery

    This chapter started off with talking about disinterested. This was very interesting because you would think you should show your audience you care. But as I kept reading I found “disinterested goodwill” which is just that, it’s caring. When you have disinterested goodwill you make the audience believe that you feel their pain and that you have nothing personal to gain. He also talked about how “disinterest” and “uninterest” are used interchangeable now a days. Even though they are vastly different. In old times politicians running for president would show their disinterest by appearing as if any short of Convention was their first, they would also give away their fortunes and bankrupt themselves to have that up-by-the-bootstraps appeal to show how much they could do. When now a days all our politicians are self interested billionaires. This was a very short chapter but it was packed with a lot of information. One main points was try to make your opinion sound as if you have only reached it after having seen some overwhelming evidence that has changed your mind. Meaning act as if you feel you have to come to this conclusion despite your own desires. It helps make the audience feel as if you are looking out for their best interest. If you can’t convince the audience that way you can talk about how you used to believe your opponent's same beliefs until you found more logical evidence and changed your mind. This can help switch the discussion from values to a more practical discussion. You could also use the tactic where you act as if the choice you have made hurts you personally. An example is “I’m sorry you have to eat carrots. I know you don’t like them and neither do I. But they help your eyesight.” You are empathizing with their problems but at the same time getting them to continue to do it.  The one thing I consider the main point of this chapter is what he labeled “ the best trick of them all: Make it seem you have no tricks”. This I believe is one of the most important things said in the whole book because you can have all the tactics you want but if people think you are trying to trick them they are not going to believe you. This all goes back to trust, there has to be trust. One way to make it seem like you have no ticks up your sleeve is dubitatio. Dubitatio is rhetoric doubt or uncertainty. If you have a little sense of doubt people can emphasize with you because they themselves don't know what to think yet.

Reflection:

    This chapter helped me see that you can have doubt in your argument and still have a convincing argument. It also helped me see that you can show disinterest in the topic. I always thought you had to show you cared, a lot. Or else people would never believe you if you did not believe you. You have to be very confident in your side of the discussion. Connecting with the audience is something you need to do and keep it. If you can’t have trust then you don’t have a discussion they have already made up their minds. I like knowing that I don’t have to be one hundred percent committed or even fully believe in what I am debating. It helps me when I’m debating something I might be on the fence about, but I have to show the audience I am not on the fence but I an on the lawn next to the fence. This chapter was very helpful in showing me how I can still be a person and have doubts in my argument and still have a good argument.

Thank You for Arguing: Chapter 6

Chapter 6:

Summery

    In the last chapter we read how to get them to like you and now we have to figure out how to make them listen to you not just hear. It’s interesting to think that you can be a terrific person but you still won’t get people to follow you. People want someone they can trust and if they don’t trust you they will not listen. And sometimes people trust the wrong people even when it is clear to see they are no good they still trust them. Your preferred audience is someone who will be receptive and attentive and overall they need to trust you. With trust you could convince people to follow you almost blind. The audience needs to believe you have their best interest at heart even if you don’t (especially if you don’t). Aristotle has three basic qualities of persuasion of ethos: Virtue, or cause, practical wisdom, or craft, and disinterest. Now he’s not saying don’t care but be impartial don’t have a bias only care about the audiences well being rather than your own. With virtue/cause you must make the audience believe you share their values.  With practical wisdom/craft you must make them believe you know the right thing to do. One thing you must remember and always keep in mind is your audience's values changes from audience to audience. When you are talking to children you must dial down your vocabulary and try to keep their attention every 10 seconds but when you are talking to an adult you can elevate your language a bit and you don't have to chase their attention like you would with a child. One thing this chapter drove home was that the point of rhetoric isn’t to make you into a better person or a worse one but to make you a more effective auger. He also comes back to the last chapter with decorum but not the decorum having to do with your clothing or your manners but with making the audience believe their beliefs are your beliefs. He talks about this how to deal with a bigot and how you will never talk a bigot directly out of their prejudices but you can dissuade him from acting on it by talking in specifics in who would be affected and describe their values that they have in common. You must make that other person or idea they have more human because the more they can connect the less they can hate them. In the concentration camps the prisoners did not have name tags they were giving numbers one for inventory purposes but on another bigger plain so that people could not connect with them. It’s hard to emotionally connect to a number in front of you or one on a piece of paper. One thing you must do is brag about yourself. Now if you can do it without even opening your mouth that is the dream. The goal is for you to be able to have a humble brag without you even having to say anything. One thing that can help you is if everyone turn of you what you can do is turn it on them by using a tactical flaw. What this means is you will point out the flaw but turn it on its head. An example would be “I’m so sorry I was late I was helping an old lady across the street”.What you have done here is admit your mistake but followed up with how good of a human being you are making everyone accept your lateness.

Reflection:

    I connected really well with the references made in this chapter with Cyrano de Bergerac and Eddie Haskell. The Eddie Haskell theory is the sneaky theory where you change your position almost to suit whatever you want. It’s like if I wanted to get a new dress I could say “You know I saw this new dress and I don't know what do you think about it mom. What do you think?” Very rarely do I honestly ask that question most of the time what I really am saying is “I like this dress would you mind if I bought this?”. Women do this more often than I see men, I rarely see men do this. People should just say what they mean they Eddie Haskell it they say what they really mean by hiding it in other words. Cyrano de Bergerac is an amazing play and C-man has some great insight and wisdom. His wisdom is not just funny and relevant in the play but relevant to rhetoric, more so than I ever would have thought. Jay also talks about talking to his teenage children and me being a teenager I could relate to the child and to him. I also find it interesting how he talks about how you can be a great person and people will still not trust you and how people trust horrible people all the time. Like in The Princess Diaries 2 when Nick’s uncle tells everyone that Mia is not fit to run the country and his nephew is people believe him even though he is the worst person ever.

Thank You for Arguing: Chapter 5

Chapter 5:

Summery

    Getting them to like you. Something more difficult than you would think and solved with only what can be seen as the simplest solution. Decorum. It’s that simple just find what your audience expects from you and do it. Rhetorical decorum is the art of fitting in. In high school I know having converse tennis shoes is all the rage. Everyone from Technical theatre to Drama wears them whether they are putting up lights or giving a monologue they have them on. Decorum comes from the latin word fit. This means when you are speaking to a large audience you are saying “Do as I say and as I do”. You should sound like a choir in tutti (all together) meaning you sound like one voice of a big group. Now this does not mean be just like your audience. It actually does help if you do something as small as dress a little better than the average person in the crowd. Decorum is often known as how Kenneth Borke said “perhaps the simplest case of persuasion” because who can’t try to slightly emulate their audience. This does not mean act exactly like your audience this means act the way your audience expects you to act. You would never talk to a teacher the same way you talk to your friends. Your teachers expects more respect from you than your friends do. When trying to convince your friends of somthing you might use less intentional decorum because of how close you already are but with your teacher or audience you might have to use more persuasion techniques. With decorum comes indecorum which is the failure to conform to good taste, propriety, or etiquette.This can be used but remember you cannot be indecorous and pervasive they are mutually exclusive. You can tell everyone like it is but you will much of your intended audience if not handled correctly. “I think anyone who has an opinion, and voices it, will offend someone.”- Peter Steele. This quote shows how decorum can be thrown out the window but it can and will hurt your argument without. Decorum is the art of the appropriate now you can fake being apart of a group but no one will believe you. People can sense when someone is being someone who they are not. If you don’t fit in or are not confident in your argument let the audience see that sometimes. Aporia is wondering openly or admitting you cannot fathom a reason. Sometimes the audience will sometimes unconsciously start to reason with you and they can appreciate the honesty. No one want to watch a speaker talk about something they don't believe or at least can’t fame interest because if you aren't interested why should the audience.

Reflection:

    This chapter was particularly engaging with its talk of decorum and its focus on the audience. Alot of books and classes on rhetoric barely talk on the audience which is astounding when all you are trying to do is talk to the audience. Being the audiences friend is important and if they don’t like you how are you supposed to get them to agree with you. Your appearance might not seem like a big deal but it’s the first thing people see and judge you on. If you are at a Sunday brunch with your parents it’s not appropriate to wear sweatpants and a dirty t-shirt even if you have a well informed and interesting conversation with everyone they will still see the dirty out of place outfit. You don’t need to outdress the group but if you are trying to impress your parents then try to dress a little nicer than everyone else. Even something as little as a nice pair of shoes can go the extra mile, just to show that you care. If the audience already has a preconceived notion about you it can make or break you. If they have heard good things you can ride on the coattails of those nice things but if they have heard negative things you will need to work extra hard to change their minds. How you present yourself is very important and should be taken seriously.

Thank You For Arguing: Chapter 1

Chapter 1
Summary:

        During this first chapter you are introduced to the concept of what is an argument and what to do and what not to do also how to win in losing an argument. He tells you about different persuasion techniques and how they are used in everyday ordinary life. With argumentum a fortiori, “argument from strength” it is thought if something works the hard way it should work the easy way. This is often used in commercials an example would be Secrets “Strong enough of a man but made for a women”. This commercial states how their deodorant can be used on the harshest subject so it can be used on the softest, it makes a lot of logical sense. Rhetoric is not only for the courts or to get you to buy a product it can be used in an everyday setting. Most common everyday persuasion technique is seduction. Now seduction is not only about sex appeal but about just appealing to everyone. It is trying to please a variety of people and their emotions. Logic can rarely get people to do anything you have to make them desire to do something. In TV shows we see this with good looking characters with dark gravelly voices fighting the same devilishly handsome bad guys each week with over dramatic and lavish close-ups of them with dramatic music. This makes us feel like we are experiencing something real even when we are not .When a TV show is not doing so well they will seduce an audience by cutting in more music. This makes the viewer ship feel more connected and it makes them feel something because we can call connect to music. Especially classical music such as The Magic Flute by Mozart in Infinity's new car commercial. Music such as this for decades has made people feel something and seeing a car back up is not very exciting but in the snow with this song rapidly playing in the background makes it exciting. Now this type of persuasion technique can be seen as manipulation but that’s only one part of the argument. Another big persuasion technique is chiasmus. Chiasmus is latin for crossing a figure of speech where two or more things are related to each other using a reversal of sentence structure to make a bigger point. This is seen a lot in speeches such as Winston Churchill's Iron Curtain speech March 5, 1946 “Let us preach what we practice —let us practice what we preach.” Most recognizable would be “All for one and one for all” the Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas, they are all around us. As you can see rhetoric is all around us and it influences everything we do.

Reflection

        The first chapter of Thank You For Arguing was very interesting, insightful, and entertaining, something most educational books lack. I have seen a lot of the same information many times and never have I been so intrigued by it. Jay Heinrichs is a brilliant writer who knows how to teach you something and at the same time make you laugh. Which made this chapter far more enjoyable to read. I enjoy learning and laughing so why not do both. Right off the bat with this book Jay tells you a story about toothpaste and his son and it was very interesting how he handled it. I would have never released he was using any sort of persuasion technique until he explained it. I thought everyone understood that in conceding your point you could still get what you want. I do that all the time with my sister when she may have thought she won the argument and proved her point but in the end I got what I wanted. Who cares who technically won I got what I wanted in the end. I also never really realized how much seduction was in our media till this chapter. I went back and looked at some of the more successful commercials and TV shows and it’s just about all you can see. Even if at first glance you don’t see it, it’s still there just under the surface. We have rhetoric built into us, into everything that pretty song the blue bird sings is actually a warning that this tree is theirs. My name on my cup tells everyone that this cup is mine. We are constantly in debate. We can’t help but seek new challenges.