|
|
|
self esteem, self confidence, coping with anxiety, free self help e-books... |
|
The Art of Public Speaking by Dale Carnegie and J. Berg Esenwein onlineXXIII INFLUENCING BY ARGUMENTpage 3 of 6 | page 1 | table of contents  QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES 1. Show why an unsupported assertion is not an argument. 2. Illustrate how an irrelevant fact may be made to seem to support an argument. 3. What inferences may justly be made from the following? During the Boer War it was found that the average Englishman did not measure up to the standards of recruiting and the average soldier in the field manifested a low plane of vitality and endurance. Parliament, alarmed by the disastrous consequences, instituted an investigation. The commission appointed brought in a finding that alcoholic poisoning was the great cause of the national degeneracy. The investigations of the commission have been supplemented by investigations of scientific bodies and individual scientists, all arriving at the same conclusion. As a consequence, the British Government has placarded the streets of a hundred cities with billboards setting forth the destructive and degenerating nature of alcohol and appealing to the people in the name of the nation to desist from drinking alcoholic beverages. Under efforts directed by the Government the British Army is fast becoming an army of total abstainers. The Governments of continental Europe followed the lead of the British Government. The French Government has placarded France with appeals to the people, attributing the decline of the birth rate and increase in the death rate to the widespread use of alcoholic beverages. The experience of the German Government has been the same. The German Emperor has clearly stated that leadership in war and in peace will be held by the nation that roots out alcohol. He has undertaken to eliminate even the drinking of beer, so far as possible, from the German Army and Navy. --RICHMOND PEARSON HOBSON, _Before the U.S. Congress_. 4. Since the burden of proof lies on him who attacks a position, or argues for a change in affairs, how would his opponent be likely to conduct his own part of a debate? 5. Define (_a_) syllogism; (_b_) rebuttal; (_c_) "begging the question;" (_d_) premise; (_e_) rejoinder; (_f_) sur-rejoinder; (_g_) dilemma; (_h_) induction; (_i_) deduction; (_j_) _a priori_; (_k_) _a posteriori_; (_l_) inference. 6. Criticise this reasoning: Men ought not to smoke tobacco, because to do so is contrary to best medical opinion. My physician has expressly condemned the practise, and is a medical authority in this country. 7. Criticise this reasoning: Men ought not to swear profanely, because it is wrong. It is wrong for the reason that it is contrary to the Moral Law, and it is contrary to the Moral Law because it is contrary to the Scriptures. It is contrary to the Scriptures because it is contrary to the will of God, and we know it is contrary to God's will because it is wrong. 8. Criticise this syllogism: MAJOR PREMISE: All men who have no cares are happy. MINOR PREMISE: Slovenly men are careless. CONCLUSION: Therefore, slovenly men are happy. |