Arthur Schopenhauer made this list with the purpose to show 38 ways to win an argument according to him. To win a debate depends on why you are debating. If you are trying to get the person you are debating to change views, these strategies are of no help. The other person will just become offended and hardened. If you are trying win in the eyes of a third party, these strategies may be the right choice. We as humans usually want the truth we seek or somehow ‘gain’ from this. And looking like you know the most truth doesn’t even help you either.
In this list of argumentative strategies written by Arthur Schopenhauger, we can see a direct relation between the ways people usually argue, and actual debating/argumentative strategies commonly used by professionals, lawyers, and politicians. These are rather commonly used to make a point, change the opponent’s mind, and state your beliefs, among others. Some examples of these rules that Arthur wrote about are to ignore your opponent’s proposition, which was intended to refer to some particular thing, which you could translate to understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it. A great strategy would also be to hide your conclusion from your opponent until the end, while mingling your premises here and there in your talk which will get your opponent to agree to them in no definite order. These strategies will get your opponent to think in a different way or manipulate their thoughts in order to view things from your perspective, resulting in your opponent to end up agreeing with you.
Argument as Emergence, Rhetoric as love written by Jim W.Corder is a lecture that shows his description or perspective of what authors write like and how they involve in the history, or previous experiences to back up their writing and portray their believes. I think that the majority of the authors do write according to what they have lived; sometimes they write according to what they are living and other times they write using a tone according to all their experience. "Language comes out of us a word at a time; we canot get all said at once (18)." The closing this lecture demonstrate that Corder is a writer who really writes with his feelings, with his life experience, persuading the reader to believe what he believes and think what he thinks. And For me, this is what rhetoric truly means, which is the art, and study of effective speaking, writing, and persuasion.
Jim W. Corder wrote this lecture called argument as emergence, rhetoric as love to explain his perspective on how writers express themselves when writing; he explained the way the majority of authors write, and this was commonly by narrating, storytelling, talking about themselves, their lives, and things they know, he said how writers often feel like they are missing something or that it doesn’t make sense. He argues how our narratives often describe our past, learned lessons, or previous experiences, He says something important about language, "Language comes out of us a word at a time; we cannot get all said at once (18)." In my opinion he said was that you think one step at a time while you write what you think, this is could be a good way to write, or bad because you could write your thoughts down and they don’t turn out to be what you really were thinking and not what you thought you wrote. Jim Corder "Argument is not something to present or to display. It is something to be (26)." Corder then explains what an argument requires, "Requires a readiness to testify to an identity that is always emerging (26)..." by this he meant that your experiences, memories, or the way you were raised makes an argument to what you believe and what you defend. He then concludes this lecture by describing how rhetoric is love, and describing it as a world that withholds our diversities, and perspectives as writers.
|
AuthorMy name is Alex Ivan Martinez, I'm a freshman at UTEP seeking an Engineering Leadership major and a graphic design minor.
Archives
November 2015
Categories |