Practical Argumentation | Page 8

work of the introduction is threefold: (1)
to conciliate the audience; (2) to explain the subject; and (3) to outline
the discussion. As the conciliation of the audience is accomplished by
an appeal to the emotions rather than to the reason, it is properly
classified under persuasion. Explaining the proposition and outlining
the discussion are of an expository nature and will be discussed under
the head of conviction.
As has been stated in a previous chapter, the amount of persuasion to
be used in any piece of argumentative work depends entirely upon the
attending circumstances. The subject, audience, author, occasion, and
purpose of the effort must be taken into consideration. But whether the
amount used be great or small, practically every argument should begin
with conciliation. The conciliation of the _audience_--the word
audience is used throughout this book to designate both hearers and
readers--consists of gaining the good will of those to be convinced, of
arousing their interest, and of rendering them open to conviction. No
argument can be expected to attain any considerable degree of success
so long as anything about its author, or anything in the subject itself, is
peculiarly disagreeable to the people it is designed to affect. If the ill
will remains too great, it is not likely that the argument will ever reach
those for whom it is intended, much less produce the desired result. In
addressing Southern sympathizers at Liverpool, during the Civil War,
Beecher had to fight even for a hearing. The speech of an unpopular
Senator frequently empties the Senate chamber. Men of one political
belief often refuse to read the publications of the opposite party.

Obviously, the first duty of the introduction is to gain the approval of
the audience. In the next place, interest must be aroused. Active dislike
is less frequently encountered than indifference. How many times
sermons, lectures, books have failed in their object just because no one
took any interest in them! There was no opposition, no hostility; every
one wished the cause well; and yet the effort failed to meet with any
attention or response. The argument did not arouse interest--and
interest is a prime cause of attention and of action. In the third place,
the conciliatory part of the introduction should induce the audience to
assume an unbiased, judicial attitude, ready to decide the question
according to the strength of the proof. This result is not always easy of
attainment. Longstanding beliefs, prejudice, stubbornness must be
overcome, and a desire for the truth substituted for everything else. All
this is frequently difficult, but unless an arguer can gain the good will
of the people addressed, arouse their interest, and render them willing
to be convinced, no amount of reasoning is likely to produce much
effect.
Now the question arises, How is it possible to conciliate the audience?
To this query there is no answer that will positively guarantee success.
The arguer must always study his audience and suit his discourse to the
occasion. What means success in one instance may bring failure in
another. The secret of the whole matter is adaptability. Humor, gravity,
pathos, even defiance may at times be used to advantage. It is not
always possible, however, for the orator or writer to know beforehand
just the kind of people he is to address. In this case it is usually best for
him to follow out a few well established principles that most arguers
have found to be of benefit.
MODESTY. Modesty in word and action is indispensable to one who
would gain the friendship of his audience. Anything that savors of
egotism at once creates a feeling of enmity. No one can endure
another's consciousness of superiority even though the superiority be
real. An appearance of haughtiness, self-esteem, condescension,
intolerance of inferiors, or a desire for personal glory will at once raise
barriers of dislike. On the other hand, modesty should never be carried
so far as to become affectation; that attitude is equally despicable.

Personal unobtrusiveness should exist without being conspicuous. The
arguer should always take the attitude that the cause he is upholding is
greater than its advocate.
In the following quotations, compare the overbearing arrogance of
Burke's introduction with the simple modesty of Proctor's:--
Mr. Speaker, I rise under some embarrassment occasioned by a feeling
of delicacy toward one-half of the house, and of sovereign contempt for
the other half. [Footnote: Edmund Burke, House of Commons, March
22, 1775.]
Mr. President, more importance seems to be attached by others to my
recent visit to Cuba than I had given it, and it has been suggested that I
make a public statement of what I saw and how the situation impressed
me. This I do on account of the public interest in all that concerns Cuba,
and to correct some inaccuracies