Practical Argumentation | Page 9

that have, not unnaturally, appeared in
reported interviews with me. [Footnote: Redfield Proctor, United States
Senate, March 17, 1898.]
FAIRNESS. Few things will assist an arguer more in securing a
respectful hearing from those who do not agree with him, but whom he
would convince, than the quality of fairness. The arguer should take the
position of one seeking the truth regardless of what it may be. If he
wishes others to look at the question from his standpoint, he will have
to show that he is willing to consider the question from their point of
view. Everything' in the shape of prejudice, everything which would
tend to indicate that he had formed conclusions prior to his
investigation, he must carefully avoid.
In this connection consider the following:--
I very much regret that it should have been thought necessary to
suggest to you that I am brought here to "hurry you against the law and
beyond the evidence." I hope I have too much regard for justice, and
too much respect for my own character, to attempt either; and were I to
make such attempt, I am sure that in this court nothing can be carried
against the law, and that gentlemen, intelligent and just as you are, are

not, by any power, to be hurried beyond the evidence. Though I could
well have wished to shun this occasion, I have not felt at liberty to
withhold my professional assistance, when it is supposed that I may be
in some degree useful in investigating and discovering the truth
respecting this most extraordinary murder. It has seemed to be a duty
incumbent on me, as on every other citizen, to do my best and my
utmost to bring to light the perpetrators of this crime. Against the
prisoner at the bar, as an individual, I cannot have the slightest
prejudice. I would not do him the smallest injury or injustice. But I do
not affect to be indifferent to the discovery and the punishment of this
deep guilt. I cheerfully share in the opprobrium, how great so ever it
may be, which is cast on those who feel and manifest an anxious
concern that all who had a part in planning, or a hand in executing, this
deed of midnight assassination, may be brought to answer for their
enormous crime at the bar of public justice. [Footnote: Works of Daniel
Webster, Vol. VI, p. 51. Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1857.]
SINCERITY. Another quality of paramount importance to the arguer is
sincerity. This he must really possess if he is to be eminently successful.
To feign it is almost impossible; some word or expression, some
gesture or inflection of the voice, the very attitude of the insincere
arguer will betray his real feelings. If he tries to arouse an emotion that
he himself does not feel, his affectation will be apparent and his effort a
failure. There are few things that an audience resents more than being
tricked into an expression of feeling. If they even mistrust that a
speaker is trying to deceive them, that he is arguing merely for personal
gain or reputation and has no other interest in the case, no desire to
establish the truth, they will not only withhold their confidence, but
will also become prejudiced against him. It is usually inviting disaster
to champion a cause in which one is not interested heart and soul. Of
course in class room work the student cannot always avoid taking a
false position, and the training he receives thereby is excellent, but he
cannot make his persuasion of the highest type of effectiveness unless
he honestly and sincerely believes what he says, and feels the emotions
he would arouse.
AN APPEAL TO SOME EMOTION. One of the strongest forms of

conciliation is the direct appeal to a dominant emotion. If an arguer can
find some common ground on which to meet his audience, some
emotion by which they may be moved, he can usually obtain a personal
hold that will overcome hostility and lack of interest. In deciding what
emotion to arouse, he must make as careful and thorough a study of his
audience as he can. In general, the use of conviction need vary but little
to produce the same results on different men; processes of pure
reasoning are essentially the same the world around. But with
persuasion the case is different; emotions are varied, and in each
separate instance the arguer must carefully consider the ruling passions
and ideals of his audience. The hopes and aspirations of a gang of
ignorant miners would differ widely from the desires of an assembly of
college students, or of a coterie of metropolitan capitalists. Education,
wealth, social standing, politics, religion, race, nationality, every
motive that is likely to have weight with