Free Making the Connection: Strategies to Build Effective Personal Relationships (Collection) by Richard Templar, Jonathan Herring, Sandy Allgeier, Samuel Barondes Page B
religious belief. We can explain that only exceptions based on religious belief will be allowed, and there will not be many of those.”
• You could argue that the slope is slippery everywhere. The argument here is that there is no sensible reason to draw the line where you do but it has to be drawn somewhere. Take, for example, the fact that to buy alcohol you need to be 21 in the US. Now, it’s easy to argue that this is an arbitrary line. Nothing magical happens on the night of a twenty-first birthday. But this point can be made at whatever age is chosen. It can always be argued that the child does not magically become more mature in the course of a few hours the day before the relevant birthday.
This is true in lots of areas of life. Take speeding. Is it really that much more dangerous to drive at 31 mph than 29 mph? Probably not, but driving at the first speed can cause you to end up with a ticket, the latter not. So the first question to ask is whether there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. Well, assuming we don’t want 7-year-olds buying beer and we don’t want roads without speed limits, we need to draw the line somewhere. Having reached that conclusion, we need to accept that wherever the line is drawn there will be cases either side of the line where it seems arbitrary. The next question is whether the place the line is drawn is a reasonably good one. So, regarding the age to buy alcohol, we are confident that, generally, under 21-year-olds lack the maturity needed to make the decision to buy alcohol, while over 21-year-olds do possess it. If that is correct, there is a strong argument for saying, yes the line drawn is an arbitrary one, but we have to draw a line somewhere, and this place is the best place to draw it.
What if?
A common tactic in argument is to produce an absurd scenario that will produce disaster.
“Bob has suggested that we relocate to Boston, but what will happen if there is a national railway strike?”
Or more dramatically:
“That financial plan looks very sensible, but what would happen if there is a stock market crash?”
This form of argument is common. Its essence is very sensible: it can be used to point out the dangers of a proposed course of action. However, the argument should be treated with care. Virtually any idea could be opposed on the basis that one can imagine a scenario where it would be foolish. “But what if ..?” can always be asked. For example:
“We should not buy Christmas presents this year, because Martians may land tomorrow and take over the world.”
A good use of “what if?” is to show that not only are there potentially disastrous consequences, but that those are realistic. If you are the opponent of a “what if” argument, your case will be even stronger if you can show that there are alternatives that are just as good, but that do not carry with them the suggested disadvantages. Also, many “what if” arguments can be defeated by saying that the dreaded scenario will be a problem whatever the situation is. If Martians land and take over the world, the fact you have bought Christmas presents may be the least of your worries!
Straw men
The battlefields of arguments are littered with the bodies of slain straw men. Straw women seem rarely to face attack. It can be a powerful rhetorical tool to pick on a particularly weak argument that could be used by the other side and ridicule it. Consider this example:
“I read yesterday an article from my opponent’s party arguing we should raise taxes so that we can spend money on improving Buckingham Palace. Well, I think the Queen can well afford to look after her own building rather than calling on the downtrodden taxpayers of England. So I say: No More Taxes.”
This argument is designed to make its opponents look foolish. However, it is based on the false assumption that the only argument opponents might make is the one mentioned. Of course, much better arguments could be used for raising taxes
• You could argue that the slope is slippery everywhere. The argument here is that there is no sensible reason to draw the line where you do but it has to be drawn somewhere. Take, for example, the fact that to buy alcohol you need to be 21 in the US. Now, it’s easy to argue that this is an arbitrary line. Nothing magical happens on the night of a twenty-first birthday. But this point can be made at whatever age is chosen. It can always be argued that the child does not magically become more mature in the course of a few hours the day before the relevant birthday.
This is true in lots of areas of life. Take speeding. Is it really that much more dangerous to drive at 31 mph than 29 mph? Probably not, but driving at the first speed can cause you to end up with a ticket, the latter not. So the first question to ask is whether there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. Well, assuming we don’t want 7-year-olds buying beer and we don’t want roads without speed limits, we need to draw the line somewhere. Having reached that conclusion, we need to accept that wherever the line is drawn there will be cases either side of the line where it seems arbitrary. The next question is whether the place the line is drawn is a reasonably good one. So, regarding the age to buy alcohol, we are confident that, generally, under 21-year-olds lack the maturity needed to make the decision to buy alcohol, while over 21-year-olds do possess it. If that is correct, there is a strong argument for saying, yes the line drawn is an arbitrary one, but we have to draw a line somewhere, and this place is the best place to draw it.
What if?
A common tactic in argument is to produce an absurd scenario that will produce disaster.
“Bob has suggested that we relocate to Boston, but what will happen if there is a national railway strike?”
Or more dramatically:
“That financial plan looks very sensible, but what would happen if there is a stock market crash?”
This form of argument is common. Its essence is very sensible: it can be used to point out the dangers of a proposed course of action. However, the argument should be treated with care. Virtually any idea could be opposed on the basis that one can imagine a scenario where it would be foolish. “But what if ..?” can always be asked. For example:
“We should not buy Christmas presents this year, because Martians may land tomorrow and take over the world.”
A good use of “what if?” is to show that not only are there potentially disastrous consequences, but that those are realistic. If you are the opponent of a “what if” argument, your case will be even stronger if you can show that there are alternatives that are just as good, but that do not carry with them the suggested disadvantages. Also, many “what if” arguments can be defeated by saying that the dreaded scenario will be a problem whatever the situation is. If Martians land and take over the world, the fact you have bought Christmas presents may be the least of your worries!
Straw men
The battlefields of arguments are littered with the bodies of slain straw men. Straw women seem rarely to face attack. It can be a powerful rhetorical tool to pick on a particularly weak argument that could be used by the other side and ridicule it. Consider this example:
“I read yesterday an article from my opponent’s party arguing we should raise taxes so that we can spend money on improving Buckingham Palace. Well, I think the Queen can well afford to look after her own building rather than calling on the downtrodden taxpayers of England. So I say: No More Taxes.”
This argument is designed to make its opponents look foolish. However, it is based on the false assumption that the only argument opponents might make is the one mentioned. Of course, much better arguments could be used for raising taxes
Similar Books
Silent Justice
Rayven T. Hill
Agatha Raisin and the Fairies of Fryham
MC Beaton
Engaging the Enemy
Elizabeth Moon
Hot and Bothered
Linda Cajio
Color Her Red
Crystal Shaw
Death Of A Dream Maker
Katy Munger
A Perfect Bond
Lee-Ann Wallace
The Jewel Box
C Michelle McCarty
Heartfire
Karen Rose Smith
Seth Baumgartner's Love Manifesto
Eric Luper