ts; and that of enabling the speaker to attack his
opponent's arguments with both keenness and justice.
TESTING AN ARGUMENT
I. THE QUESTION UNDER DISCUSSION
1. _Is it clearly stated?_
(_a_) Do the terms of statement mean the same to each
disputant? (For example, the meaning of the term "gentleman" may not
be mutually agreed upon.)
(_b_) Is confusion likely to arise as to its purpose?
2. _Is it fairly stated?_
(_a_) Does it include enough?
(_b_) Does it include too much?
(_c_) Is it stated so as to contain a trap?
3. _Is it a debatable question?_
4. _What is the pivotal point in the whole question?_
5. _What are the subordinate points?_
II. THE EVIDENCE
1. _The witnesses as to facts_
(_a_) Is each witness impartial? What is his relation to the
subject at issue?
(_b_) Is he mentally competent?
(_c_) Is he morally credible?
(_d_) Is he in a position to know the facts? Is he an
eye-witness?
(_e_) Is he a willing witness?
(_f_) Is his testimony contradicted?
(_g_) Is his testimony corroborated?
(_h_) Is his testimony contrary to well-known facts or general
principles?
(_i_) Is it probable?
2. _The authorities cited as evidence_
(_a_) Is the authority well-recognized as such?
(_b_) What constitutes him an authority?
(_c_) Is his interest in the case an impartial one?
(_d_) Does he state his opinion positively and clearly?
(_e_) Are the non-personal authorities cited (books, etc.)
reliable and unprejudiced?
3. _The facts adduced as evidence_
(_a_) Are they sufficient in number to constitute proof?
(_b_) Are they weighty enough in character?
(_c_) Are they in harmony with reason?
(_d_) Are they mutually harmonious or contradictory?
(_e_) Are they admitted, doubted, or disputed?
4. _The principles adduced as evidence_
(_a_) Are they axiomatic?
(_b_) Are they truths of general experience?
(_c_) Are they truths of special experience?
(_d_) Are they truths arrived at by experiment?
Were such experiments special or general?
Were the experiments authoritative and conclusive?
III. THE REASONING
1. _Inductions_
(_a_) Are the facts numerous enough to warrant accepting the
generalization as being conclusive?
(_b_) Do the facts agree _only_ when considered in the
light of this explan
|