This
tearing to pieces another's argument, is called refutation, or destructive
argument. A successful debater shows nearly if not equal skill in tearing
down his opponent's arguments as in building up his own.
Even in arguments in which no one takes the opposite side at the given
time, we must not forget that there are points on the opposite side which
are likely to arise in the minds of our hearers. Just as the skillful
teacher must know the difficulties that will arise in the minds of the
pupils even though they are not expressed, so must the skillful debater
consider the objections that his hearer will mentally set up against his
argument. It is well, however, for the debater to avoid overemphasizing
objections. Sometimes his discussion gives the objections a weight that
they would not otherwise have. It is not wise to set up "a man of straw"
for the purpose of knocking him down.
Notice the refutation in the following argument:--
In no respect is the difference of opinion as to the methods of fishing so
pronounced and disturbing among anglers as the diverse ones of fishing
"up" and "down" stream.
"Fishing up stream" has many advocates who assert that as trout always lie
with their heads up current, they are less likely to see the fisherman or
the glint of his rod when the casts are made; that the discomfort and
fatigue accompanying wading against strong rapids is amply repaid by the
increased scores secured; that the flies deftly thrown a foot or two above
the head of a feeding trout float more life-like down the current than
those drawn against it by the line, when they are apt to exhibit a
muscular power which in the live insect would be exaggerated and
unnatural.
Pages:
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434