Aristotelian Argumentation

Aristotelian Argumentation

1. Prologue
2. Three ways to persuade
   • Ethos
   • Pathos
   • Logos
     
3. Real-life works and examples
4. Conclusion and credits
   

Prologue: The Aristotelian argumentation, as anticipated, was developed and implemented by a great thinker and a debater, Aristotle. Aristotle was a thinker who surpassed the level of thinking of an average human-being; His contributions encompassed almost of all fields such as Biology, Philosophy, Theology, Astronomy, etc... . One of his most used contribution is his argumentation structure which shows necessary skills to a debater/thinker in to persuading your opponent and 13 fallacies that one should avoid.

Three ways to persuade: This format of persuading is the most effective way to prove your point and build a strong base to your argument; These three ways of argumentation is being used by many debaters. We look at some real-life works and examples of these argumentations later.

• Ethos - An Aristotelian argumentation which uses credible sources to prove his/her point.
  
  • Credibility When one is using credibility to prove his/her point, then that one must provide a credible source which is either provided/written by a qualified scholar or an authoritarian. For example: One cannot support his claim with a source from a website with no qualified credibility such as Yahoo answers, blogspots. However one can support his/her claim by using a source with a qualified author from Harvard University or a certified expert. Holistically, Credibility argumentation is the usage of sources with an expert opinion.
  • Reputable Reputable is a form of credibility except it depends on the reputation a source was given by has. For example: If one is trying to persuade you to buy his product, he/she will use a reputed personality to promote your product; This reputed personality could be Oprah Winfrey, Barack Hussein Obama, or any other famous and persuading character.
    
• Pathos - This argumentation deals with persuading or proving your point through emotional statements or arguments. Pathos doesn't contain any sub-categories because it is a straight-forward argumentation in which the debater or the opponent uses emotional and personal attacks to prove his/her points. Lets use some flamers on Hackforums as an example to this argumentation: When one makes a thread discriminating the entire Muslim religion because of the act of one Muslim terrorist, Muslims are enraged because of the false accusation. This type of response is Pathos. The Muslim member feels this treatment unfair for accusing an entire race for the act of few members.
• Logos - Logos is the most useful and resolving argumentation of the three argumentation type, however, statistics show that people tend to use Pathos and Ethos more often. This also alludes to the fact why people fail to make a strong points and arguments on Hackforums. Logos mainly deals with rational explanations which scientific proofs and reason.
  • Evidence Evidence is a straightforward tool to prove a point and build a strong base. One of the main mis-conceptions of this sub-category is that evidence only encompasses Scientific evidences and proofs which means one cannot use the Bible, Quran, Harry Potter or any other Holy Books and fictional books as evidences to support arguments; If one negates the previous stated rule and uses fictional sources as evidence, that one will fail the debate automatically. One must use scientific proofs and physical/material evidence with supported hypothesis and conclusion as an evidence to support that ones claim.
  • Reason Reason is a sub-category in which most people rarely touch or use on Hackforums. This type of argumentation deals with rational and logical thinking without any scientific evidence or proofs. For example: When one says our Universe has a creator because everything has to have a creator, then the creator should also have a creator according to his/her logic.
    

Those three ways of persuading encompasses all types of speeches or debates. Every passage, debate, or a speech you encounter in your life will fall under one(or two) of the categories.

Real-life works and examples:
In this example, we will be analyzing the letter Martin Luther King[Jr.] sent to the clergyman in Atlanta. The prologue behind this letter is truly fantastic. The seven clergymen from Atlanta accuses Dr. King's actions as violent and it should halted. However, Dr. King[Jr.] rejects this accusation and responds through a polite letter; He uses many argumentations in his letter.

Example: "I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against "outsiders coming in." I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promise. So I, along with several members of my staff, am here because I was invited here. I am here because I have organizational ties here." ~Martin Luther Kind[Jr.] letter from Birmingham Jail.

Explanation: After analyzing the paragraph, we can conclude that this passage from the speech is an example of credibility which falls under the category of Ethos. This passage is Ethos because Dr. King[Jr.] states that he is a reputed and credible person because he served president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. This shows that he has the complete authority to speak and support his claim.

Example: "In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn't this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion?" ~Martin Luther Kind[Jr.] letter from Birmingham Jail.

Explanation: This is a tough passage to "decipher" the category it falls under but after analyzing deeply, we can conclude that this is a logical passage, Logos. This passage is logos because he refutes the accusation and continues to provide series of examples and shows that Dr. King[Jr.]'s acts are non-violent just like how the examples he provided are.

-You can find many argumentation styles in just about every speech you encounter. The speech George W. Bush gave us after the 911 attack is a perfect example of Pathos.

Conclusion and credits: This thread was written entirely by me, Sri Krishna(which is my account on Hackforums), without plagiarizing any of the material. If one decides to use any segment or the entire thread, he/she must give credits. I would also like to give credits to my English teacher for teaching us Aristotelian Argumentation.

Thanks for reading,