Arguments on the topic: Selfishness and pride (USE in Russian). Heartlessness, mental callousness - the arguments of the exam

Hello everyone! I am very glad to you, my regular readers, as well as new friends!

Today, continuing the conversation about how to write a reasoning essay, let's talk about an equally important part in our work - about reasoning and arguments in a reasoning essay.

In previous articles, we have learned

Think it over, determine its optimal choice. Today we are finally starting evidence.

Arguments- this is precisely the evidence, arguments, explanations that must be provided in support of the thesis. No clear full evidence essay-reasoning will not work!

Let's remember the types of arguments

Logical (rational) arguments, or arguments - this is what reflects the logic of the human mind, i.e. real facts, theories, hypotheses, statistics, laws of nature, eyewitness accounts, experimental results, etc.

illustrative examples- these are examples from literature and from personal life or the lives of close people and acquaintances, as well as a case that could take place in life under certain conditions.

Authoritative opinion- statements of prominent people, figures of science or literature, which are perceived by everyone as AXIOMS. Proverbs and sayings as folk wisdom, the experience of the people. See how to format quotes here.

Arguments can be both "for" and "against".

Arguments “for” are direct evidence, they must be accessible, unambiguous, reflect an unbiased reality, and be based on authoritative sources.

Arguments "against" some thesis must be convincing, because you need to refute this judgment. Here you will need a certain correctness and a developed sense of tact, because. you will have to criticize authors who support a thesis with which you cannot and do not want to agree!

Phrases and turns of speech to help:

I share the indignation (rejection, admiration) of the author and I think that ...

A story comes to mind, heard (read, which happened to me...)

My opinion is confirmed by this fact ...

The optimal number of arguments in an essay is three. This will be enough, trust me! But in terms of volume, this part of the essay should be at least 2/3 of the entire text. Arrange the arguments in a specific order. Do not lay out all your “trump cards” at once! The last argument should be the strongest.

If there is no exact citation text for an argument, use indirect sentences. Thus, you will convey the general meaning of the statement and prevent errors in the use of quotations.

If you have two arguments, for example, your life experience and an example from a literary work, then first give a literary example. Describe personal experience after an authoritative opinion.

Start each argument with a new paragraph! Link paragraphs together.

The problem of spirituality, a spiritual person is one of the eternal problems of Russian and world literature

Ivan Alekseevich Bunin(1870 - 1953) - Russian writer and poet, the first Nobel Prize winner in literature

In "The Gentleman from San Francisco" Bunin criticizes bourgeois reality. This story is symbolic in its title. This symbolism is embodied in the image of the protagonist, who is a collective image of the American bourgeois, a man without a name, called by the author simply a gentleman from San Francisco. The lack of a name for the hero is a symbol of his inner lack of spirituality, emptiness. The idea arises that the hero does not live in the full sense of the word, but only physiologically exists. He understands only the material side of life. This idea is emphasized by the symbolic composition of this story, its symmetry. While “he was quite generous on the way and therefore fully believed in the caring of all those who fed and watered him, served him from morning to evening, preventing his slightest desire, guarding his purity and peace ...”.

And after a sudden “death, the body of a dead old man from San Francisco returned home, to the grave, to the shores of the New World. Having experienced many humiliations, a lot of human inattention, after a week of space from one port shed to another, it finally again got on the same famous ship, on which so recently, with such honor, they carried it to the Old World. The ship "Atlantis" sails in the opposite direction, only carrying the rich man already in a soda box, "but now hiding him from the living - they lowered him deep into the black hold." And on the ship all the same luxury, well-being, balls, music, a fake couple playing at love.

It turns out that everything he has accumulated has no meaning in the face of that eternal law to which everyone is subject without exception. Obviously, the meaning of life is not in the acquisition of wealth, but in something that cannot be valued in money - worldly wisdom, kindness, spirituality.

Spirituality is not equal to education and intelligence and does not depend on it.

Alexander Isaevich (Isaakievich) Solzhenitsyn(1918-- 2008) - Soviet and Russian writer, playwright, publicist, poet, public and political figure who lived and worked in the USSR, Switzerland, the USA and Russia. Winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature (1970). A dissident who for several decades (1960s - 1980s) actively opposed communist ideas, the political system of the USSR and the policies of its authorities.

A. Solzhenitsyn showed this well in the story "Matryonin Dvor". Everyone mercilessly used Matryona's kindness and innocence - and unanimously condemned her for this. Matrena, besides her kindness and conscience, did not accumulate other wealth. She is used to living by the laws of humanity, respect and honesty. And only death revealed to people the majestic and tragic image of Matryona. The narrator bows his head to a man of great disinterested soul, but absolutely unrequited, defenseless. With the departure of Matryona, something valuable and important passes away ...

Of course, the germs of spirituality are embedded in every person. And its development depends on education, and on the circumstances in which a person lives, on his environment. However, self-education, our work on ourselves, plays a decisive role. Our ability to peer into ourselves, ask our conscience and not dissemble in front of ourselves.

Mikhail Afanasievich Bulgakov(1891--- 1940) - Russian writer, playwright, theater director and actor. Written in 1925, first published in 1968. The story was first published in the USSR in 1987.

The problem of lack of spirituality in the story M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog"

Mikhail Afanasyevich shows in the story that humanity is powerless in the fight against the lack of spirituality that arises in people. In the center of it is the incredible case of the transformation of a dog into a man. The fantastic plot is based on the image of the experiment of the brilliant medical scientist Preobrazhensky. Having transplanted the spermatic glands and the pituitary gland of the brain of the thief and drunkard Klim Chugunkin into a dog, Preobrazhensky, to everyone's amazement, gets a man out of a dog.

Homeless Sharik turns into Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov. However, he retains the dog habits and bad habits of Klim Chugunkin. The professor, along with Dr. Bormental, is trying to educate him, but all efforts are in vain. Therefore, the professor again returns the dog to its original state. The fantastic case ends idyllically: Preobrazhensky goes about his direct business, and the subdued dog lies on the carpet and indulges in sweet reflections.

Bulgakov expands Sharikov's biography to the level of social generalization. The writer gives a picture of modern reality, revealing its imperfect structure. This is not only the history of Sharikov's transformations, but, above all, the history of a society that develops according to absurd, irrational laws. If the fantastic plan of the story is completed in terms of plot, then the moral and philosophical one remains open: the Sharkovs continue to multiply, multiply and assert themselves in life, which means that the “monstrous history” of society continues. It is these people who know no pity, no sorrow, no sympathy. They are uncivilized and stupid. They have canine hearts from birth, although not all dogs have the same hearts.
Outwardly, the balls are no different from people, but they are always among us. Their inhuman nature is just waiting to be revealed. And then the judge, in the interests of his career and the fulfillment of the plan for solving crimes, condemns the innocent, the doctor turns away from the patient, the mother abandons her child, various officials, for whom bribes have already become the order of things, drop the mask and show their true essence. Everything that is most lofty and holy turns into its opposite, because in these people the non-human has awakened. Coming to power, they try to dehumanize everyone around, because nonhumans are easier to control, they have all human feelings replaced by the instinct of self-preservation.
In our country, after the revolution, all the conditions were created for the appearance of a huge number of balls with dog hearts. The totalitarian system is very conducive to this. Probably due to the fact that these monsters have penetrated into all areas of life, Russia is still going through hard times.

The story of Boris Vasiliev "Do not shoot the white swans"

Boris Vasilyev tells us about the lack of spirituality, indifference and cruelty of people in the story “Do not shoot at white swans”. Tourists burned a huge anthill, so as not to experience inconvenience from it, "watched how the gigantic structure, the patient work of millions of tiny creatures, was melting before our eyes." They looked with admiration at the fireworks and exclaimed: “Victory salute! Man is the king of nature.

Winter evening. Highway. Comfortable car. It is warm, cozy, music sounds, occasionally interrupted by the voice of the announcer. Two happy intelligent couples are going to the theater - a meeting with the beautiful is ahead. Do not frighten away this wonderful moment of life! And suddenly the headlights snatch out in the dark, right on the road, the figure of a woman "with a child wrapped in a blanket." "Abnormal!" the driver screams. And everything is dark! There is no former feeling of happiness from the fact that a loved one is sitting next to you, that very soon you will find yourself in an easy chair of the stalls and you will be spellbound to watch the performance.

It would seem a banal situation: they refused to give a ride to a woman with a child. Where? For what? And there is no space in the car. However, the evening is hopelessly ruined. The situation of "déjà vu", as if it had already happened, - a thought flashes through the heroine of the story A. Mass. Of course, it was - and more than once. Indifference to someone else's misfortune, detachment, isolation from everyone and everything - phenomena are not so rare in our society. It is this problem that the writer Anna Mass raises in one of her stories in the Vakhtangov Children cycle. In this situation, she is an eyewitness to what happened on the road. After all, that woman needed help, otherwise she would not have thrown herself under the wheels of a car. Most likely, she has a sick child, he had to be taken to the nearest hospital. But self-interest was higher than the manifestation of mercy. And how disgusting it is to feel powerless in such a situation, one can only imagine oneself in the place of this woman, when "people pleased with themselves in comfortable cars are rushing past." Pangs of conscience, I think, will torment the soul of the heroine of this story for a long time: "I was silent and hated myself for this silence."

"Satisfied people", accustomed to comfort, people with small property interests - the same Chekhov's heroes, "people in cases". This is Dr. Startsev in Ionych, and teacher Belikov in The Man in a Case. Let us recall how Dmitry Ionych Startsev rides "on a troika with bells, plump, red", and his coachman Panteleimon, "also plump and red," shouts: "Prrrava hold!" "Prrrava hold" - this is, after all, detachment from human troubles and problems. On their prosperous path of life there should be no obstacles. And in Belikovsky's "No matter what happened," we still hear the sharp exclamation of Lyudmila Mikhailovna, the character of the same story by A. Mass: "What if this child is contagious? We also, by the way, have children!" The spiritual impoverishment of these heroes is obvious. And they are not intellectuals at all, but simply - petty bourgeois, townsfolk who imagine themselves to be "masters of life."

Argumentation of one's own opinion on the problem.

What is an argument?

In the essay, you must express your opinion on the formulated problem, agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author, as written in the task of part C. In your answer, you must give two arguments based on knowledge, life or reading experience.

note

It is not enough just to formally state your opinion: I agree (disagree) with the author. Your position, even if it coincides with the author's, should be formulated in a separate sentence.

For example: Thus, the author seeks to convey to the reader the idea that nature has long needed the help of each of us. I fully agree with the author and also believe that humanity should reconsider its consumer attitude towards nature.

Then your position must be supported by two arguments. In this part of the work, you must strictly follow the rules for constructing a reasoning text. Argumentation is the presentation of evidence, explanations, examples to justify any thought in front of listeners (readers) or an interlocutor.

Arguments are evidence given in support of the thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis.

Illustrating the Argument

An important element of the argument are illustrations, i.e. examples that support the argument.

Argument collection:

Arguments worth two points

Kinds of Arguments

There are various classifications of arguments. For example, they distinguish between logical arguments - these are arguments that appeal to human reason, to reason (scientific axioms, laws of nature, statistics, examples from life and literature), and psychological arguments - arguments that evoke certain feelings, emotions in the addressee and form a certain attitude to the described person, object, phenomenon (emotional conviction of the writer, appeal to universal values, etc.).

The main thing that the writer of the essay should know is that the arguments you use “have different weights”, that is, they are evaluated by different points.

Some arguments are worth one point, while others are worth two points.

Note that two-point arguments always include a reference to the author and the title of the work. In addition, when talking about a literary text, it is not enough just to mention the author and the title of the work ( L.N. Tolstoy reflects on the problem of patriotism in the novel “War and Peace”), it is also necessary to indicate specific characters, their actions, words, thoughts that demonstrate the connection of the work of art you mention with the problem considered in the source text.

For example: M. Gorky wrote very emotionally and expressively about the problem of humanism in the story "Old Woman Izergil". Danko, the hero of one of the legends, sacrificed his life to save his people. He appeared just when people needed help, and led them, desperate and embittered, through the forest to freedom. The feat of Danko, who tore out his heart from his chest in order to illuminate the path to freedom, is a stunning example of true humanism, boundless love for people.

As an argument, estimated at 2 points, proverbs, sayings, aphorisms can be considered, but only if they are accompanied by explanations, your reflections on their content. For example: It is no coincidence that folk wisdom affirms the unconditional value of friendship: “Do not have a hundred rubles, but have a hundred friends”; “An old friend is better than two new ones”, “Seek a friend, and if you find it, take care of it” ... Indeed, true friends are ready to share grief and joy with you, to come to the rescue in difficult times. It is friends who let us know that we are not alone in this world.

I must say that any example from fiction, scientific or journalistic literature should be “framed” by your reasoning, emphasizing the connection of the given example with the problem you are considering.

When giving an example from journalistic literature, also do not forget, in addition to the author's name, to indicate the title of the note, article, essay and, if possible, the name of the publication in which this material was published.

TV journalist Oleg Ptashkin reflects on the problem of the influence of television on modern Russian society in the article "Tresh-TV", published on the website www.gazeta.ru. According to the author, modern television in Russia is experiencing an acute crisis - a crisis of ideas and meaning. Those who create TV programs do not think about the public good at all. The journalist is concerned that modern media promote lack of spirituality and immorality, accustom to the idea that a normal life for the sake of family, children, success in work is the lot of losers. The author is convinced that the main task of modern television is education: it should teach to honor the family, parents, and cultural traditions. Only then will television contribute to the revival of spirituality.

Everything that was said earlier applies to examples from the scientific literature.

People who do not shy away from life's difficulties, who boldly face the truth, are the masters of their own destiny. The historian Lev Gumilyov in his work "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth" called such people passionaries. Among them are many great historical figures, famous military leaders, fighters for freedom and human rights, and each of them has contributed to the development of society.

In search of weighty arguments, some students boldly come up with the names of "famous publicists" or the names of non-existent works, sometimes attributing them to famous writers. For example: In one of his works "Nature", the Russian writer I. S. Turgenev reflects on the relationship between nature and man.

The critic Belinsky in his article "On Humanity" wrote that people should help each other.

You can also cite the story of A. Pristavkin "The War of Russians and Chechens" as an example.

Rest assured that all such “opuses” will be qualified as factual errors, which means that not only will you not earn points for argumentation, but you will also lose 1 point for violation of factual accuracy.

Arguments worth one point

Arguments rated 1 point, as a rule, are easier to pick up, therefore their “specific weight” is lower. Most of them are based in one way or another on our life experience, our observations of our lives, the lives of other people or society as a whole.

Examples from life. Despite the fact that the graduate's life experience is not yet very great, in his own life or the lives of those around him, you can find examples of good or bad deeds, manifestations of friendly feelings, honesty, kindness or callousness, selfishness.

Be careful with arguments of this type, because, as our experience of checking essays shows, most of them are simply invented by students and the persuasiveness of such arguments is very doubtful. For example:

From my own experience I was convinced of the dangers of cheap literature. After reading one of these books, my head hurt a lot. This a book about a thief-loser. Brad is terrible! Indeed, I was afraid that I would get brain cancer after reading this book. Terrible feeling!

I will give an example from my personal life: people are sitting on the street without housing, without food, absolutely without anything. They sit and ask for money for some food.

Unfortunately, my poor life experience does not allow me to express my extensive opinion on this issue.

Especially often in such unfortunate arguments various relatives, friends and acquaintances appear, with whom extremely instructive stories happen. For example:

I know one person who overlooked (?!) the illness and death of his father. Now his children do not help him.

My grandfather told me that his dad was in the detachment in 1812 (?!) when troops under the command of Napoleon began to attack Moscow.

A good example of the problem of this text are some of my classmates. Obviously, they were brought up too little, and they were not accustomed to work from childhood, so they do nothing.

Much less common are examples from life that can be considered suitable arguments:

I was convinced that there are not only indifferent people. Two years ago, trouble came to our family - there was a fire. Relatives, neighbors, acquaintances, and even just people who knew about our trouble, helped us as much as they could. I am very grateful to everyone who did not remain indifferent and helped me and my family in difficult times.

Observations on the life of people and society as a whole look more convincing, since individual facts in such examples are generalized and drawn up in the form of some conclusions:

I believe that empathy and compassion are instilled in people from childhood. If the child was surrounded by care and affection, then, having matured, he will give this kindness to others.

However, arguments of this type may look curious and not the most convincing:

Probably, all mothers and grandmothers are fond of women's novels. Women read all sorts of books, and then suffer from why they do not have the same as in the book.

Suggestive examples are reflections of what might happen under certain conditions:

I can't imagine my life without books: without textbooks that help us explore the world, without fiction, revealing the secrets of human relationships and forming moral values. Such a life would be incredibly poor and boring.

“Blind faith has evil eyes,” the Polish writer Stanisław Jerzy Lec once said.

Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky reflected on the essence of writing talent: “Talent is the ability to say or express well where mediocrity will say and express badly.” “For others, nature is firewood, coal, ore, or a dacha, or just a landscape. For me, nature is the environment from which, like flowers, all our human talents have grown, ”wrote Mikhail Prishvin.

Remember that the persons whose statements you refer to must really be authoritative in one area or another. For example, the Dutch philosopher Benedict Spinoza generally doubted the significance of such arguments, believed that "reference to authority is not an argument."

At their core, proverbs and sayings are a kind of reference to authority. The strength of these arguments lies in the fact that we appeal to the authority of popular wisdom. Remember that a simple mention of proverbs, sayings, winged words, not accompanied by your reflections on their content, is estimated at 1 point.

It is no coincidence that Russian proverbs affirm the value of the experience of older generations: “A parent's word is not said to the wind; He who honors his parents never perishes."

References to films, which have recently been frequently found in essays, most often testify to a narrow outlook, to a small reader's experience. We are convinced that examples of friendship, humane treatment of people or heroic deeds can always be found not only in the films "Avatar" or "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone", but also on the pages of fiction.

It seems to me that the fate of the heroine of the film by V. Menshov "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" can serve as an excellent confirmation of the author's idea that a person should strive to fulfill his dream. Katerina worked at a factory, raised a child herself, graduated from the institute in absentia and as a result achieved success - she became plant director. Thus, each of us is able to achieve the realization of his dream. It is only necessary to bring its realization closer with every step, with every deed.

(It can be noted that confirmation of the author’s thought could also be found in the fate of Alexander Grigoriev, the hero of V. Kaverin’s novel “Two Captains”, or cite as an example Alexei Meresyev from B. Polevoy’s work “The Tale of a Real Man”, or recall Assol from novel of the same name by A. Green.)

Argument Structure

When writing an essay, it should be remembered that between the thesis and two arguments confirming your position, there should be a clear connection, which is usually expressed by the so-called "logical transitions" - statements that connect the known information of the text with the new one. In addition, each argument is accompanied by a "micro-conclusion" - a statement that sums up some thoughts.,

Failure to follow this structure (in fact, any paragraph of coherent text is built according to this scheme) often leads to logical errors.

Common Argumentation Errors

What does an expert check?

The expert highlights that part of the text of the essay that performs the function of argumentation. Then he establishes the conformity of the argument with the asserted (the argument must prove exactly what is being asserted), assesses the degree of persuasiveness, which can manifest itself both in strict logic and in emotional evaluativeness, figurative expression.

The expert determines the number of arguments, as well as the correspondence of the argument to the semantic function: the given example should not only act as a vivid narrative or descriptive microtext, but prove or refute one or another statement.

The maximum score (3) according to the K4 criterion is set for the work in which the examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (given at least 2 arguments, one of which is taken from the artistic, publicistic or scientific literature).

1. (40 words) One of the basic values ​​of any person is time, and you need to use it wisely. This is taught by "The Tale of Lost Time" by E. Schwartz. The protagonist learned from his own experience that idlers will not notice how they grow old - and then it will be too late to achieve something.
2. (54 words) The hero of a famous myth, King Midas, rendered a service to the god Dionysus, and he promised the king any gift as a reward. Midas asked that everything turn to gold at his touch. Greed almost killed him, because food and wine also turned into gold. This is a vivid example of the fact that the choice of certain life values ​​determines our destiny.
3. (39 words) Animals, like people, have their own values ​​in life. Let us recall the dog Kashtanka from Chekhov's story of the same name: she remained faithful to her former owners, although the new one treated her much better. Not every being is capable of such devotion to its own detriment.
4. (55 words) It is very easy to find out what is most important for a person - just ask. So did the music teacher from the story of V. Dragunsky "What the Bear loves." One of the boys in response listed a lot - "the whole world", and the second - only his favorite food. It is understandable why the teacher was dissatisfied with his words: an exceptional commitment to the material is especially terrible if the hero is a child.
5. (54 words) The story of I.S. Turgenev's "Khor and Kalinich" is an example of the difference in the life orientations of people belonging to the same class. Khor and Kalinich are both peasants, but for the first the main thing is a strong life, and the second "hovers in the clouds", but he is a sincere person, close to nature and art. What's better? According to the author, the characters complement each other, personify the two sides of life.
6. (43 words) Some values ​​are called "eternal" - they are common to most people and do not change for centuries. For example, friendship. The Fox, the hero of Exupery's The Little Prince, speaks beautifully about her. Thanks to friendship, he explains, a person is saved from boredom and loneliness, feels needed and can know true happiness.
7. (55 words) Gleb Kapustin, the hero of the story by V.M. Shukshina “Cut off”, saw his life value in “bringing down arrogance” from noble people who came to visit their native village. He publicly caught them in ignorance of some scientific fact and rejoiced at their embarrassment. It is not surprising that no one loved Gleb - the one who is pleased to humiliate others will sooner or later be left alone.
8. (50 words) Life values ​​easily betray someone as an egoist. For example, the Pig from the fable of I.A. Krylova "Pig under the Oak" undermined the roots of the Oak in search of acorns, not at all caring that the tree could dry out from this. Unfortunately, sometimes people do not think about how their actions can affect others.
9. (45 words) Home is dear to every person. Its walls are salvation from all life's adversities. This is allegorically shown in the poem by Ya.P. Polonsky's "The Road": the lyrical hero is on the road and envies the coachman, who "will find peace, hello and dinner ... under his roof" and will be happy, even though he lives in a poor shack.
10. (54 words) It is sad when the importance of something is directly related to the material value of this thing or even a living being. For example, in the story of A.P. Chekhov's "Chameleon" dog bit the drunk Khryukin when he poked a cigar at her. The policeman first orders to exterminate the dog, but after learning that its owner is the general's brother, he blames Khryukin himself for what happened, and already affectionately addresses the dog.

Examples from life, cinema, media

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Argumentation strategies:

The most difficult step is selection of arguments. The construction of an argument can be based on two principles: on the approval of one’s own thesis and on the refutation of the opponent’s thesis (the latter is easier, because the opponent takes over the work of generating new ideas, and you can only scold his ideas).

With the confirmation strategy, a person gives arguments that confirm his thesis (we do not take the kindergarten situation, when the thesis is simply repeated many times, but without a single proof).

Direct confirmation of the thesis.

Thesis: squirrels are dangerous animals.

Argument: because they attack people.

It still happens indirect confirmation, when another proposition is deduced from the thesis, its truth is proved and then the truth of the first thesis is proved.

Thesis: Squirrels are dangerous animals.

Additional thesis: Bites from dangerous animals require medical supervision.

Argument: Indeed, after a squirrel bite, you will have to visit the emergency room and get vaccinated against rabies. This proves that proteins are dangerous.

Rebuttal strategy:

direct refutation :

Counterthesis: Proteins are harmless.

Refutation of the counterthesis: Proteins spoil their habitat, i.e. they are not harmless.

It also happens indirect rebuttal. Then the person himself deduces certain provisions from the counterthesis (opponent's thesis), refutes them, and thus refutes the counterthesis itself.

Counterthesis: Proteins are harmless.

Additional counterpoint:Harmless animals are kept at home.

Refutation of the counterthesis: No one keeps protein at home, only fans This means that proteins are not harmless and unsafe.

In the fight against an opponent is also a good way refutation of arguments, which leads to the recognition of the groundlessness of the counterthesis and to the reinforcement of the thesis.

Counterthesis: Proteins are harmless.

Argument: They are small animals compared to humans.

Refutation of the argument: Viruses are also small, but they can cause great harm to a person. So size doesn't matter here.

Another way to refute demo rebuttal, i.e. proof that arguments that are valid in themselves are not connected with a counterthesis.

Counterthesis: Proteins are harmless.

Argument: Squirrels are beautiful and graceful.

Demonstration rebuttal: Yes, squirrels are beautiful and graceful, but this does not affect their safety in any way. Jaguars are also beautiful and graceful, but would anyone agree to meet one on one with a hungry jaguar at night?

Argument types:

Arguments are divided into:

1. natural evidence: arguments for the obvious(eyewitness accounts, documents, expert examination data, scientific experiment - "tangible" evidence)

2. artificial evidence(other)

artificial evidence :

- logical (arguments to logos)

There are two types logical evidence: syllogism(the particularity is proved with the help of general statements) and guidance(the general assertion is proved on the basis of particulars).

This corresponds to two methods of deriving conclusions: deduction(from the general to the particular) and induction(from the particulars, a conclusion is drawn about the general). Sherlock Holmes, who all the time shouted about the deductive method, actually used the inductive method (from the particulars he deduced the whole). Induction can fail, because from several particular facts we can draw some kind of conclusion, and then one fact will take and refute it (for example, we will decide on the basis of observations that all pigeons are blue-gray, and then some white scoundrel will fly in and that’s it). spoil).

Examples of syllogisms :

A syllogism usually includes two premises and a conclusion.

The premises and the conclusion are judgments.

Judgments are of four types: general affirmative (all objects that have a certain property also have another property);

All people are mortal

private affirmative (some objects that have a certain property also have another property);

Some people are men

general negative(no object that has a certain property has another property); No man is a plant

partial negative (some objects that have a certain property do not have another property)

Some people are not children

A judgment is divided into a subject (what is being said) and a predicate (what is new about the subject).

All professors (M) have a degree (P)(includes conclusion predicate: major premise).

Pantelei Prokofich Kryndilyabrov (S) - professor (M) (includes the subject of the conclusion: a small premise).

Panteley Prokofich ( S ) has a degree (P).

All professors are the subject of an utterance. Have a degree - a predicate.

Pantelei Prokofich is a subject. The professor is a predicate.

Panteley Prokofich is again a subject. Has a degree - a predicate.

Subjects and predicates must match, otherwise the syllogism will be meaningless (we equated the subject of the first premise with the subject of the second, after which the predicate of the first premise turned out to be the predicate of the second as well).

Allocate large (P), small ( S ) and the middle (M) member of the syllogism. The middle member acts as an intermediary and does not appear in the conclusion (in our case, the professor). A large penis - in this case it is "having a degree." Small member - Pantelei Prokofich.

Not all syllogisms are equally correct (not all yogurts are equally healthy).

The conscious construction of an incorrect syllogism at the output gives a sophism (“People eat bread.Pigs eat bread.Therefore, people are pigs.”). There are syllogisms in which a mistake is made unintentionally.

For example: Many PhDs are assistant professors. Pasha Zyabkin - Ph.D. Pasha Zyabkin - Associate Professor.

In fact, Pasha Zyabkin may or may not be an associate professor: not all candidates of science are associate professors at the same time, these are two partially overlapping sets, and Pasha Zyabkin can either be a member of both sets or belong to one of them, i.e. e. many candidates.

There are multi-story syllogisms (complex).

Men like Angelina Jolie.

Men like beautiful women.

If men like Angelina Jolie, then she is a beautiful woman.

Women who look like Angelina Jolie are also beautiful.

Dunya looks like Angelina Jolie, so Dunya is also beautiful.

guidance(inductive method)

It often leads to errors, because it forces one to accept as truth a conclusion that concerns only a part of the phenomena.

For example: I saw only rock pigeons on the streets of the city. Pigeons are only gray.

Close to induction is analogy(properties of one object known to us are transferred to another). Unlike induction, we are talking about a single object about which we know something, and the transfer is also made to a single object, and not to a class of beings / substances.

For example: I'll take a red apple. I do not want to take green - it for sure sour. Yesterday I ate a green apple and it was terribly sour.

This physical analogy . Within its framework, close or identical objects are compared.

Is there some more figurative analogy. It allows you to match distant objects.

For example: A good marriage is everything equals what comfortable house slippers.

- arguments for ethos (mores) / ethical arguments (reliance on the collective experience of society)

arguments for empathy (mentioning the qualities that are positioned in society as commendable)

a) direct attacks on a person (my opponent is a cretin)

b) indirect attack (my opponent is interested in the results of the discussion, so his opinion cannot be considered objective)

c) an indication that the person has previously said or done something different

- arguments for pathos(passions)/emotional arguments (relying on a person's individual experience)

The author evokes certain, pre-programmed emotions (positive or negative) in the audience. In this case, the arguments can be directed to the audience itself, to the speaker (some feelings should arise for him) or to third parties (feelings towards them)

a) arguments for a promise (promises)

b) arguments for the threat (audience intimidation)

reasons for trust

If we are talking about logical proof, the argument for confidence is that, along with logical reasoning, the person to whom this reasoning belongs is indicated, and, as a rule, this person is characterized in accordance with the "logos" spirit, such as "the great thinker of antiquity ”, “famous logician of the twentieth century”, “Chinese sage”, etc.Sometimes the names speak for themselves, and then the usual way of introducing them is as follows: "Even Socrates believed that ...", "Aristotle himself, the father of logic, believed that ...". As a third party when cast logical proof experts can speak.

A reference to authority in an argument to ethos most often contains a characteristic of authority (from the “ethos” side) and an indication of the addressee of the speech. Her usual scheme is as follows: "So-and-so, and he knows a lot about this, he said that we often forget about something."

The reference to authority in an argument for pathos also usually contains a characterization of the authority itself. This can be not only an authority in the proper sense of the word, but also a little-known person who has become an authority as a person who has experienced firsthand what is said in the threat or promise. Moreover, in the latter case, the third party can be named generically: “Every American will tell you that...”, “Those who have experienced the horrors of war do not need to be explained that...”, “Those who lived under socialism remember very well how...”.

d leads to distrust

Distrust in the argument to the logos is created by the fact that a deliberately false statement is given, which belongs to a person whose logical abilities the author doubts. In this case, the "out-of-the-box" effect is often used as well.

Distrust when arguing for ethos is created by the fact that a person is qualified as not knowing people (most often quite specific people, a given social or age group), not understanding their ethical attitudes. For example: “So-and-so speaks with great feeling about the problems of youth. But he apparently forgot how young people live. And he simply has no idea about today's youth, their thoughts and feelings.

Distrust when arguing for pathos (threat or promise) is created in a similar way: it is shown that the person who appeals to pathos does not know well the people to whom he appeals. For example: “He promises hungry old people Snickers and discos! He invites them to enjoy the sounds of heavy metal, and they need free medical care!” Or: “He threatens the rebels with war? People who have been carrying weapons with them for forty years! Yes... It is unlikely that this politician will be able to control people!”

Argument selection strategy:

When choosing arguments, consider the following:

strong arguments are natural proofs:

Judgments based on well-established, documented facts

Experimental results

Testimony of disinterested and competent eyewitnesses

Expert opinions

Statistical Calculations

And:

Quotes from statutes, laws, regulations, etc.

However, even with such arguments you can fight (if you really need it):

Facts can be accurate, but they can be interpreted in your own way (for example, to doubt the causal chain)

The opinions of experts and authorities can be challenged by calling into question their right to conduct an examination, their viability as specialists, their disinterest in the results, and it can also be clarified whether the opinion of experts concerned this particular situation or this opinion was simply farfetched

Witnesses can be suspected of being interested and that they could not soberly assess the situation / in amnesia

Statistical calculations can be accused of being unrepresentative (are you sure you interviewed the entire population of the globe?)

Weak arguments are recognized:

Conclusions from dubious statistics (interviewed five people in a nightclub)

Reasoning with incorrect application of the syllogism scheme

Sophisms, reasoning with a deliberately made logical error ("Horns")

Contrived analogies (an analogy between playing basketball and driving a car)

One-sidedly selected aphorisms and sayings

Generalizations

Assumptions based on personal experience

Insolventthe following arguments:

Conclusions based on rigged facts

- speculation

Advance promises not supported by deeds, personal assurances (I guarantee you ..., I assure you as a specialist ..., I ask you to just take it on faith ...)

You should not give too many arguments: a large number of arguments, especially arguments of different sizes, leads to a loss of persuasiveness, to the depreciation of each specific argument.

Individual arguments should not be abandoned if together they create a convincing picture (a situation where only the sum of the arguments can be convincing, but not each of the arguments separately). Let's say we're trying to substantiate a murder charge against a dead man's son. We have no direct evidence, but we can show by the sum of the arguments that it was the son who was most interested in the death of his father and had the best opportunity to kill.

You should not use arguments that can be turned to your advantage by the opposite side. The destructive power of your own argument, used by enemies, increases many times over.

Reasoning errors are:

1) errors related to the thesis

Substitution of the thesis- in the process of argumentation, the author begins to prove a different thesis, not the one that he outlined at the beginning. It can be done on purpose, it can be done by accident.

Proof of absurd theses .

2) arguments related errors

Use of false premises (a good driver never gets into an accident).

3) demo related errors

Parcels not related to the thesis are used as arguments (first a company of four people came to the cafe, then a company of three, the next visitors will be a couple).