Values are an important part of argumentation not only
because of how they relate to pathos but how they relate to ethos as well. A
person’s credibility in an argument can be one of the most important factors to
decision makers, and often times a person’s set of values can disqualify them
in the eyes of decision makers in certain spheres. For example, the book says
that the dominant value system in the United States is the enlightenment value
system, which focuses on intellectual freedom and an individual’s ability to
discover the natural laws of life. So, if a person in an argument uses language
that suggests they hold values contrary to the enlightenment value system, they
could be viewed as not credible in the eyes of decision makers from our
culture. This principle can apply to individual arguments as well, as a person’s
set of values could hurt their credibility in discussion a certain topic. For
example, a person who holds the values that men are superior to women could be
seen as not credible when discussing abortion, because they are not likely to
take a woman’s individual rights into account when formulating their argument.
Values are a useful tool not only for supporting arguments but also for
understanding the different parties in an argument as well. If a person’s
values are made clear through their speech, it can be easier to predict what
stance they will take and also how well equipped they are to take that stance.
In Chapter 9, the authors of the text discuss credibility. The text remarks that credibility is not only able to serve as a claim in argumentation, but it also plays a significant role as a means to support a claim (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 142). The text then goes into detail about characteristics and forms of credibility but finally goes over the general principle the authors suggest for the use of credibility. Credibility can be incredibly subjective, but there are still some general principles of credibility that can apply to most situations. The principle I found to stand out the most in the group of principles the authors presented was the principle of developing credibility from reputation. Reputation is the credibility someone possesses with decision makers before they argue (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 147). When I think of reputation in argument, I always manage to think of the polarized reputation of Donald Trump. There is a significant amount of people who hat
Comments
Post a Comment