英語(yǔ)修辭與寫作·21.1　辯論

21.1　辯論

21.1A　辯論場(chǎng)合和論題選擇

1） 有兩種場(chǎng)合的辯論：非正式辯論和正式辯論。兩個(gè)汽車司機(jī)狹路相逢，幾乎相撞，于是雙方下車爭(zhēng)論誰(shuí)是誰(shuí)非；哥哥和妹妹吃完飯后都不想洗碗，并為之爭(zhēng)執(zhí)起來(lái)。像上述這類場(chǎng)合的爭(zhēng)論都屬于非正式辯論，往往越爭(zhēng)論越離開正題，相互指責(zé)甚至謾罵。這樣非正式的辯論不屬本章所討論的問(wèn)題。我們這里討論的辯論屬于正式辯論（Formal Argumentation），它具有兩個(gè)特點(diǎn)：

一是辯論雙方可能會(huì)爭(zhēng)得面紅耳赤，但不失去控制，不作人身攻擊；

二是堅(jiān)持依靠推理和論證闡述自己的觀點(diǎn)，力圖在辯論中說(shuō)服對(duì)方。

2） 在論題選擇上要注意辯論的對(duì)象和范圍。例如在論述本地區(qū)的建筑規(guī)劃時(shí)，論題應(yīng)集中在公共建筑上，而若論述學(xué)校建筑，則應(yīng)集中談教學(xué)區(qū)、生活區(qū)、辦公區(qū)及文體設(shè)施上，不應(yīng)論述范圍過(guò)泛，更要避免脫離本題。此外，有的論題很容易得到答案（如“Swimming is a healthful and enjoyable activity”，“George Washington was six feet tall”），有的論題屬于個(gè)人愛(ài)好 （如“Blue is a prettier color than green”，“Basketball game is more interesting than football game”），也不應(yīng)進(jìn)行辯論。

21.1B　兩種辯論題旨與三種邏輯推理策略

1） 進(jìn)行辯論的主旨有兩種：

一種是為了說(shuō)服對(duì)方接受自己的觀點(diǎn)、信仰、主張等，這叫做“Proposition argument”：提出自己的主見后，接著陳述理由和加以論證，這和說(shuō)明文體有相似之處，但重點(diǎn)是強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)方接受與否的利害關(guān)系。

另一種是提出問(wèn)題和解決方案，這叫做“Problem-solution argument”，突出說(shuō)明自己提出的為什么是最佳方案。例如：

I can sum up very briefly my position with regard to the question we are discussing. I am dissatisfied with the present Freshman English course in its typical form; but I am convinced that any radical amelioration must wait on, not precede, changes in the English curriculum in high school. Attempted coercion of high school English teachers would get us nowhere. They would like to do a better job of teaching writing quite as much as we would like to have them do it; but we must help them, working with them as equals on a problem neither they nor we have so far been able to solve properly. If our combined efforts lead to the results we want, the need for this present Freshman course would disappear — but not the need for a new Freshman course that would take advantage of and build upon the revised high school courses. I would argue that such a course ought to be at least as much value to the Freshman as any other course he might take in that year — valuable because it would concentrate on trying to raise the level of his writing skill from competence to distinction, and valuable also because it would contribute significantly to his liberal education through the continued study of literature and language. Both of these are rightful concerns of an English department.

Indeed, I think they are obligations.

（Albert R. Kitzhaber）

在1959年全美英語(yǔ)教師理事會(huì)上，Warner G. Rice教授提出取消現(xiàn)設(shè)的一年級(jí)英語(yǔ)課程，持相反觀點(diǎn)的Albert R. Kitzhaber教授則主張加以改革。上面是他的發(fā)言的結(jié)尾段落，他扼要說(shuō)明了為什么改革的方案比取消的方案更為實(shí)際和有效。

2） 雖然辯論的主旨可能有所不同，但都離不開邏輯推理（Logical reasoning）。在進(jìn)行邏輯推理時(shí)，有3種基本策略：

一是激發(fā)讀者/聽話者的興趣和感情；

二是引用公認(rèn)的權(quán)威論點(diǎn)；

三是提出有力的證據(jù)。

例如：

The Almighty has His own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses! For it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.” If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but, which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with a sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, “The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.”

With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in — to bind up the nation's wounds — to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

（Abraham Lincoln）

21.1C　兩種推理方式與四種三段論結(jié)構(gòu)

1） 前面20.2A介紹了說(shuō)明體的兩種格式，即“演繹”和“歸納”，這也是進(jìn)行推理的兩種基本方式，而且在具體場(chǎng)合往往是將兩種方式綜合應(yīng)用。

所謂“演繹法”（Deduction）,是從一般情況推論到個(gè)別情況。

例如：

Determined 　　　People who live in huge homes, have servants, and drive expensive cars are wealthy.

Generalization 　　The Johnsons live in a huge house, have servants, and drive an expensive car.

Conclusion 　　　The Johnsons are wealthy.

而“歸納法”（Induction）正好相反，即從個(gè)別情況推論到一般。例如：

Individual 　　This supermarket-brand item is cheaper than its comparable name-brand item.

Instance 　　Each of these other seventeen supermarket-brand items is cheaper than its comparable name-brand item.

Conclusion 　Supermarket-brand items are cheaper than comparable name-brand items.

2） “三段論”（Syllogism）是建筑在演繹法上的推理方式，由主前提（Major Premise），次前提 （Minor Premise）和結(jié)論（Conclusion）3部分組成，這里介紹三段論的4種基本結(jié)構(gòu)。

第一種結(jié)構(gòu)為“ALL”式：

All freshmen are dorm residents.

（All A's are B's.）

All the members of the Green Team are freshmen.

（All C's are A's.）

Therefore, all the members of the Green Team are dorm residents.

（All C's are B's.）

第二種結(jié)構(gòu)為“SOME”式

No graduate students are dorm residents.

（No A's are B's.）

Some older students are dorm residents.

（Some C's are B's.）

Therefore, some older students are not graduate students.

（Some C's are not A's.）

第三種結(jié)構(gòu)為“IF”/THEN”式

If the stadium is finished, then the team will open its season there.

（The stadium is finished.

Therefore, the team will open its season there.）

第四種結(jié)構(gòu)為“EITHER/OR”式：

Either the Common Market succeeds or Europe falls.

（The Common Market is succeeding.

Therefore, Europe will not fall.）

21.1D　推理中應(yīng)注意的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題

1） 要注意前提本身的正確性、合理性，否則必然得出不恰當(dāng)?shù)慕Y(jié)論。例如：

Abortion is a form of murder.

All forms of murder are wrong.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

顯然，籠統(tǒng)說(shuō)“abortion is wrong”的結(jié)論是不正確的，而結(jié)論的毛病又來(lái)自前提。

2） 要注意主、次前提之間邏輯的嚴(yán)密性，防止話題轉(zhuǎn)移并導(dǎo)致荒謬的結(jié)論。例如：

Major premise: All property owners favor reduced real estate taxes.

Minor premise: Janet favors reduced real estate taxes.

Conclusion: Therefore, Janet is a property owner.

3） 注意了解、研究應(yīng)用三段論的范例。例如：

Our society has moved illogically in this direction by virtually institutionalizing adultery; a growing number of spouses permit each other complete sexual liberty on the conditions that there shall be no “involvement” and that the extracurricular relations are not brought to their attention. It is beginning to institutionalize ritual spouse exchange.

（Alex Comfort: Sexuality in a Zero-Growth Society）

上面這段話可以用“三段論”格式表示為：

A society that encourages ritual spouse exchange is a society that institutionalizes adultery.

Our society is a society that encourages ritual spouse exchange.

Our society is a society that institutionalizes adultery.

又如：

The cases of Adolf Beck, of Oscar Slater, of the unhappy Brooklyn bank teller who vaguely resembled a forger and spent eight years in Sing Sing only to “emerge” a broken, friendless, useless, “compensated” man — all these, if the dignity of the individual has any meaning, had better have been dead before the prison door ever opened for them. This is what counsel always says to the jury in the course of a murder trial and counsel is right: far better to hang this man than “give him life.”

（Jacques Barzun: In Favor of Capital Punishment）

上面這段話也可以用“三段論”格式加以表示：

An experience that takes away individual dignity is worse than death.

Long imprisonment is an experience that takes away individual dignity.

Therefore, long imprisonment is worse than death.

這里需要說(shuō)明：上述邏輯推理固然符合三段論的要求，也有一定的道理，但存在著明顯的片面性和表面性，因?yàn)椤八佬獭笔窃谝欢v史時(shí)期內(nèi)解決特殊社會(huì)矛盾的一種極端的法律手段，是否采用它，應(yīng)以維護(hù)社會(huì)安定和群眾生命財(cái)產(chǎn)安全為準(zhǔn)則，而不能只從個(gè)人尊嚴(yán)角度著眼；對(duì)于長(zhǎng)期監(jiān)禁，也要看到它們的必要性和積極方面，不宜一概否定?？傊?，如果能從不同方面分析問(wèn)題，就會(huì)更有說(shuō)服力。