Transcript Ethics and Argumentation - www.micheleweber.homestead.com

Ethics
What is “ethics”?




Branch of philosophy that deals with
issues of right and wrong.
Concerned with moral issues such as
honesty, fairness, just, etc.
A speaker’s character is being judged.
Quintilian says that speechmaking is the
“good person speaking well”.
Five sources of ethical
standards:






Utilitarian approach
Rights approach
Fairness or Justice approach
Common good approach
Virtue approach
Putting the approaches together.
Guidelines for speaking ethical







Make sure your speaking goals are ethical.
Be fully prepared for each speech.
Be honest in what you say.
Avoid name calling and abusive language.
Put ethical principles in practice.
Use a large amount of sources.
Distinguish between quotes and paraphrases.
Plagiarism


Plagiarism is “presenting another person’s
language or ideas as one’s own.
Three types of plagiarism:



Global plagiarism: taking am entire speech
from “one” source.
Patchwork: copying verbatim from two or
three sources.
Incremental: copying verbatim specific parts
or increments.
Argumentative Dishonesty







Advancing false conclusions.
Intentionally using old evidence.
Using unreliable sources.
Concealing available evidence.
Twisting or distorting evidence.
Fabricating information.
Using inferior evidence.
Arguer Orientations:


Wayne Brockriede
published an article in
the 1970’s called
“Arguers as lovers”.
He proposed that
arguer orientations
can be framed as
(abuser)“rapist”,
“seducer”, or “lovers”.
The arguer as “Rapist”(abuser)





Depersonalizes the other.
Relies on verbal aggressiveness. (name
calling, ad hominems, etc . . )
Uses force, authority, sanctions.
Employs threats, ultimatums.
An example: poor litigants vs. large
corporations.
The Arguer as “Seducer”





Relies on harm, beguilement, trickery.
Creates an illusion of choice.
Utilizes ingratiation strategies.
Resorts to deception.
Employs illicit reasoning (false reasoning,
withholding evidence, etc.)
“Rapists” and “Seducers” as
Arguers





Displays disregard for the other person.
Views other as an “object” or “target” rather
than as a person.
Emphasizes success, de-emphasizes
relationships.
Unwilling to expose oneself to the risk of
change.
Adopts only one perspective on a issue—one’s
own.
Arguers as “Lovers”





Regards other as an equal, stresses power
parity.
Values the relationship as much as (if not
more than) the outcome of decision.
Emphasizes cooperation and collaboration
over competition.
Values shared decision making, choice making.
Willing to risk values, knowledge, and selfesteem by engaging in argument.
Conclusions:



The categories aren’t mutually exclusive,
they are a matter of degree.
The categories are situational and
contextual.
A person can change his or her orientation
to arguing.
Six Pillars of Character






Trustworthiness
Respect
Responsibility
Fairness
Caring
Citizenship

Taken from Michael Josephson (KNX)
Ethical guidelines for listeners

Be courteous and
attentive!

Avoid prejudging.

Keep an open mind.