Page 3 - 2023-bfw-TLC-4e

of as no more than raised voices interrupting one another, exaggerated assertions
2
without adequate support, and scanty evidence from sources that lack credibility.
We might call this “crazed rhetoric,” as political commentator Tom Toles does in the
following cartoon.

Argument

All rights reserved. TOLES ©2011 The Washington Post. Reprinted with permission of ANDREWS MCMEEL SYNDICATION.

This cartoon appeared on January 16, 2011, a few days after Arizona congress-
woman Gabrielle Giffords became the victim of a shooting; six people were killed and
another thirteen injured. Many people saw this tragedy as stemming from vitriolic polit-
ical discourse that included violent language. Toles argues that Uncle Sam, and thus
the country, is in danger of being devoured by “crazed rhetoric.” There may not be a
“next trick” or a “taming,” he suggests, if the rhetorical lion continues to roar.
Is Toles’s view exaggerated? Whether you answer yes or no to that question, it seems
quite clear that partisanship and polarization often win out over dialogue and reason
when it comes to argument. The goal of this chapter is to avoid thinking of argument as a
zero-sum game of winners and losers but, instead, to see it as a means of better under-
standing other people’s ideas as well as your own.

60

Uncorrected proofs have been used in this sample. Copyright © Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers.
Distributed by Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers.
For review purposes only. Not for redistribution.
03_sheatlc4e_40925_ch02_058_111_4pp.indd 60 8/9/22 2:54 PM