Argumentation is a marvelous process for us. I invested much of my life teaching argumentation, both to collegians who acknowledged their Christian orientation, and those who did not. Considering my purpose I am grateful to have worked in both cultures – secular and religious. On surface there did not appear great differences between the two. But, the differences were quite meaningful, even to the point of truth and fiction. Both tend to agree on evidence, but vary on presuppositions, which variance affects meaning.
For both contexts I was a teacher (guide) for: seeking truth, pointing out what mankind knows and discovering things new, finding ways of learning and absorbing facts so to direct beliefs and conduct. We learned, for example, that there really are only a few ways in which to prove a proposition. Evidence in presentation consists of: 1) – Examples (what has happened relative to the proposition in question, in the experience of mankind and nature); 2) – Analogies (stories that clarify, like parables, that will guide the mind in the direction of the assumptions); 3) – Statistics (numbers related to finding the appearances of the factors related to the course of the debate/argument); 4) – Quotations (authoritative statements from persons who are presumed to know the field of interest, persons carrying weight with listeners or readers of the argument); and, 5) – Instances (truncated examples related to the main evidence preceding the resort to these rhetorical instances). This last may be illustrated in following a point of presentation related to freedom in democracy held by George Washington. The debater might add: This viewpoint was believed and followed from Washington, through Presidents Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and forward until Jackson. There is no evidence provided beyond Washington, but assumed acceptable for this occasion, asserted, and known to the advocate, in adequate detail if requested – so to turn an Instance into an Example, usually called, Illustration. (This important process is developed further on another Page. Some of these factors are not hard evidence which can be documented, but probative and persuasive.)
Problems with proofs (evidence) are many, and none so distorted as statistics, which in our present society carry enormous weight in intellectual argumentation. How were the statistics gathered? What was the motivation of the gatherers of the statistics? How old are the results that are reported? How do they differ from other studies? So the questions of validity stack up. The process of collecting statistics, dividing them, explaining them, finding deviations, and using them, has become major effort in the search for truth in the natural world. Those that deal with nature are differentiated from those dealing with behavior. Statistics about natural resources, create controversy – like how much oil remains in the ground available to mankind, but are usually easier to accept and use than statistics about human behavior and experience.
Today the minister used statistical reports to point to his thesis on low morality found in society. He referred to a Survey – a lower statistical level, sometimes quite useful. Surveys require less preparation to assure faithful responses than do crafted programs. The survey reported that of adults, 18-29 years of age: 25% had lied to families and colleagues; 28% had padded their expense accounts; 34% had justified stealing from an employer;, and, 46% called in sick when they were not. There were other impressive stats used to support the point. They tell us something, but we are not always sure what that is, whether samples are representative, and if documentation is sound. Christians presuppose that Scripture holds evidence from God to find life and truth in Christ. Believers make Scripture the first order of evidence for divine purpose. Secularists would not. Those who find truth and solutions in Scripture, as I do, must be aware that the presupposition that God has spoken, most authoritatively in the Bible, is not acceptable to those who have settled, in their minds, that evidence and conclusion that can be shown in replication (repeated with the same results) is the only acceptable way. At that point the believer and the humanist are at odds – and leave it there. Christ and the Apostles declared the gospel, relying on the response of their listeners. If rejected, they went on their way. It was presumed that there was no ill will. The most negative gesture from the Apostles was to shake off the dust of their sandals as they left town. In this was a sign they had fulfilled their purpose – the declaration of the Christian gospel believed by faith. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020