KINDS AND USES. It is evident that the kind of exposition illustrated above is useful mainly for planning and outlining a subject. It is concerned with laying the ground-work for subsequent discussion, description, or narration. It analyzes, defines, divides, and classifies; it plays an important part in planning every essay that is written, whether in description, narration, or argumentation. These methods may all be included under the single designation of Scientific Exposition. There is, however, another kind of exposition, of a less rigidly scientific character, which we shall call Popular Exposition, and under which may be included the Didactic Essay, the Conversational Essay, and the Critical Essay. These we shall discuss under the headings indicated. THE DIDACTIC ESSAY. This is the type most frequently attempted. It takes a clearly stated proposition as its subject, and attempts to establish it by one or more of the various means of development, such as definition, contrast, explanation, illustration, particular instances, etc. Most of the essays that appear in such reviews as the North American, the Forum, the Popular Science Monthly, the Contemporary, and the Fortnightly belong to this class. The essays of Macaulay, De Quincey, and Emerson, for the most part, belong here. Selecting a subject within one's powers, stating the subject clearly and accurately, careful thinking, gaining information by reading and conversation, and outlining before beginning the work of composition, are of the greatest importance in writing essays of this kind. THE CONVERSATIONAL ESSAY. The conversational essay is illustrated in the essays of Charles Lamb, Steele, Addison, Holmes, and Thackeray. It is generally loose in structure, and gives the personal impressions, whims, and fancies of the essayist in the easy confidential tone of conversation. The subjects chosen are usually of a light character, and a whimsical view is not infrequently presented. To write good essays of this type requires considerable original talent, or long training, or the combination of the two; for, in spite of their seeming irregularity, the best of these essays are underlaid by a carefully planned framework, and guided in their erratic flights by a profound sense of artistic form. The beginner, therefore, until he has learned to lay the solid foundations of essay-structure, or has developed to some degree a natural sense for structural unity, will do well to avoid the writing of essays of this character. THE CRITICAL ESSAY The aim of the critical essay is to estimate the value of a work of literature or art, and to judge it by the principles of the class to which it belongs, pointing out both excellences and defects. It is evident that real criticism implies wide and thorough knowledge on the part of the critic as well as a nature capable of entering with sympathetic and appreciative interest into the thoughts and feelings of others, while at the same time preserving his own individuality of judgment and opinion. The works of Ruskin give the best-known (if not the best) art criticism; while in literary criticism the names of Arnold, Dowden, Stephen, Lowell, Stedman, and Pater are most familiar. d. ARGUMENTATION. The argumentative essay devotes itself to proving the truth or falsity of a proposition. "An argument," says Bain, "is a fact, principle, or a set of facts or of principles adduced as evidence of some other fact or principle." To illustrate, the fact that a large proportion of the prisoners in our penitentiaries are ignorant men is adduced as evidence of the principle that ignorance breeds crime. It is evident that to be of value as an argument the statement as to the large proportion of ignorant men among the prisoners in the penitentiaries must, first, either be admitted to be true or must be shown to be true by statistics; secondly, the same statement must also be admitted or shown by statistics to have been generally true for a long period and likely to be true in the future. Both these conditions are essential to a valid argument. THE PROPOSITION. The proposition to be proved should be clearly and accurately stated in the affirmative form. A close analysis of the terms of a proposition will sometimes indicate a line of argument to be pursued, and will very frequently furnish a good approach to the main discussion. A complex proposition may be proved by dividing it into its constituent propositions and proving each of these. The proposition "Judges should be elected by popular vote" would require such a division, since the considerations which tend to make the proposed step desirable are different for different classes of judges, and the possible objections to the proposition are different for the different classes also. Thus the division might be of U. S. courts of State courts Judges of County courts should be elected by popular vote. of Police courts etc. CLASSIFICATION AND KINDS OF ARGUMENTS. Proofs applied immediately to the establishment of the proposition are called direct proofs. Proof is indirect when it is applied to the overthrow of objections; indirect proof is called refutation. This classification is based on the purpose to which proofs are applied, on the use made of them. Whether direct or indirect, proofs are of three kinds: a priori, signs, and examples. In a priori proofs (sometimes called proofs from antecedent probability) the reasoning is from cause to effect, or from a general law to the results of that law. The prevalence of intemperance in a community is an a priori proof of the existence of wretchedness in that community, because intemperance is a cause of wretchedness. Bountiful crops throughout the country furnish an a priori proof that business will be good, since we know that these are a potent cause of general prosperity. Arguments in regard to future events are always a priori. General bad character in an accuser, long-standing hatred on his part toward the accused, the existence of a wicked motive in making the accusation, is a priori proof that his accusation is false. The validity of an a priori proof depends upon the certainty that the cause assigned is adequate and operative. If it can be shown that the cause assigned is inadequate or inoperative, or hindered from producing its natural result, the argument is impaired to that extent. Signs are proofs from an effect to a condition so connected with the effect that the existence of the effect implies the existence of the condition. Widespread ignorance, pauperism, and crime in a country are signs going to show the falsity of the proposition that that country is ready for self-government. Blood-stains upon the clothing of a man accused of murder are signs of his guilt. Signs are merely indications or circumstances, and are always open to doubt. What is known as circumstantial evidence is a collection of a priori proofs and signs. The most suspicious circumstances are often wholly inconclusive. If, for instance, the blood-stains upon the clothing of a man accused of murder are clearly accounted for in some other way than by the supposition of guilt, doubt is cast upon the validity of the argument. The same signs are frequently employed for opposite ends. One writer regards strikes as signs that the influence of trades unions is pernicious; another quotes the same phenomena as signs that the trades unions have given the working classes power to assert and, in some cases, to maintain their rights. The more numerous the signs, the greater their value as arguments for the truth of a proposition. Authority, or what books and competent persons have said, irrespective of particular cases, as to the truth or falsity of a proposition, and testimony, or the evidence of witnesses, have been classified as signs by some writers; but it is clear that authority and testimony may be a priori proof, or signs, or proof by examples, according to the nature of the proof given by the authority or by the witness testifying. When authorities are quoted to support a statement, reference should be made to the edition, volume, and page; and in general only those authorities should be referred to who are acknowledged to be competent to speak on the subject, and whose works, if quoted, are accessible. Concurrence of authorities or of witnesses as to the truth of any matter gives special force to this kind of argument. Examples of the truth of a proposition are a form of proof which gains its power on the principle that what has once happened under certain conditions may be expected to happen again under like conditions. When the number of examples adduced is sufficiently large to convince us that the whole class to which they belong possess the same property, the proof is called Induction. If, for instance, we find that several hundreds of roses have the same number of petals and stamens, and conclude that all roses of the same class have the same number of petals and stamens as those examined, we have a case of Induction. The number of examples necessary to make the proof of a proposition conclusive depends upon the nature of the proposition to be proved, and must be decided in each case as it arises. One of the most frequent of faults in writing is a hasty generalization from too few examples. It is evidently not sufficient to cite the cases of Homer and Milton in proof of the proposition that blindness induces the growth of the poetic spirit in a man. A form of the argument by example is that which asserts that, if a principle is true in an admitted case, much more will it be true in the case cited when the conditions are more favorable. This is known as the argument a fortiori. II. FIGURES OF SPEECH. A figure of speech, in the ordinary acceptation of the term, may be defined as a form of expression which departs widely and strikingly in certain specified ways1 from what is literal, straightforward, and matter-of-fact. The names of the most common figures are as follows: 1 The ways must be specified, otherwise there will be no distinction between figurative language and language that is simply picturesque or imaginative. When Shakespeare says, for example: "I saw a smith stand with his hammer, thus, The whilst his iron did on the anvil cool, the entire passage departs widely and strikingly from what is plain, literal, and matterof-fact, yet only the last line, because it contains the word "swallowing," would ordinarily be called figurative. |