Sally Brown is a sensible, intelligent girl; she is an orphan, uneducated and without means of support. She has a good deal of self-respect and a strong desire for selfimprovement. She has an opportunity to work in a large jewelry factory, where some four hundred young men and women are employed, for seven dollars a week. She can get a comfortable room and board for four dollars a week. She can also get a position to do general housework, at three dollars a week with good board and room, in the home of a college professor whose wife is a considerate, cultivated woman and has taken an interest in Sally. The girl has not had special training for either situation, but is confident that she could succeed in either. c. Resolved, That The Star and The Record should consolidate. The Record is an old, conservative paper with good standing, circulation, and advertising list, and an able editor. The Star is a new, progressive paper, without a reputation for reliability; its editorials are light, its advertising rate low. The capital invested in The Record is $20,000. The capital invested in The Star is $10,000. For years The Record has paid an average dividend of seven per cent on the money invested. The Star has not averaged more than one per cent. They are the only Republican papers in town. Some families take both papers, others take The Star or The Record. It has been proposed that the companies consolidate and publish but one paper. (Considering the question as one of finance, the proprietors of one paper will favor the consolidation; the proprietors of the other will have to be convinced that the combination will be to their interest. Figures are given showing that the combination must result in a profit large enough to pay more than seven per cent on the combined capital of the two papers. Give the issue exactly.) THE TEST OF A GOOD INTRODUCTION TO A BRIEF As has been shown, we may consider the proposition to be proved as the conclusion of a syllogism. The truth of the conclusion of a syllogism depends on the truth of the two premises that logically support it. If they are both true, the conclusion must inevitably be true. Together the premises form a sufficient reason for the truth of the conclusion. Take the syllogism: All men who care more for the well-being of others than for their own comfort and pleasure are generous. Mr. Hale is a man who cares more for the well-being of others than for his own comfort and pleasure. Mr. Hale is generous. How do we know that Mr. Hale is a generous man? What is the test of generosity? Mr. Hale is generous because any one who cares more for the well-being of others than for his own comfort and pleasure is generous, and Mr. Hale is a man who cares more for the well-being of others than for his own comfort and pleasure. If the universal statement is admitted to be true, if caring more for the wellbeing of others than for one's own comfort and pleasure is the test of generosity, then, if Mr. Hale is proved to have this characteristic, he will be proved to be generous. ARGUMENTATION 5 The introduction to a brief for an argument whose purpose was to prove the generosity of Mr. Hale might be something like this: I. Mr. Hale's refusal to contribute toward the building of the new library raises a question as to his generosity. II. All agree, that A. A man may be generous without giving money to every worthy enterprise. B. All men who care more for the well-being of others than for their own comfort and pleasure are generous. III. The question then resolves itself into this, Is Mr. Hale a man who cares more for the well-being of others than for his own comfort and pleasure? It will be noticed that the material issue furnishes the middle term. As soon as we have reached that in the introduction to a brief we have the three terms for a syllogism, since we start with the conclusion in which the minor and the major terms occur. In the normal syllogism, it will have been noticed, the terms are arranged as follows: Major premise: middle term, major term. If the terms in the proposition or conclusion are not arranged in the right order, minor term, then major, it is necessary to put the conclusion into logi cal form before we can work back from it to the premises and complete the syllogism. If the proposition is, The negro should be given social recognition according to his individual merit, it is conceivable that different problems might be suggested by this proposition. From it the following syllogism might be evolved: Whatever is necessary to the negro's highest development is the negro's due. Social recognition of the individual according to his merit is necessary to the negro's highest development. Social recognition of the individual according to his merit is the negro's due. Or, All persons who deserve opportunity for the highest development should receive social recognition according to individual merit. The negro is a person who deserves opportunity for the highest development. The negro should receive social recognition according to his individual merit. The minor and major terms in this proposition are rightly arranged for the conclusion of the first syllogism; their order must be changed if the second syllogism is the one desired. Study of these syllogisms will show that, in each, the major premise of the one syllogism contains the idea of the minor premise of the other. If, then, both premises must be proved in order to prove the conclusion, it would be immaterial which syllogism were taken to epitomize the argument. But a comparison of the introduction and the syllogism given at the beginning of this chapter will show that the major premise expresses something agreed upon by both sides, and that the minor proposition expresses the point or points that must be proved by evidence. If, then, the first of the two syllogisms just given is taken, the argument will be limited to proving that the negro is a person deserving opportunity for the highest development. If the second is taken, the question for argument is simply, whether or not social recognition of the negro according to individual merit is essential to the highest development of the negro. If the writer wishes to consider both questions in his argument, he will reject both of these limited syllogisms and take a more comprehensive one :— Whatever is essential to the negro's highest development and whatever the white man owes the negro, should be given without consideration of the result to the white man. Social recognition according to individual merit is something essential to the negro's highest development and something the white man owes the negro. Social recognition of the negro according to individual merit is something that should be given the negro without consideration of the result to the white man. The major premise thus often expresses a belief that may be regarded by some as debatable, but |