For the past two millenia, five principles or canons have governed the creation and execution of classical rhetoric. These five canons form a template for developing and critiquing speeches and written compositions. In canon one, INVENTION, the orator or writer determines the topic, discovers the arguments, and develops the thesis for his speech or essay. Canon two, ARRANGEMENT, was called “dispositio” by the ancient Romans since it involved the disposition or arrangement of the idea and supporting arguments. Contemporary home school parents and even public school teachers spend an enormous amount of time teaching their students how to organize their thoughts often without consistent success. Let’s take a look at how ancient, medieval, Renaissance, and colonial orators arranged their material.

Introduce the Idea

In the beginning of the speech or essay, the debatable idea was introduced. Ancient Romans called the introduction the exordium, and it was during this initial stage that the public speaker established his credibility and authority as an expert on the subject. Often the speaker referred to his knowledge or personal experience with the idea. Of course, the savvy orator selected evidence during the invention stage which highlighted his expertise so that the persuasive appeal of his personal character would lend weight to his arguments. Personal character, reputation, and intelligence were important factors in disposing the audience to listen and respond just as they are important to effective communication today.

Contemporary orators and writers often add a step before the introduction called the “attention-getter.” Quotations, personal stories, jokes, or other compelling statistics open the speech so that the audience is immediately alert and receptive to the speech or essay.

State the Facts

The second part of a classical discourse was called narratio or narration. A narrative account of the facts is provided, and a general explanation of the case or idea is outlined. The current state of affairs or status quo was usually described with vivid word pictures that stirred the emotions and prepared the audience to favorably consider the arguments. Although a direct appeal to accept the arguments was not made at this point, the underlying intention of the narration was to move or persuade. Today, we call this portion of the speech or essay the exposition…the facts are exposed.

Outline the Proposal

Once the facts were stated and summarized, the ancient orator briefly outlined the evidence that was to follow. Contemporary audiences would recognize this ancient practice as the place in the speech where the speaker tells you what he’s going to tell you! For example, after the attention-getter and introduction of the thesis statement, an excellent orator will “sign-post” where he’s going with the speech or essay by using transition words like “first,” “secondly,” “next,” “finally.” Then he launches into the substance of the speech or essay.

Nail the Proof

Called the confirmation, this main body of the speech was devoted to the evidence. Quality content and logical arguments were imperative. It was here that the orator proved the points of his case or debatable idea. Now he would reveal the evidence that was derived during the question portion of the invention stage starting with the least powerful proof and gradually building to the most powerful and convincing proof as the climax of the argument.

The ancient orator used persuasive techniques like appeals to exhort the audience to recognize the benefits that would accrue to each of them if they adopted his position. He often appealed to material, spiritual, or emotional self-interest. (Contemporary copywriters call this technique “what’s in it for me?”) Sometimes, the orator exposed the inherent danger of acting on the opposing idea. Ethical and logical appeals were also made when the orator wanted to move the audience toward decisions of public good like caring for widows and orphans. Above all, the ancient orator appealed to reason or the logic of his case, so it’s not surprising that ancient orators and audiences highly regarded critical thinkers.

Refute the Opposition

This portion of the speech was devoted to answering the counterarguments of one’s opponents. Of course, in order to refute, the orator had to know both sides of the argument. During the invention stage, he gathered evidence for his case and against his case. Often during the speech, the orator asked imaginary questions in anticipation of the objections being raised in the minds of his audience; he then answered these imaginary objections. Sometimes the orator denigrated the authority or credibility of an opponent. At other times, the ancient orator found it useful to reject an alternative idea as immaterial, ridiculous, unnecessary, absurd, false, or morally wrong. Today we regularly reject opposing ideas as too expensive in terms of time and money.

Conclude and Call to Action

The peroration or conclusion of the speech included a summary of the debatable idea, the arguments, and the refutation in a compelling, climactic manner. The Greek word for climax means “ladder,” and a rhetorical climax looks just like a ladder: the words, phrases, and ideas are arranged in a manner of increasing importance often in parallel structure. Usually, a final appeal was made to the listener to act on the orator’s advice.

The Apostle Paul, trained in classical rhetoric, concludes the argument of chapter 4 of The Epistle to the Romans with a climactic conclusion: “we also boast in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.” (Romans 5:3-5 NRSV). Another example from Scripture of a classical conclusion is found in the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah at the end of Matthew, chapter 1. After listing all the generations from Abraham to Jesus, Matthew concludes with “So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.” (Matthew 1:17 NRSV). Arguably, the most famous peroration in Scripture could be the destruction of the Northern Kingdom, Israel, found in 2 Kings 17:1-22 which concludes the historian’s exposition and arguments for the fall of Israel.

So now I hope you see how important artful arrangement is to the effective communication of the message and the ultimate persuasion of your audience. The orator or writer needs an introduction, a statement of facts, an outline, the proof, the refutation, and the conclusion. Although I’ve just given you a lot of detail, you can really boil classical rhetoric down to the idea, the proof, and the call to action. Canon three, STYLE, is the subject of the next post on “Communicating Well,” skill set three of the classical trivium.

* * * * *

One of the first exercises for teaching classical rhetoric in Quintilian’s Progymnasmata was storytelling. If you have younger kids, prepare them for classical rhetoric now by teaching them how to narrate stories. Read them a story, close the book, and ask them to tell you the story in their own words. If they are having trouble, coach them through the beginning, middle, and end. Teach them how to ask the standard questions: who, what, when, where, how, and why. Eventually, they will learn how to quickly summarize the story which will be useful later when incorporating narratives in their speeches and writing as well as in literary analysis.

Tags: arrangement, attention-getter, classical rhetoric, climax, conclusion, confirmation, counterarguments, critical thinkers, debatable idea, dispositio, effective communication, essay, evidence, exordium, exposition, home school, invention, logical arguments, narratio, narration, orator, organize thoughts, outline, peroration, persuasive appeals, principles of classical rhetoric, proof, public speaker, refutation, speeches, style, thesis, transitions, written compositions

“I don’t know.” Perhaps you thought you understood a concept then when pushed to summarize the concept in a clear, concise statement, you found yourself uttering the feeble words “I don’t know.” Or maybe you asked your son to explain what he just read, and he weakly stammered “I don’t know.” If you can’t explain why you know something, then you don’t really know it!

The English word “critical” derives from the Greek word “kritikos” which means to question, to make sense of, or to analyze. Critical thinkers know why they believe what they believe because they have asked lots of questions, analyzed lots of data, and have made sense of the evidence. According to Merriam Webster, a belief is “a conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based upon examination of evidence.” In evaluating beliefs, we need to consider four different kinds of evidence:

• Expert Authorities

• Written References

• Hard Facts

• Personal Experience

Expert Authorities

An authority is one who is an expert in a field and has usually devoted the majority of his working career to gaining a deep understanding of his area of expertise. Biblical scholars specialize in interpreting particular books of the Bible. Supreme Court justices specialize in Federal Constitutional Law. Anthropologists specialize in indigenous cultures. Who are the authorities for your core beliefs? Are they particularly knowledgeable in the area of the belief? Are they reliable? Have they ever given inaccurate information? Do other authorities disagree with their positions?

Written References

Original source documents like books, newspapers, online publications are written by authors who could be authorities or work for authorities. What texts do you rely upon to support your beliefs? Is the content of these texts based upon factual evidence? What are the credentials of the authors? How much personal experience does the author have with the topic? Does the author have a relationship with someone who is an authority on the topic? Are there other authors who disagree with the position that your texts endorse? Is there evidence to support the opinion of these texts?

Hard Facts

Facts are pieces of information presented as having objective reality; that is, facts can be objectively quantified or substantiated and are not subject to the interpretations of the user. When considering the facts behind your beliefs, inquire of the source of the facts. Were experiments performed to statistically quantify the facts? Was evidence obtained to substantiate the conclusions? Can this evidence be interpreted differently? Does the factual evidence support the conclusion?

Personal Experience

Many times our beliefs are based upon personal experiences. In evaluating these experiences, ask yourself the following questions. What were the circumstances of the experience? Were distortions or mistakes in perception possible? Have other people had similar or conflicting experiences? Are there other explanations for the experience?

You don’t have to examine each of these four types of evidence for every belief or position that you consider, but critical thinking skills will be improved if you practice asking these questions regularly. Think of a core belief that you hold about life then go through this exercise step by step. Some possible beliefs that you could examine are what you believe about marriage, parenting, or homeschooling. Here are the steps:

1. Describe the belief.

2. Explain the reasons why you feel so strongly about the belief.

3. Identify evidence for your position.

4. Describe an opposing point of view.

5. Identify evidence for the opposing viewpoint.

6. Evaluate the evidence for both pros and cons using the four categories above:

a. Who are the authorities?

b. What are the written references?

c. What are the facts?

d. What are your personal experiences?

Was that difficult to do? Now you’re ready to try this exercise with your child. Select an easy belief to start with then move on to more difficult beliefs. For instance, in my household, Handel’s Homemade Ice Cream is favored above all other brands, so I might guide the kids through the following analysis:

1. Handels Ice Cream is better than Ritters Custard.
2. Flavor, variety, texture, and price all support our position.
3. We know this from personal experience and newspaper articles showing consumer preferences.
4. Ritters Custard is better than Handels.
5. Some people prefer the lighter, creamier texture of custard as evidenced by all the cars parked in front of the building.
6. Finally, authorities, references, facts, and personal experiences would be considered for both Handels and Ritters.

You can use these tools to evaluate all kinds of beliefs from moral positions (like “I believe lying is wrong”) to scientific theories (like “I do not believe global warming is a threat to the earth”) to difficult worldview issues (like “I believe in the Trinity”). Start with the easier concepts from their math lessons (like “I believe nine times eight is seventy-two” or “I believe a right triangle has one 90 degree angle”) or from their history reading (like “I do not believe the American Civil War was caused by slavery” or “I believe that Benedict Arnold was a traitor”).

You might want to set aside a few minutes every morning to practice this exercise just like you would practice an impromptu speech. Give the kids a topic (abstract ideas like love and power or concrete ideas like evolution and property ownership), and set the timer for 10 minutes. Give them a notecard and have them complete the 6 steps above. When the timer goes off, have them narrate their thoughts from the notecard. I promise you that this exercise will really stimulate their thinking; it really reveals how much they do or do not know about their belief! Train your kids in how to evaluate their beliefs so that they can confidently give a precise, thoughtful answer next time when you ask them why they believe what they believe.

Tags: belief, critical thinking, evidence, questions, Thinking Critically, worldview