11.5 Facts as examples and illustrations.

Empirical data, facts can be used to directly confirm what is said in the advanced position, or to confirm the logical consequences of this position. Confirmation of the consequences is an indirect confirmation of the situation itself.

Facts or special cases can also be used as examples, illustrations and images. In all these three cases we are talking about inductive confirmation of some common position by empirical data. Speaking as an example, a particular case makes generalization possible; as an illustration, it reinforces the already established general situation; and finally, as a model, he encourages imitation.

The use of special cases as models is not relevant to argumentation in support of descriptive statements. It directly relates to the problem of justifying assessments and arguing in their support.

An example is a fact or a particular case, used as a starting point for the subsequent generalization and to support the generalization made. “Then I say,” writes an 18th-century philosopher. J. Berkeley, - that sin or moral corruption consists not in external physical action or movement, but in the internal deviation of the will from the laws of reason and religion. After all, killing an enemy in battle or carrying out a death sentence over a criminal according to the law is not considered sinful, although the external action here is the same as in the case of murder. ” Here are two examples (murder in war and the execution of a death sentence), designed to confirm the general position of sin or moral corruption. The use of facts or particular cases as examples should be distinguished from their use as illustrations. Speaking as an example, a particular case makes a generalization possible; as an illustration, it reinforces a generalization that has already been made independently of it.

In the case of an example, the reasoning goes according to the scheme: “If the first, then the second; the second takes place; then the first also takes place. ”

This reasoning from the statement of the consequence of the conditional statement goes to the statement of its basis and is not a correct deductive reasoning. The truth of the packages does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion drawn from them. An argument based on an example does not prove the position accompanied by an example, but only confirms it, makes it more plausible. Prime]) has, however, a number of features that distinguish it from among all those facts and particular cases that are used to confirm general propositions and hypotheses. The example is more convincing or more weighty than other facts and special cases. It is not just a fact, but a typical fact, i.e. fact revealing a certain trend. The typing function of the example explains its wide use in argumentation processes, and especially in humanitarian and practical argumentation, as well as in everyday reasoning.

The example can only be used to support descriptive statements. He is not capable of supporting assessments and statements, which, like norms, oaths, promises, etc., are subject to appraisals. The example can not serve as the source material for estimates and similar statements. What is sometimes presented as an example, designed to somehow confirm the assessment, norm, etc., is in fact not an example, but a model. The difference between an example and a sample is significant: an example is a description, while a sample is a special case assessment setting a particular standard, ideal, etc.

The purpose of the example is to lead to the formulation of the general situation and to some extent be an argument in support of the latter. Criteria for selecting an example are associated with this goal. First of all, the fact or particular case chosen as an example should look clear and unquestionable. He must also express a tendency towards generalization quite clearly. The requirement of biasedness, or typicality, of the facts taken as an example is connected with the recommendation to list several similar examples, if taken alone they do not show with the necessary certainty the direction of the forthcoming generalization or do not support the generalization already made. If the intention to argue with the help of an example is not announced openly, the fact itself and its context should show that the audience is dealing specifically with an example, and not with some description of an isolated phenomenon perceived as simple additional information. The event used as an example should be perceived, if not as usual, then, in any case, as logically and physically possible. If this is not the case, then the example simply breaks off the sequence of reasoning and leads to just the opposite result or a comic effect. Examples should be chosen and formulated in such a way that they encourage the transition from the single or the particular to the general, and not from the particular again to the particular.

Special attention needs a contradictory example. It is usually considered that such an example can only be used when refuting erroneous generalizations and falsifying them. However, a controversial example is often used differently: it is introduced with the intention of preventing an illegal generalization and, demonstrating its incompatibility with it, suggest the only direction in which the generalization can proceed. The task of the contradictory example in this case is not the falsification of some general situation, but the identification of such a situation.

Illustration is a fact or a special case, designed to reinforce the conviction of the audience in the correctness of the already known general situation. The example pushes the thought to a new generalization and reinforces this generalization, the illustration clarifies a well-known general situation, demonstrates its value with the help of a number of possible applications, enhances the effect of its presence in the minds of the audience. With the difference in the tasks of the example and the illustration, there is a difference in the criteria for their selection. An example should look like a fairly solid, unequivocally interpreted fact, the illustration has the right to raise small doubts, but it should have a particularly vivid effect on the imagination of the audience, to stop its attention. The illustration, to a much lesser extent than the example, runs the risk of being misinterpreted, since there is already a well-known position behind it. The distinction between example and illustration is not always clear. Aristotle distinguished between two examples of use, depending on whether the speaker has any general principles or not: “It is necessary to give many examples to someone who puts them at the beginning and who puts them at the end, for that one [example] is enough for a witness who deserves faith is useful even when he is alone. ” The role of particular cases is, according to Aristotle, different, depending on whether they precede that general position, to which they belong, or follow it. The point, however, is that the facts given before generalization are, as a rule, examples, while one or few facts given after it are illustrations. This is evidenced by the warning of Aristotle that the demands of the listener, for example, are higher than for the illustration. An unfortunate example calls into question the general situation which he is called upon to reinforce. The contradictory example can even disprove this position. The situation with the unsuccessful illustration is different: the general situation to which it is presented is not questioned, and the inadequate illustration is regarded more as a negative characteristic of who applies it, indicating that he did not understand the general principle or the inability to find a successful illustration. An unsuccessful illustration can have a comic effect. The ironic use of illustration is especially effective when describing a particular person: first, a positive characteristic is given to that person, and then an illustration is presented that is directly incompatible with it. So, in "Julia Caesar" Shakespeare Anthony, constantly reminding that Brutus is an honest person, brings one after another evidence of his ingratitude and betrayal.

Specifying the general situation with the help of a particular case, the illustration enhances the effect of presence. On this basis, they sometimes see in it an image, a living picture of an abstract thought. The illustration does not set, however, the goal to replace the abstract with concrete and thereby transfer the consideration to other objects. This makes an analogy, the illustration is no more than a special case, confirming the already known general situation or facilitating a clearer understanding of it.

Often, the illustration is chosen taking into account the emotional resonance that it can cause. This is done, for example, by Aristotle, who prefers the style of a periodic style to a coherent one that does not have a clearly visible end: “... because everyone wants to see an end; for this reason, competitors in the race choke and weaken when cornering, whereas earlier they did not feel tired, seeing the limit of running before them. ”

A comparison used in the argument and not a comparative assessment (preference) is usually an illustration of one case to another, with both cases being considered as concretizing the same principle. A typical comparison example: “People are shown by circumstances. So, when some circumstance falls to you, remember that this god, as a gymnastics teacher, pushed you with a rough end ” (Epictetus).