Thank You For Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About The Art of Persuasion, by Jay Heinrichs

A book like this needs to come with a bit of a warning. I enjoyed this book as a reader who has a practical interest in rhetoric and as someone who engaged regularly in public speaking where I seek to engage in appeals that are heavy in logos and ethos, and only limited pathos. I have a general fondness for pop culture references and found the author’s shameless willingness to make himself look idiotic while sharing anecdotes and examples on how to craft pragmatic rhetorical appeals in an age of increasing polarization to be winsome even if somewhat quixotic. If your patience with the author’s cluelessness is limited or if you have a hostility to the author’s attempts to make classical rhetoric into a trendy and easily accessible subject that seeks to improve the ability of contemporary Americans to engage in argumentation in a spirit where one desires the conversation to go on and does not seek to derail that conversation with blame or appealing to enduring standards of right and wrong, which the author views as being responsible for the sad state our society is in, this book is going to come off as extremely offensive. If you are inclined to be generous to the author, you can see this book as a flawed attempt at creating the space for reasoned dialogue in contemporary society through the popularization of rhetoric for readers who are young or young at heart. If you are not inclined to be generous, this is a book that provides plenty of reasons for the reader to find fault with the author’s ethos.

This book is about 300 pages long and is divided into several sections and 25 chapters. The book begins with a preface and an introduction that discusses the invisible argument that goes on all around us (1). This is followed by a look at various offensive rhetorical principles, such as setting your goals (2), controlling the tense of the argument (3)–blame is past, belonging is present, choice is future–softening up one’s audience (3), getting others to like you (5), making them listen (6), showing leadership (7), winning their trust (8), controlling the mood (9), turning the volume down (10), gaining the high ground (11), persuading others on your terms (12), and controlling the argument (13). This is followed by a few chapters on rhetorical defense, such as spotting fallacies (14), calling a foul on others (15), knowing whom to trust (16), and finding the sweet spot in moderate positions (17). A few chapters follow on advanced offensive, such as speaking in your audience’s language (18), making them identify with your choice (19), using wit (20), seizing the occasion (21), and using the right medium for one’s message (22). The last three chapters then look at advanced agreement, with a discussion of giving a persuasive talk (23), using the right tools (24), and running an agreeable country through encouraging deliberative rhetoric (25). The book ends with a discussion of tools (i), a glossary of terms (ii), a chronology of rhetoric (iii), and suggestions for further reading (iv), along with acknowledgements and an index.

Indeed, while I found much to enjoy in the book’s effort to bring rhetoric and its techniques into the reach of those who lack a formal understanding of Greek and Latin and want to see themselves as too hip for encountering the classics on their own terms, I hesitate to recommend this book. There is a serious flaw running through the book, and it is a problem of ethos. Is it even worthwhile in the first place to seek to engage in public discourse with people whose only means of trying to reach out to you is to bash you with an argumentative club, to accuse you of being some sort of a fascist or other cretin who they see as being unworthy of a public life and worthy only of harassment and threats? Does one even want to appeal to such people, or deal with them at all? The whole point of appreciating argument is to find the joy of interacting with people who have different experiences and different perspectives but a common commitment to exploring communication, but we do not live in a place where it is pleasant or enjoyable to engage with those who belong to different and hostile tribes. This is a book which is written from the perspective that if we learned how to communicate more effectively then we would be able to live at peace, but I don’t happen to think that is true, and if you don’t, you will find this book to be of somewhat limited use. The other’s focus on choice and deliberation in a world where no one wants to hear you out unless they know you are one of them is woefully misplaced.