not be allowed.

+Theme CXIII.+--_Write an argument of expediency using
one of the subjects named in the preceding exercise._

(What advantages have you made most prominent?
To what feelings have you appealed?)

+Theme CXIV.+--_Write a narration in which the hero is called upon to
decide whether some course of action is right or wrong_.

(Consider the theme as a narration. Does it fulfill the requirements of
Chapter IX? (See Summary.) Consider just the arguments used. Are the
arguments sufficient to bring conviction to the reader that the hero
decided rightly?)

+203. Refutation.+--No question is worth argument unless there are two
sides to it--unless there is a chance for some doubt in the mind of the
hearer as to which side seems most reasonable. Many questions are of such
a nature that in trying to convince our hearers of some truth, we often
find it necessary to show them, not only the truth of a proposition or the
expediency of a course of action, but also the falsity of some opposing
proposition or the inexpediency of the opposite course of action. This
tearing to pieces another's argument, is called refutation, or destructive
argument. A successful debater shows nearly if not equal skill in tearing
down his opponent's arguments as in building up his own.

Even in arguments in which no one takes the opposite side at the given
time, we must not forget that there are points on the opposite side which
are likely to arise in the minds of our hearers. Just as the skillful
teacher must know the difficulties that will arise in the minds of the
pupils even though they are not expressed, so must the skillful debater
consider the objections that his hearer will mentally set up against his
argument. It is well, however, for the debater to avoid overemphasizing
objections. Sometimes his discussion gives the objections a weight that
they would not otherwise have. It is not wise to set up "a man of straw"
for the purpose of knocking him down.

Notice the refutation in the following argument:--

In no respect is the difference of opinion as to the methods of fishing so
pronounced and disturbing among anglers as the diverse ones of fishing
"up" and "down" stream.

"Fishing up stream" has many advocates who assert that as trout always lie
with their heads up current, they are less likely to see the fisherman or
the glint of his rod when the casts are made; that the discomfort and
fatigue accompanying wading agains