Analyzing Heinrichs Repercussions Of An Argument

of argument goes with with a certain topic and tense.as an example Heinrichs shows how it would make sense for people would talk about values in the present tense because people think that their beliefs are eternal and unchanging. The Heinrichs implies that Aristotle’s distinction works by controlling the “tense” of an argument, and how people can control the content of that debate by shifting the debate to the future tense, for example, an arguer can shift from discussing values to discussing actions because future represents the action you have yet to do. He shows that when beginning an argument, you should always consider the most appropriate tense for the argument and that determining the correct tense is the most important part of winning an argument. He then draws the conclusion that deliberative debates are more willing to change their actions than their core beliefs.
As stated before Aristotle was a master of categorizing, and during this chapter Heinrichs takes time to discuss Aristotle’s most valuable ideas: the division of …show more content…
Heinrichs starts by discussing how decorum doesn't in all situations. He gives an example of how something you do at school may not be acceptable at another school. Decorum teaches the importance of knowing how to fit in with your audience (which is appropriate because decorum literally means “fit in”) and why getting them to be at ease around you is incredibly important. he goes on to state that once the last step is accomplished, persuasion gets even easier from there. Later in the chapter it says that how you dress has a role to play in decorum. This plays a role because as Heinrichs puts it “you have to dress the part your audience expect” so that would mean dressing the part of a lawyer to appeal to lawyers not dressed as a clown. However