Refutation Applied to the Dilemma. - The validity of a dilemma depends entirely upon whether all the possibilities of proof are exhausted in the theories that are presented; and also upon whether the conclusion necessarily follows from each of the theories.

To refute a dilemma, the debater should always seek, therefore: First, to find a third horn on which he may escape; or second, to destroy one or both of the horns that threaten him.

If the second method is employed in the case of a constructive dilemma, both horns must be destroyed; but, in the case of a destructive dilemma, either horn may be destroyed.

Expanded Forms of the Dilemma. - The method of proof represented by the dilemma is capable of indefinite expansion according to the number of horns that may be presented against an opponent. If the proof involves two horns, it is a dilemma; if it involves three, it is a trilemma; if four, a tetralemma; and if five or more, a polylemma.

Summary of Refutation. — To become a thorough master of debate, a student must acquire skill in the use of all the different weapons of controversy. These weapons. include both constructive and destructive proof. Refutation, therefore, which consists of destructive proof is one of the most important processes in debate, and the student must know regarding it what to refute, when to refute, where to refute, and how to refute. He should practice continually on the various methods of refutation, and should give particular attention to turning the tables, reductio ad absurdum, the method of residues, and the dilemma.

PART III. BUILDING THE CASE

CHAPTER I

DEFINING THE TERMS 1

Preliminary Statement. In Part I of this text under the general title, Beginning Principles, sufficient theory has been given to enable the student to begin intelligently the practice of debate. In Part II, under the general title, Elements of Proof, a thorough consideration has been given to all the elements of proof that must be used by a debater in the practice of his art. And now in Part III, under the general title Building the Case, it is planned to give the student a thorough understanding of the process by which all the different elements of proof may be assembled under a proposition to constitute what is known as a case.

Definition of a Case. A case consists of all the assembled proof that is available for determining the alleged truth of a proposition. When this proof is assembled in such a way that it tends to establish the alleged truth of a proposition, then it constitutes an Affirmative case; and when it is assembled in such a way that it tends to disestablish the alleged truth of a proposition, then it constitutes a Negative

case.

Process of Building a Case. The process of building a case is one in which a solid foundation of proof is laid under a proposition to give it firm support; and this process may be

1 For lesson assignments on Defining the Terms, see Appendix A.

likened to laying a similar solid foundation under any material structure. The supports in this foundation may be referred to as the main points; the subordinate points; and the evidence.

A graphic illustration of the manner in which a case lays solid foundations of proof under a proposition is given in the diagram below:

Importance of Building the Case. - The general process of building the case is one of the most important parts of a debater's preparation for actual debate; for, without a fully developed case a debater cannot hope to settle finally the alleged truth of his proposition; he cannot hope to avoid the fatal criticism of being superficial; and he cannot hope to escape the snares and pitfalls that will be set for him in the proof of his opponents.

The Four Main Steps in Building the Case. The four main steps in building the case are:

1. Defining the Terms;

2. Surveying the Proof;

3. Finding the Issues; and

4. Drawing the Brief.

By defining the terms of a proposition, the debater makes sure of the exact nature of the proposition to be upheld, and, thereby, lays the basis for excluding much proof from his

case that supports propositions of an entirely different na

ture.

By surveying the proof under a proposition, the debater lays out all the logical possibilities of proof that may be employed to support both the Affirmative and the Negative sides of a case.

By finding the issues under a proposition, the debater selects those points of proof that he himself must make firm as supports for his proposition; and separates these points from other points that in no way affect his proposition, and from other points that are already firmly established under his proposition.

And then by drawing the brief of a case, the debater assembles around the issues in an orderly fashion all the available proof in a case in such a way that it shows clearly every process of reasoning by which the proposition is upheld or overthrown.

Problems of Definition. The principal problems confronting the student in an attempt to define the terms of his proposition are:

1. What terms require definition? 2. How may definitions be found?

3. How may definitions be formulated?

4. What methods of definition are most valuable? — and 5. How may definitions be tested for clearness and accuracy?

Terms Requiring Definition. Not all terms in a proposition, of course, require definition; but only those terms that may give rise to more than one interpretation. Such terms usually are unfamiliar terms, technical terms, figurative terms, abstract terms, and very general terms.

To illustrate: In the following proposition: - Resolved: That Professor Huxley in his Three Lectures on Evolution completely disproved the Miltonic hypothesis in regard to the creation of the world; the term Miltonic hypothesis in regard to the creation of the world requires definition, because it is unfamiliar.

In the following proposition:-Resolved: That employers generally should recognize the principle of the closed shop; -the term closed shop requires definition, because it is technical.

In the following proposition:-Resolved: That the League of Nations established by the Treaty of Versailles is nothing more than a mere rope of sand; the term rope of sand requires definition, because it is figurative.

In the following proposition:-Resolved: That any serious affront to a nation's honor is sufficient justification for war; the term nation's honor requires definition, be

cause it is abstract.

In the following proposition: - Resolved: That all New England cities with a population of less than 500,000 and more than 25,000, should adopt the city-manager plan of government; the term all New England cities with a population of less than 500,000 and more than 25,000 requires definition, because it is very general.

Sources of Definition. The task of finding a definition to make clear the exact meaning of a term seems, at first, like a very simple matter; but, in reality, it is often very difficult.

The debater's first thought, of course, is to consult a dictionary; but a definition taken from a dictionary is frequently inadequate; for, in many instances, it is too short and too general to fit the exact meaning of the term in ques