CHAP. XIII.

Of Academic or Scholastic Disputation.

THE common methods in which disputes are managed in schools of learning are these, viz.

I. The tutor appoints a question in some of the sciences, to be debated amongst his students: one of them undertakes to affirm or to deny the question, and to defend his assertion or negation, and to answer all objections against it; he is called the respondent: and the rest of the students in the same class, or who pursue the same science, are the opponents, who are appointed to dispute or raise objections against the proposition thus affirmed or denied.

II. Each of the students successively in their turn becomes the respondent or the defender of that proposition, while the rest oppose it also successively in their turns.

*

III. It is the business of the respondent to write a thesis in Latin, or short discourse on the question proposed; and he either affirms or denies the question, according to the opinion of the tutor, which is supposed to be the truth, and he reads it at the beginning of the dispute.

IV. In his discourse (which is written with as great accuracy as the youth is capable of) he explains the terms of the question, frees them from all ambiguity, fixes their sense, declares the true intent and meaning of the question itself, separates it from other questions with which it may have been complicated, and distinguishes it from other questions which may happen to be akin to it, and then pronounces in the negative or affirmative concerning it.

V. When this is done, then, in the second part of his discourse, he gives his own strongest arguments to confirm the proposition he has laid down, i. e. to

vindicate his own side of the question; but he does not usually proceed to represent the objections against it, and to solve or answer them; for it is the business of the other students to raise objections in disputing.

VI. Note, in some schools the respondent is admitted to talk largely upon the question, with many flourishes and illustrations, to introduce great authorities from ancient and modern writings for the support of it, and to scatter Latin reproaches in abundance on all those who are of a different sentiment. But this is not always permitted; nor should it indeed ever be indulged, lest it teach youth to reproach instead of reasoning.

VII. When the respondent has read over his thesis in the school, the junior student makes an objection, and draws it up in the regular form of a syllogism: the respondent repeats the objection, and either denies the major or minor proposition directly, or he distinguishes upon some word or phrase in the major or minor, and shews in what sense the proposition may be true, but that sense does not affect the question: and then declares, that in the sense which affects the present question, the proposition is not true, and consequently he denies it.

VIII. Then the opponent proceeds, by another syllogism, to vindicate the proposition that is denied: again the respondent answers by denying or distinguishing.

Thus the disputation goes on in a series or succession of syllogisms and answers, till the objector is silenced, and has no more to say.

IX. When he can go no further, the next student begins to propose his objection, and then the third and the fourth, even to the senior, who is the last opponent.

X. During this time the tutor sits in the chair as president or moderator, to see that the rules of disputation and decency be observed on both sides;

and to admonish each disputant of any irregularity in their conduct. His work is also to illustrate and explain the answer or distinction of the respondent where it is obscure, to strengthen it where it is weak, and to correct it where it is false: and when the respondent is pinched with a strong objection, and is at a loss for an answer, the moderator assists him, and suggests some answer to the objection of the opponent, in defence of the question, according to his own opinion or sentiment.

XI. In public disputes, where the opponents and respondents choose their own side of the question, the moderator's work is not to favour either disputant; but he only sits as president, to see that the laws of disputation be observed, and a decorum maintained.

XII. Now the laws of disputation relate either to the opponent or to the respondent, or to both. The laws obliging the opponent are these: 1. That he must directly contradict the proposi tion of the respondent, and not merely attack any of the arguments whereby the respondent has supported that proposition; for it is one thing to confute a single argument of the respondent, and another to confute the thesis itself.

2. (Which is akin to the former) he must contradict or oppose the very sense and intention of the proposition as the respondent has stated it, and not merely oppose the words of the thesis in any other sense for this would be the way to plunge the dispute into ambiguity and darkness, to talk beside the question, to wrangle about words, and to attack a proposition different from what the respondent has espoused, which is called ignoratio elenchi.

3. He must propose his argumenta in a plain, short, and syllogistic form, according to the rules of logic, without flying to fallacies or sophisms, and, as far as may be, he should use categorical syllogisms.

4. Though the respondent may be attacked either

G

upon a point of his own concession, which is called argumentum ex concessis, or by reducing him to an absurdity, which is called reductio ad absurdum, yet it is the neatest, the most useful, and the best sort of disputation, where the opponent draws his objections from the nature of the question itself.

5. Where the respondent denies any proposition, the opponent, if he proceed, must directly vindicate and confirm that proposition, i. e. he must make that proposition the conclusion of his next syllogism.

6. Where the respondent limits or distinguishes any proposition, the opponent must directly prove his own proposition in that sense, and according to that member of the distinction in which the respondent denied it.

XIII. The laws that oblige the respondent are these:

1. To repeat the argument of the opponent in the very same words in which it was proposed, before he attempts to answer it.

2. If the syllogism be false in the logical form of it, he must discover the fault according to the rules of logic.

3. If the argument does not directly and effectually oppose his thesis, he must shew this mistake, and make it appear that his thesis is safe, even though the argument of the opponent be admitted; or, at least, that the argument does only aim at it collaterally, or at a distance, and not directly overthrow it, or conclude against it.

4. Where the matter of the opponent's objection is faulty in any part of it, the respondent must grant what is true in it, he must deny what is false, he must distinguish or limit the proposition which is ambiguous or doubtful, and then, granting the sense in which it is true, he must deny the sense in which it is false.

5. If an hypothetic proposition be false, the respondent must deny the consequence; if a disjunc

tive, he must deny the disjunction; if a categoric or relative, he must simply deny it.

6. It is sometimes allowed for the respondent to use an indirect answer after he has answered direetly; and he may also shew how the opponent's argument may be retorted against himself.

XIV. The laws that oblige both disputants are these:

1. Sometimes it is necessary there should be a mention of certain general principles in which they both agree, relating to the question, that so they may not dispute on those things which either are or ought to have been first granted on both sides.

2. When the state of the controversy is well known, and plainly determined and agreed, it must not be altered by either disputant in the course of the disputation; and the respondent especially should keep a watchful eye on the opponent in this matter.

3. Let neither party invade the province of the other; especially let the respondent take heed that he does not turn opponent, except in retorting the argument upon his adversary after a direct response; and even this is allowed only as an illustration or confirmation of his own response.

4. Let each wait with patience till the other has done speaking. It is a piece of rudeness to interrupt another in his speech.

Yet, though the disputants have not this liberty, the moderator may do it, when either of the disputants break the rules, and he may interpose so far as to keep them in order.

XV. It must be confessed there are some advantages to be attained by academical disputation. It gives vigour and briskness to the mind thus exercised, and relieves the languor of private study and meditation. It sharpens the wit, and all the inven tive powers. It makes the thoughts active, and sends them on all sides to find arguments and answers both for opposition and defence. It gives opportunity of viewing the subject of discourse on all sides, and of