I have heard Domingo live in Otello, Samson, Siegmund and Don Carlo, and, frankly, the only role that sounded comfortable for him live was Don Carlo to my ears, but on mike Domingo sounded fine in the heavier roles, so my experience is a mixed bag. Certainly, PD never embarassed himself, though he did sound a bit strained live in the heavier roles.
The Classical Argument Adapted from Walter Beale, Real Writing, 2nd edition, One of the oldest organizing devices in rhetoric is the classical argument, which incorporates the five parts of a discourse that ancient teachers of rhetoric believed were necessary for persuasion, especially when the audience included a mixture of reactions from favorable to hostile.
They often prescribed this order to students, not because it was absolutely ideal, but because using the scheme encouraged the writer to take account of some of the most important elements of composing: But if you use the structure as a way to make sure you cover all the needs of all parts of your audience, you will find it a very useful heuristic for developing effective arguments.
The classical argument traditionally consists of five parts: In Speech In Writing The introduction, in which the speaker warms up to the audience, establishes rapport, and announces the general theme or thesis of the argument In writing, the first two parts of the classical argument, the introduction and narration, The narration, in which the speaker presents specific circumstances or issues to be dealt with, a summary of relevant background, and an overview of what is at stake; The confirmation, in which the speaker gives her or his principal claims and evidence for accepting the thesis or point of view in the argument The confirmation, where you present the claims and evidence that back up or substantiate the thesis of your argument.
These claims and evidence are often connected together in a chain of reasoning that link the reasoning, facts and examples, and testimony i. Often the confirmation section has the typical shape of a Toulmin argument. The refutation, in which the speaker considers opposing viewpoints, conceding as much as can be without damaging the thesis, and refuting conflicting views.
This section also can anticipate and also attempt to deal with possible objections to the speech The concession and refutation The conclusion, where the speaker wraps up the various arguments into a summary statement, and amplifies the force of arguments already made.
The Introduction It must attract the interest of a specific audience and focus it on the subject of the argument. It must provide enough background information to make sure that the audience is aware of both the general problem as well as the specific issue or issues the writer is addressing for instance, not just the problem of pollution but the specific problem of groundwater pollution in Columbia, SC.
Komen Race for the Cure because your mother is a breast cancer survivor. What is the situation that this argument responds to? What elements of background or context need to be presented for this audience? Is this new information or am I just reminding them of matters they already have some familiarity with?
What are the principal issues involved in this argument? Where do I stand on this issue? What tone should I establish? What image of myself should I project? But a rational audience has strong expectations of the kinds of proof you will and will not provide to help it accept your point of view.
Most of the arguments used in the confirmation tend to be of the inartistic kind, but artistic proofs can also be used to support this section. Some Questions to Ask as You Develop Your Confirmation What are the arguments that support my thesis that my audience is most likely to respond to?
What arguments that support my thesis is my audience least likely to respond to? How can I demonstrate that these are valid arguments?
What kind of inartistic proofs does my audience respect and respond well to? Where can I find the facts and testimony that will support my arguments?Many consider the argument for God from contingency to be one of the strongest.
The basic form is simple: If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist. The universe—the collection of beings in space and time—exists. Therefore, there must exist what it takes for th.
Plato’s Parmenides contains an argument against the so-called Platonic theory of forms known as the “Third Man Argument”.. Here’s how it goes: Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama are each “human”.
We infer that there must be a Form called “Human-ness” by which these “humans” participate. How your music taste could reveal if you're a psychopath People who prefer listening to rap over pop and classical music are more likely to by PSYCHOPATHS.
Religious believers often claim that the universe is fine-tuned for life, and that this is evidence of God. In fact, this might be the modern believer’s favorite argument for God, and the one considered to be the strongest by atheists.
Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence Formerly: Over Three Hundred Proofs of God’s Existence Originally adapted from a forum on the Internet Infidels.
Teleology or finality is a reason or explanation for something in function of its end, purpose, or goal. It is derived from two Greek words: telos (end, goal, purpose) and logos (reason, explanation). A purpose that is imposed by a human use, such as that of a fork, is called extrinsic.
Natural teleology, common in classical philosophy but controversial today, contends that natural entities.