How to Win an Argument: An Ancient Guide to the Art of Persuasion

Ancient Wisdom for Modern Readers

by Marcus Tullius Cicero, James M. May (Translator)

All of us are faced countless times with the challenge of persuading others, whether we're trying to win a trivial argument with a friend or convince our coworkers about an important decision. Instead of relying on untrained instinct--and often floundering or failing as a result--we'd win more arguments if we learned the timeless art of verbal persuasion, rhetoric. How to Win an Argument gathers the rhetorical wisdom of Cicero, ancient Rome's greatest orator, from across his works and combines it with passages from his legal and political speeches to show his powerful techniques in action. The result is an enlightening and entertaining practical introduction to the secrets of persuasive speaking and writing--including strategies that are just as effective in today's offices, schools, courts, and political debates as they were in the Roman forum.

How to Win an Argument addresses proof based on rational argumentation, character, and emotion; the parts of a speech; the plain, middle, and grand styles; how to persuade no matter what audience or circumstances you face; and more. Cicero's words are presented in lively translations, with illuminating introductions; the book also features a brief biography of Cicero, a glossary, suggestions for further reading, and an appendix of the original Latin texts.

Astonishingly relevant, this unique anthology of Cicero's rhetorical and oratorical wisdom will be enjoyed by anyone who ever needs to win arguments and influence people--in other words, all of us.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics, Politics, Audiobook, History, Psychology

288 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2016

About the author

Born 3 January 106 BC, Arpinum, Italy
Died 7 December 43 BC (aged 63), Formia, Italy

Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roman constitutionalist. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.

Alternate profiles:
Cicéron
Marco Tullio Cicerone
Cicerone

Note: All editions should have Marcus Tullius Cicero as primary author. Editions with another name on the cover should have that name added as secondary author.

Reviews

[Srividya Vijapure · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent primer on Cicero and Classical Rhetoric. While the book does quote passages at length from Cicero's books, it is an interpretation of his principles on oratory and rhetoric. Extremely interesting and Simon Vance does an excellent job as always in making me want to keep listening to him forever.

The examples or passages used are mostly from the trials but the basic rules are those that we can apply anywhere and to any kind of discussion or argument, which makes it a book that can be read and profited from by one and all. In fact, I would recommend it to all as it is extremely readable and fascinating. As for me, I know I will keep coming back to this one whilst also going onto reading Cicero's original works.

[Massimo Pigliucci · Rating 5 out of 5]

Want to learn how to persuade others? This Princeton Press collection of Cicero's writings on the art of oratory, translated by James M. May, will do the trick! Oratory nowadays is both denigrated and not practiced, both of which attitudes are detrimental to society. After all, a lot of what we want and need in life, both private and public, is to persuade other people to think or act in certain ways, so oratory at all scales is fundamental to human intercourse. Moreover, we could certainly use the kind of approach to the art that is recommended by Cicero. For him it isn't just a matter of stringing together a bunch of empty-but-good-sounding words, as many politicians and salesmen do these days. Rather, effective oratory requires actual mastering of a broad scope of disciplines, as well as the deployment of logical, evidence-based arguments as one (but only one!) of its key ingredients. Think of it as virtuous oratory, instead of sophistry.

[Julian Worker · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a useful book for those interested in public speaking and I wondered when reading it how Cicero would have fared in a Toastmasters group.

According to Cicero, rhetoric is an art and not a science. He emphasises the need to practice the art and find out what type of rhetoric suits your nature, your voice, and your natural gifts as an individual. He also indicates the need to know your audience and the importance of being able to memorise the speech if necessary. Many skills are required in order to be a persuasive and eloquent speaker.

Finally, prior to even practising the speech, it's so important to be able to write the speech. Cicero says the pen is the best and most eminent teacher and creator of speaking.

['Izzat Radzi · Rating 5 out of 5]

You know what they say of classics!

It's regretable that I haven't read Aristotle Rhetoric before this.
It's a privilege if one is able to read Latin, because the English part is only 140 pages, with the remaining is in the original language.

Love the sub-chapter on the notion of memory and writing speech in helping oratory.
Though, the best for me, and this is significant throughout the book, is the Chapter : The Value of Imitating Good Models of Speaking; and Background Knowledge of oneself.

This two, personally affect me in the deepest sense, as two of five people who deeply influenced me are well-versed in the skills of oratory.

First, is in the build-up of the 2013 General Election.
I'm grateful that I -as a media unit (where from there I developed my interest in media studies) -had the chance to accompanied one student leader, amongst many others, in leading the political and the neglected citizens issues; from only dozens of spectators to hundred of thousands, inter-state roadshow to students societies meet-up.
Cicero himself trained under two renowned orator in his budding years, while in later help train one as well.
Seeing his action first hand and learning, it is as Cicerio suggested, to one who wish to learn must accompany (Arabic :mulazamah) a teacher for some time.

The second and most recent is in UK, a senior also I looked up to and deeply respected.

In his style meanwhile, one can see his profound reasoning and speech delivery as he accumulates amass background Knowledge and apply Aristotle's Method of Persuasion in argumentation.
When he argue -and he rarely does- it is not uncommon to see people were put into absolute silence!

Definitely need to learn and practice more.

[William Schram · Rating 4 out of 5]

Everyone in Ancient Rome was expected to be able to argue persuasively and give well-formed arguments. However, even by those standards, Marcus Tullius Cicero was a master of the craft. As such he wrote extensively on the Art of Rhetoric and several other subjects. He lived through troubled times in the Roman Empire and was eventually murdered for his political views.

How to Win an Argument chooses a small piece of Cicero’s work that mainly focuses on the Art of Rhetoric and Oratory. So we learn about the methods necessary to form arguments and the different aspects of a good argument. The book is selected, edited, and translated by James M May. I have not heard of the man before, and I don’t have any preconceived notions of what sort of voice to give Cicero. Therefore, I find his translations to be adequate. I can’t read Latin and I don’t feel like learning to do so.

The book doesn’t really flow all that well. I say this only because of how it is edited; it jumps from subject to subject. First, it starts with different types of arguments: logos, ethos, and pathos. The book is really exhaustive. The translator/editor provides some background to the entry and then goes on to translate Cicero’s take on it. I say it is exhaustive because it also contains the original Latin text and a summation of Cicero’s points.

I enjoyed this book. It was and was not in-depth at the same time. The inclusion of the Latin Text makes it somewhat better, so if you can read Latin, maybe you can try to translate it yourself.

[Illiterate · Rating 2 out of 5]

Extracts from Cicero on rhetoric. (This PUP series reprints widely available ancient texts under snazzy but misleading titles.)

[Ostreaf · Rating 2 out of 5]

A fun read, but felt that I already knew most of what was in the book as it seems obvious. Also, the book is more about "how to do a speech" than how to win an argument.

[Petrina Binney · Rating 4 out of 5]

When I was in my mid-twenties, a friend bought me a metal sign to hang in my house. It read, ‘I don’t need other people around to have an argument.’
She knew me so well.

I will say, for those who might think this book is a guide to winning any argument - it is, but under very specific circumstances. There is no winning one-liner to finish the opposition and have them scurrying back to some unknown spot, for a vigorous round of wound-licking, contained within these pages.

In fact, what Cicero does is break down every aspect of a good speech - whether it is used for a summing up for the jury, or a difference of opinion with a friend. A great speaker must have some natural talent, the ability to sprinkle some glitter on his words, and charm. A great speaker must practise his skills in order to make his performance flawless. He must have a world-beating memory, a working understanding of any number of subjects - not limited to the one he is speaking about, but encompassing pretty much everything that may or may not come up. Each of the skills a great speaker must possess would take a lifetime to learn, and there are many of them to master.

I would have thought this book should be recommended reading for every would-be lawyer, politician and business leader in the world. I’m not any of those things but, now that I’ve read the book, I suppose anything is possible.

[Jon · Rating 3 out of 5]

We live in a time when I guess the main rule of argument is "If a guy is an idiot, you're doing him a favor to tell him so." This entry into the Princeton U. Press series of selected classics (mostly Cicero and Seneca) is perhaps the least interesting except to students of rhetoric. For them it is a well-designed summary of Cicero's views, excerpted from works he wrote from the age of 17 to shortly before his death. The editor introduces each excerpt with his own explication, sometimes almost as long as the excerpt itself. The book is possibly the handiest introduction I've seen, breaking the parts of rhetoric into invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery, with subcategories and further explanations. Really more for legal or debate-form argumentation than discussing politics with your crazy uncle over the dinner table. Much of it is common sense, but the analysis and organization is amazing. I'll admit I had a hard time differentiating between the examples of low, medium, and high styles of delivery, possibly because they don't translate well, possibly because all of them were higher and more formal than anything you're likely to hear today.

[Steven · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you're interested in learning about rhetoric from classical authors, this is a great place to start. May's selections from Cicero's works along with his comments do a great job of giving a digest of the Roman author's salient points about how to be a good orator.

[Samuel Sadler · Rating 5 out of 5]

Solid introduction to Ciceronian rhetoric. Accessible, clear, and to the point.

[Joshua Lister · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a collection of excerpts from Cicero’s writings which are translated and compiled by James May. He also includes helpful introductions to each section. The organization is superb.

This is a quick and easy introduction, great for anyone new to Cicero or Classical Rhetoric. It also serves as an excellent companion to Rhetorica Ad Herennium. Ad Herennium is a text book written in the Roman rhetorical tradition and May’s compilation shows examples of Cicero putting the content into practice.

[Melissa Matthewson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I used this in my Honors seminar and it’s a wonderful teaching text!

[The_J · Rating 3 out of 5]

In a tome of wisdom, I think that the best was to move a jury or audience reflect their essence so that you are moved by the message. In addition this pearl: If we consider our leisure time, what can be more pleasant or more properly human than to be able to engage in elegant conversation and show oneself a stranger to no subject?

[Lamis Akkad · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book. Enjoyed the narration. It is clear that we can see much of the described principles and rules currently in application in modern court proceedings. Listening to it, though, as an audio book, was a bit less effective for me to retain the information. Otherwise, it was a nice listen.

[tosiap]

Lektura na Power of Persuasion. (Tak naprawdę ma 140 stron, bo reszta to jest to samo po łacinie.)

[Alex Pizzoni · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book and includes quotes from the time of Marcus Tullius Cicero; excerpts from stories are shown to help in winning arguments. I found it a hard read and the last 1/3 of the book has scripts from stories in Latin.
Great for someone who is an avid reader of classical civilization books.

[Dave · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good, systematized way to look at oration

[Sinta · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting choice of title - not actually how to win an argument substantively, but how to be persuasive generally. Perhaps useful for some, but nothing groundbreaking, and often a bit too ancient to be entirely appropriate for today

Notes:
Generally, the ancient theorists spoke of a requisite triad: natural ability or inborn talent, mastery of the art of speaking as outlined in rhetorical treatises (called artes in Latin), and diligent application of one’s talent and training through practice.

[Speech / eloquence originated as a counterweight to “laws of nature” that enabled to move from “savagery” to civilisation - by convincing someone not to use force for self-interest, but for community]

the ideal orator must, in addition to knowledge of rhetorical rules, possess a vast knowledge of all the humane arts, including history, literature, law, and philosophy. Such knowledge, along with natural ability, study, and diligent practice are essential for winning an argument.

Those who in antiquity taught and wrote about the art of persuasion regularly identified three genres of oratory, or types of cases: “judicial,” suited to seeking justice in courts of law; “deliberative,” whose goal is to argue what is most beneficial or expedient in a public meeting or before an assembly; and “epideictic” or. “demonstrative,” the oratory of praise or blame, perhaps best illustrated by the funeral oration or eulogy. Handbooks tended to concentrate on the judicial genre, as perhaps being most crucial and as lending itself best to systematic exposition.
Ancient theorists organized their presentation around five parts, or activities of the orator: “invention” (discovering, that is, thinking out the material), “arrangement” (ordering the material), “style” (putting the ordered material into appropriate words),
“memory” (memorizing the speech), and “delivery” (including directives about voice, facial expression, and gesture).

Every subject that contains in itself some controversy situated in speech and debate
involves a question about a fact, or about a definition, or about the nature or quality of
an act, or about legal processes.

When the dispute is about a fact, the issue is called “conjectural,” because the plea is supported by conjectures or inferences [for example, “you did it”; “I did not”]. When, however, the issue is about a definition, it is called the “definitional” issue, because the meaning of the term must be defined in words [for example, “you did it”; “yes, but it wasn’t theft”]. When the nature or quality of the act is examined, the issue is called “qualitative,” inasmuch as the controversy concerns the value of the action and its class or quality [for example, “you did it”; “yes, but I didn’t mean to,” or “I had to”].But when the plea depends on the circumstance that it seems the right person does not
bring the case, or that he brings it against the wrong person, or before the wrong court, or at the wrong time, under the wrong statute, or for the wrong charge, or with the
wrong penalty, the issue is called “translative” because the actions appears to require a transfer to another court or a change in the form of pleading.

Nonartistic proofs are those that the
speaker does not invent by using his art, for example, written contracts and the testimony of witnesses; artistic means of persuasion, which the speaker does create by employing his art, are three in number: logos (rational argumentation), ethos (the presentation of character), and pathos (the arousal of emotions in the audience).

By most accounts, a judicial speech in its basic form has four parts, an introduction or prologue, a narration or statement of the case, an argument including a refutation of opposing arguments, and a conclusion or epilogue.

Moreover, at times a speaker might find it appropriate to add a proposition, a statement or division of his arguments, or a digression, an excursus on some related facet of the case, often on the character or actions of one of the principles involved.

The exordium, or prologue, of the speech is a passage designed to bring our audience into the proper state of mind in order to receive the rest of our argument. To accomplish this goal, the speaker should strive to secure the attention of his listeners, to make them receptive and ready to receive his arguments, and to win their goodwill.

But we are now laboring under the
opinions not only of the crowd, but also of half-educated people. They find it easier to
deal with things they cannot grasp in their entirety, if they split them apart and almost
tear them to pieces, and they separate words from thoughts just like a body from its soul —which in both cases can only wreak destruction. In my discussion, therefore, I will undertake no more than is assigned to me. I would only indicate briefly that discovering words for a distinguished style is impossible without having produced and shaped the thoughts, and that no thought can shine clearly without the enlightening power of words

Discussions concerning style in Cicero’s time were usually organized either around the four qualities or “virtues” of style as defined by Aristotle’s student Theophrastus, or according to three or more “types” or “characters.” The virtues of style are the correct use of Greek (or Latin in Cicero’s case; English, in ours), clarity, distinction (ornamentation), which includes tropes such as metaphors, figures of speech, and figures of thought, and appropriateness. The best-known categorization of “types” or “characters” of style is the threefold division into “plain,” “middle,” and “grand.”

The foundation of eloquence, just as of everything else, is wisdom. In a speech, just as in life, nothing is more difficult than to discern what is appropriate.

For these three functions of the speaker there are three styles, the plain style for proving, the middle style for delighting, and the vigorous style for swaying; and in this last resides the full force of a speaker.

[Heather-Lin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh excellent!

I quite enjoyed the brief overview of Cicero's life, as it gave context to the culture and government he was operating within.

I also enjoyed the exploration of the different levels of making a convincing argument: logically, ethically, emotionally. I didn't expect the examples of him arguing as an attorney to be as engaging as they were. There was one case in particular - a murder plot that sours and the intended victim was accused of murder himself - that had me completely riveted!

There was also a brief reference to seeking out mentors, and cultivating a robust memory using the mind palace technique.

Overall, interesting as well as still relevant. And the audio narration by Simon Vance is as always superb.

[Mitch · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this book up on a whim at an art museum gift shop. In my haste, I didn't realize that only around 130 pages were in English, and the rest in Latin. Still, this was a very interesting read and it was well edited and arranged. I'm happy to have it on my shelf for future reference, or if I ever decide to try my hand at Latin in the future.

I found it interesting how many of the topics covered felt like "common sense". How to arrange an argument seems like something most of us learned actively or passively at some point in school- but much of those fundamentals date back to the ancients. It just goes to show how much the ancients have influenced our lives and education!

[Ricky Mikeabono · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a book of lies.
First, it is not written by Cicero. It is written by some guy named James May, who periodically references and quotes Cicero. If you want Cicero's version, go straight to the source and read the translations of De Oratore and Orator.
Second, it is not about winning arguments, it's about giving speeches. Organized, prepared, speeches in front of large groups. There's a very real distinction there. For a book on actual arguments, and everyday rhetoric, I'd suggest "Thank You for Arguing."
What a disappointment! Don't waste your time.

[Richard Mulholland · Rating 5 out of 5]

You can't beat the classics.

In this case that isn't hyperbolic, this was a fantastic listen. So good in fact I have immediately bought the Kindle version to make more notes.

---

Just finished the second reading of this as I wanted to be more intentional in my learning than you can with audio.

This should be required reading for everyone. It's so good.

[Tarek Masri · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great collection of selections from Cicero's works regarding the art of rhetoric. The editor's choices and the connections he draws between them make up a very connected and fluid continuity; it feels like the book was originally written as a single text. This makes the text very accessible and easy to read.

The editor uses actual anecdotes and speeches delivered by notable ancient orators (mainly Cicero) to highlight different aspects of the art of rhetoric. These increase the historical value of this text and make the text an effective window into the courtrooms and courtyards of ancient times. Cicero is famous for being one of history's greatest orators, so these speeches and anecdotes are mostly very interesting to read. The actual content of the book is nothing spectacular though, so do not expect detailed or unusual strategies. In retrospect, most of the information would seem "obvious", since the book mainly covers the general aspects of proper speaking and writing that have found their way into modern language and philosophy education. However, the historical value and the fluidity of the text make it a nice read, nonetheless. The rest of this review is dedicated to a general outline of what Cicero covers in the selections found in this book, for those interested:

The book highlights Cicero's views regarding the importance of rhetoric and outlines the different "canons" of rhetoric; i.e. of proper persuasion and oration. It starts with what he calls the "invention" of proofs, which can be either non-artistic or artistic proofs. The latter type falls under one of the 3 Aristotelian modes of persuasion: the logos dealing with facts (involving induction and deduction), pathos dealing with emotional appeal, and ethos dealing with ethical appeal (winning over the audience through character).

The next stage is that of arranging our proofs. The famous arrangement used in philosophy is outlined here, with an introduction, presentation of arguments, response to potential counterarguments, and finally a conclusion.

The next stage is that of style, which focuses on correct use of language, clarity, distinction (use of figures of speech, etc..), and appropriateness. Appropriateness involves choosing the scale of the "speech", its tone, and its overall approach in a way suitable to the context and audience.

Next comes the stage of memory: memorising the speech. Though this is not as important in modern times (as mentioned by the editor), it was a key skill for ancient orators. The editor includes some of Cicero's tips for developing our "artificial" (as opposed to natural) memory. These tips include the use of mnemonics and writing our speech down.

Finally comes the stage of delivery. This stage deals with how a speech is delivered in terms of voice, facial expressions, gestures, and overall body language. Cicero regarded this stage as extremely important, since great content needs proper delivery to reach an audience, while dull content can be masked with great delivery.

The editor concludes the book with Cicero's views on general traits an exceptional orator must have, most importantly being well-rounded and knowledgeable in all the liberal arts.

[Brad Balderson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good book - so why 3 stars? The reason is because it could have been GREAT.

I learnt a few important things from this book - the most important being the relationship between writing, reading, and speech. Cicero believed - and practised with great success - that writing is the gateway to better and clearer articulate speech. He also believed that - while being aware of and familiar with pedagogical rules of rhetoric is somewhat helpful - the foremost important thing was to actually have knowledge. Anyone who has written anything or tried to explain something will know that the difficulty lies in what you DON'T know- where you get caught up, where you fumble - THAT'S where you lack understanding - as Richard Feynman taught us. Cicero also figured this out. Therefore, to truly be able to speak and to write you need to understand - but the best way to understand is to and explain. So it follows - like any other skill - the capacity for persuasive writing and speech comes as a natural result of dedicated study, practice, and reading across a wide range of subjects.

Cicero also discusses the rarity with which this faculty - the faculty of speech and persuasive written word - develops. He discusses that the reason is few people studying for understanding. He also discusses the necessity for mnemonic techniques in order to remember vast amounts of information, and also the power of speech for both good and for evil (both Hitler and Churchill were great Rhetoricians).

The final important thing - which was mentioned quite early in the book - is the iterative creation of persuasive argument. First there is invention, then arrangement, then style, memorisation and delivery. There is also discussion of the different techniques of rhetoric - the Ethos, relying on the ethical character and trust in the orator as a means of persuasion; the Logos, persuasion through the logical cohesiveness of the argument, and the Pathos, persuasion through the appeal to the emotions and passions of the audience.

The reader of this review can see perhaps how profound and powerful the above ideas are, and how they clearly only just scratch the surface of what is clearly an extremely important discipline of study - rhetoric.

This is why I think the book is only worth 3 stars - it barely scratches the surface; just as I was really getting into it, and was really excited for more - it ended. Turns out that half the book is the original latin text, so the book is actually not a book - but a pamphlet of 172 pages. Anyhow, you don't need to read this book - there is probably much better books on rhetoric which won't end having barely begun.

[Gyan · Rating 5 out of 5]

How to Win an Argument by Cicero lays out how persuasion works through a mix of his speeches, essays, and explanations of techniques. The book shows how Cicero organized arguments so that the audience could understand his point(s) quickly and stay with him the entire time. You see how he balanced logic and emotion and how he adjusted his tone depending on who he addressed. The translation also kept his ideas clear, so you don’t get lost in older language or confusing phrasing, which was a relief seeing as older books I've previously read have been extremely confusing. His examples from Roman court cases help you picture how he used these skills in real situations instead of only talking about them in theory. The book stays focused and gives you tools that still apply today even though he wrote them thousands of years ago. Overall, it works as a strong nonfiction read because it teaches you how communication shapes decisions, debates, and public life.


The most interesting thing I learned from the book was Cicero’s belief that trust matters more than any single fact in an argument. He explains how audiences listen more closely when they see the speaker is confident and honest, and clear about their purpose. He also shows how to weaken an opponent’s claims without turning the argument into personal attacks, which keeps the audience on your side. His breakdown of structure states your point, then supports it, then addresses the other side, and ends with a strong finish that makes the idea of persuasion feel more like a tool that could be misused but isn't inherently wrong to use.. I liked how he paid attention to human nature and how people react when they feel respected or pressured. Reading these points made me notice how often arguments fall apart because people only focus on winning, not on making their case understandable or relatable. Learning that persuasion depends on character and communication, not just information, made the book stand out.

[Basil · Rating 4 out of 5]

i’ve always had trouble with organizing my thoughts and words just randomly jumbling out my mouth, and when i picked this up i felt like it could be a solid foundation on improving my eloquence and diction in verbal speech so i won’t look a fool when i’m in a position where i have to defend or refute an argument 😭. it was MOSTLY as i expected (i’ll get into that later) the translation was easy to read and more accessible which i found more enjoyable along with informative. it kept Cicero’s substance and main points while also making his words sound more contemporary, and more relatable in a sense, given this was Ancient Rome.

it is mentioned that Cicero didn’t like using handbooks on rhetoric as a sole means of learning the art, and emphasized more on practice and practical learning, all while he gives the reader a solid foundation on the art of rhetoric/argument/eloquent speech through these writings. i found through my personal experience, combined with the contents and instructions of this book, offered me a more nuanced and enriched perspective on the art of rhetoric, so i would advise against just reading the book and expecting to be an expert on winning arguments and whatnot but to take what Cicero said, apply it in practical life, and practice to hone your skills as an orator.

with that being said, i do find the title a bit misleading, as this wasn’t really a debate/argument guide, but more so a how to organize your speech guide. which is, don’t get me wrong, good for winning arguments and debates but i expected something a smidge different. my overall rating is 3.5 stars!!

[Misho · Rating 3 out of 5]

Part 1 of Rhetoric: Non-Artistic Rhetoric: Using the facts vs Artistic Rhetoric:

Logos: using a logical argument
Weapons of logic to win arguments are to employ induction by the use of examples and deduction through syllogistic reasoning (fictitious or historical analogies). With the syllogistic approach you then induce a probable conclusion about the matter in dispute, and then offer a general or universal application drawn from the example. What this does is
1- presents one or more similar cases
2- states the point we want conceded
3- draws a conclusion that reinforces the concession or demonstrates the results which follow from it

Ethos: winning over the audience/presentation of character
Your character will help you make your point: your prestige, accomplishments, the reputation that you’ve acquired through your way of life. And these come across better if you have a gentle tone of voice and you show restraint and kindliness. If you come across as decent, unassuming, not severe, not obstinate, not litigious, not harsh, with goodwill, you will win over the audience when they see the lack of these qualities in others. Speaking with mindfulness and reverence to God speaks volumes to how you come across.

Pathos: Arousal of emotions in the audience
Bring out the heavy emotions in people. You should even feel inside what you want the audience to feel to know how to bring them there.

Part 2 of Rhetoric: Style - eloquence forms a unity in whatever realm it travels and it is persuasive
• Clarity and brevity
• Avoid ambiguous language
• Saying words with too little breath or too much emphasis
• Excessively long periodic sentences
• Spun-out metaphors
• Confusing chronology
• Mixing up people
• Distinction (ornamentation): using tropes like metaphors, figures of speech, figures of thought
• Sprinkle sweetness or flare a bit here and there but don’t rely on it, similar to how we like sweet foods at time but wouldn’t be able to strictly survive on sweets
• Appropriateness

Part 3 of Rhetoric: Memory to be able to recount or lay out the narrative
• Introduction: bring the audience into the proper state of mind, character helps here
• Narration or statement of the case
• Argument including refutation of opposing arguments
• Conclusion or epilogue

Part 4 of Rhetoric: Delivery
Is huge to drive home everything what you’re saying. It can all fall without it. Use gestures and facial expressions to drive home the point

Choose a good role model to look to for speaking. In the Roman times, people took apprenticeships for such. But make sure to prune out their flaws.

Writing is such a crucial component to speech that people neglect because it takes effort. Writing will help you overcome random speech by reflection and preparation, especially with diligent writing. Cicero learned a routine from Gaius Carbo where he would watch a speech and try to memorize as much as possible then redescribe it written in his own words. But he found a defect that he ended up copying words, so he changed this by watching Greek speeches and then transcribing in Latin

[Tammam Aloudat · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a translation of some of the work of Cicero, the greatest of all Roman orators, about the art of speech. Cicero was a man of humble origins who became with his words and his oration the Consul of Rome.

The book is a selection that aims to illustrate some of the technicalities of rhetoric in a way that can be easily digested and absorbed by the lay person. It tries to bring together some basic rules in almost a bullet point format and goes only in little depth in explaining them but then illustrates the points with passages from Cicero's own oration and speeches. So in a way this is the short summary by the translator/editor of how they understand Cicero's rhetorical principles. The translator did a great job putting it together... however, this would be a little too simplistic for anyone with any familiarity with rhetoric and the works of the Greeks and Romans on the topic and I find the structure of the book owes more to Aristotle than it does anyone else.

All in all, I think it is well done and a great introduction to rhetoric and winning an argument, an art that has survived for twenty-five centuries.

[Volbet · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book's title is kinda misleading. It's not so much How to Win an Argument: An Ancient Guide to the Art of Persuasion as it is guide on how to construct an argument like a skilled orator. This short compilation of text snippets from Marcus Tullius Cicero will form a really good backbone in your future debates, speeches and litigations, but it won't teach you how to respond to counter-arguments or how to think on your feet during negotiations or debates.

So while you can definitely use these outtakes to write a very compelling speech, but once you encounter any resistance you're on your own.