Gimme An Example

When you make an argument, there is an important question that naturally stems from it. People will ask themselves ‘is this true.’ For example, if someone said that we should keep our cats indoors to protect the cerulean warbler bird, we have to prove keeping their cats indoors would actually have an effect on the bird population.

Typically, when we say something it is an assertion. For example, me saying that ‘keeping Bobby, your cat, indoors would save the birds’ is an assertion. However, to prove that it is true, I would need to provide evidence, either in an exemplar or a statistical form. For example, if I then said that 2.4 billion birds were killed by free roaming cats alone in the US last year and Bobby snacked on my canary, I could prove that my argument is true.

Fundamentally, when you’re giving an example, you are telling a story. One of the things that’s important to think about when it comes to examples is your level of detail. If you use too little detail, your audience won’t have an emotional attachment to the unfortunate soul of the story or the story might not seem credible. However, if you use too much detail, the person you’re trying to convince might lose interest.

You want to balance your examples to make them both credible and compelling. A good rule of thumb on this is to include two non-relevant details along with each important one. At the beginning of Martin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech, King says “five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.”

The same thing would be achieved by the simple sentence that ‘a great American signed the Emancipation Proclamation.’ However, the two tangential details, namely that it happened “five score years ago” and that the speech is happening in the shadow of the great man’s statue make the fact seem more authentic and personable.

If you’re telling multiple different stories across an argument to prove your points, it can be hard to find the time to introduce each character individually. As a result, many strong orators will use a threaded example throughout their argument.

This is something we try to do at Kinnu too. For example, if you take our Macroeconomics Pathway, you might be able to learn about Jimmy, who eats pies. Throughout different teaching points about Aggregate Supply and Demand, Jimmy is continuously referred to. Perhaps Jimmy has won the lottery and it will mean that he can buy more pies. Or, alternatively, if Jimmy has fallen into poverty then the pie industry might take a dip. As a result, the connection you make to Jimmy can be successfully sustained. You don’t need to reintroduce a character every time you’re adding a layer of complexity to the same generic idea.

Sometimes, it can be even better to use a personal anecdote. This helps to build the Aristotelian value of Ethos, which is the credibility of the speaker. By stating that you suffer from the same problem, you can build relatability and trustworthiness.

For example, in 1952, Vice Presidential candidate Richard Nixon was accused of taking political donations and using them for personal expenses. In his defense speech, he continuously referred back to the story of his life and the life of his family. By talking about his challenge in getting a mortgage and affording insurance, he was able to relate to an American audience struggling to balance their own familial books. As a result, he was able to make himself seem relatable.

Personal anecdotes are particularly good examples in cases where an audience member might be suspicious of the speaker’s motives, such as with Nixon’s funding, or their authenticity, like with a major political figure taking a sudden interest in environmentalism.

When telling a personal anecdote, it can be difficult to strike the right emotional balance. While you hope that the level of detail associated will allow the audience to feel an immediate emotive connection, telling it also requires the example to apply universally so your audience can draw meaningful conclusions from it.

For example, if you’re telling a story about the time you won the lottery and the difficulty with finding things to spend the money on, you are unlikely to receive much sympathy from your audience. In short, they will struggle to find your anecdote relatable and, as a result, they won’t find the conclusions drawn from it to be applicable to their lives.

As a result, when telling a personal anecdote, it is important to ground it in your audience’s personal experiences. Try to think of anecdotes which will be relatable to other people - if talking to a family, it is much better to say that the idea struck you at the family dinner table over a pizza than to say you had it while skydiving in Buenos Aires. Even if what you are talking about is unusual, try to pepper it with details showing the normality of other parts of your life situation.

When telling a story, another big example is whether to use the names associated with your examples. Should you mention that it was Hugh who dropped the coin? Or should you just say that a friend of yours dropped it?

On the one hand, a frequent use of names can make an example seem more real and easy to relate to. On the other hand, adding a specific name can detract from the universality of the example’s applicability - sometimes it is better to remember that this is something that could happen to everyone.

Often, when it comes to the questions of whether to use names as part of an example, you will want to consider what the point of your example is. Are you trying to argue that this is a specific problem that applies to specific people or a generalized one? For example, if you are campaigning for people with multiple sclerosis, it might be better to use a named example because it will allow people to feel more compassionate toward the emotive case study. However, if you are talking about how climate change is going to hurt your grandchildren, it might be better to use generic terms.

Making examples representative can be a challenge. Often, a story is more emotionally powerful than a statistic, as it's easier to care about an individual than a large number. This is due to the human mind's capacity to visualize and care about a limited number of people at a time.

However, this can lead to criticism of an example being an isolated incident. Therefore, it's important to contextualize the number of people affected by something, often using statistics to show the relatability of examples.

Another crucial aspect of using examples is making them memorable. The details can make a difference. For instance, using unusual fruits to demonstrate price inflation at a market can make the example stick in people's heads. However, it's important not to be too outlandish, as this can distract the reader from the main point.

When arguing, you're likely not the only one using examples. You may need to discredit your opponent's examples. The grounds for disproving an example are often similar to the things you have to consider when making it. You can question whether an example is applicable to all situations or just an isolated case.

Additionally, looking into the wider context behind the example and identifying any neglected factors can be useful. Co-opting counter-examples can be a powerful tool in argumentation, as it not only removes evidence from your opponent but also adds it to your argument.