Huxley- Use of Deductive Reasoning
1st paragraph-hook-
People often encounter experiences that require them to analyze a situation and make a conclusion. For people to arrive at a sensible conclusion, they must reason to create a valid argument. For instance, they may employ deductive reasoning, a method that entails moving from the general principles that they are sure are true, to the specific ones. On the other hand, they may employ inductive reasoning, which involves moving from precise instances to the generalized ones. In his essay words and behavior, Huxley explains his opinion concerning war and its issues, including inappropriate use of language when discussing conflicts. The general principle that he presents at the beginning of his essay is that individuals use words to falsify the truth because doing so favors them in a certain way, while the situation is war.
2nd paragraph- one of the examples that he uses to support his reasoning is the use of the word “riffles” and “sabers” instead of “foot soldiers” and “cavalrymen.” He gives an example of a sentence that describes the Battle of Marengo, which claims that the French retreated orderly. Additionally, the sentence claims that the troops held together, and the Australian cavalrymen did not get a chance to escape. Huxley explains that the war is between the muskets in echelon and sabers in line, and dismisses it as a mere ironmongery clash.
3rd -Another example involves the attribution of individual characteristics to institutions, collectivities, and geographical expressions. He explains that the use of personal traits causes misunderstanding in political thought, and is the origin of crimes and political mistakes. Huxley argues that people make the Verror in politics because it is advantageous to them as egotists to feel to be violently proud of themselves and their nations. Furthermore, he claims that the egotists assume that the misfortunes that befell them due to their mistakes emanate from foreigners. He also argues that it is easy to become violent towards an individual than an abstraction; hence people often make political personifications.
4th He also uses the example abstract word “force,” which he considers dangerous when used in the context of war. He explains that among the people who like using the word is those who organize collective security through military treaties against possible rivals. Additionally, he argues that such people believe that peace-loving nations must join hands and forcefully suppress aggressive dictators. He also explains that when the word force is used in the context of human relations, it lacks a definitive meaning.
5th conclusion – Overall, Huxley concludes that the language that people use about warfare is inappropriate. He feels that the language is used to hide the reality, which is so disgusting that people hate knowing it. Additionally, he reiterates that the political language that individuals use is bad though its mistakes have different intentions. Lastly, people should aim at arousing, rationalizing, and justifying such fundamentally agreeable sentiments as hatred and pride, contempt for others, and self-esteem.