Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Federalist No. 10
Transcript of Federalist No. 10
One of America's most influential founding fathers, James Madison, in his formal essay, the Federalist No. 10, promotes the ideas that will be the foundation of the American government. Madison's purpose is to persuade the general public to accept and endorse the new governmental model. He adopts a rational tone in order to coax his audience into agreement, with his views and opinions regarding the Federalist cause.
To form a basis for his argument by making sure his audience understands the literal meaning of his ideas and thus remove ambiguity from his argument.
Ex. 1 By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverted to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
To highlight the differences between two ideas so that the reader can easily distinguish between them and decide which one is superior - usually Madison's.
Comparing is explaining the similarities between to concepts or things, contrasting is explaining the differences.
the process that leads to a logical conclusion starting with a central premise than working to the underlying conclusion.
Federalist No. 10: Rhetoric
Establishing an exact meaning for an idea or term used within a rhetorical argument. Must be exact and cannot be a definition for a different idea as well, to avoid confusion.
Ex. 2 A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.
Ex. 3 From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are:
There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, the same interests.
There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one by removing its causes, the other, by controlling its effects.
"No man is allowed to be the judge in his own case, because his interest would certainly bias his judgement, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time."
To create a logical argument that convinces his audience to agree with his stance and ideas.
In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised in order to guard against the cabals of the few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.
The pockets are small