9780062472373
Play Sample

Winning Arguments audiobook

  • By: Stanley Fish
  • Narrator: Joe Barrett
  • Length: 6 hours 0 minutes
  • Publisher: HarperAudio
  • Publish date: July 05, 2016
  • Language: English
  • (367 ratings)
(367 ratings)
33% Cheaper than Audible
Get for $0.00
  • $9.99 per book vs $14.95 at Audible
    Good for any title to download and keep
  • Listen at up to 4.5x speed
    Good for any title to download and keep
  • Fall asleep to your favorite books
    Set a sleep timer while you listen
  • Unlimited listening to our Classics.
    Listen to thousands of classics for no extra cost. Ever
Loading ...
Regular Price: 18.99 USD

Winning Arguments Audiobook Summary

A lively and accessible guide to understanding rhetoric by the world class English and Law professor and bestselling author of How to Write a Sentence.

Filled with the wit and observational prowess that shaped Stanley Fish’s acclaimed bestseller How to Write a Sentence, Winning Arguments guides readers through the “greatest hits” of rhetoric. In this clever and engaging guide, Fish offers insight and outlines the crucial keys you need to win any debate, anywhere, anytime–drawn from landmark legal cases, politics, his own career, and even popular film and television. A celebration of clashing minds and viewpoints, Winning Arguments is sure to become a classic.

Other Top Audiobooks

Winning Arguments Audiobook Narrator

Joe Barrett is the narrator of Winning Arguments audiobook that was written by Stanley Fish

Stanley Fish is a professor of law at Florida International University in Miami, and dean emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois in Chicago. He has also taught at the University of California at Berkeley, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke University. He is the author of fourteen books, most recently Fugitive in Flight and Save the World on Your Own Time. He lives in Andes, New York, and New York City.

About the Author(s) of Winning Arguments

Stanley Fish is the author of Winning Arguments

More From the Same

Winning Arguments Full Details

Narrator Joe Barrett
Length 6 hours 0 minutes
Author Stanley Fish
Publisher HarperAudio
Release date July 05, 2016
ISBN 9780062472373

Additional info

The publisher of the Winning Arguments is HarperAudio. The imprint is HarperAudio. It is supplied by HarperAudio. The ISBN-13 is 9780062472373.

Global Availability

This book is only available in the United States.

Goodreads Reviews

Mark

December 18, 2020

In rough political times I crave the clarity of Fish’s analysis of bounded argument spaces. My second read was even better than my first. New insights. And numbers of laugh-out-loud-at-the-cleverness moments. I’m indebted to Fish.Numbers of other reviewers appeared to expect this to be a how-to book. They wanted help winning arguments. They don’t know Fish. That’s not his way. His way is to observe arguments from the outside—and to observe that because of human finitude, and, yea, human fallenness, those arguments will never go away until we no longer see through a glass darkly but instead face to face. Yes, he cites the Bible. He’s a Milton scholar. I dearly love Stanley Fish.The thing is, though, that he *has* helped me “win arguments” with his counsel in this book and elsewhere. In particular, his observation that those who change their minds do so by pivoting on something they already believe—like the white supremacist who dropped his views the near instant he heard a neo-Nazi speaker inveigh against the undesirables and included people with cleft palates. The man’s child had a cleft palate. Fish also helped me by making the Rortian argument that truth is whatever you can persuade your colleagues to let you get away with. I’m a Christian; I don’t believe that. Truth is what God says it is. But “under the sun”—in places where God hasn’t spoken clearly, and among people who aren’t listening to God—there is important truth there. There is a pragmatic element to persuasion: you look for the arguments that will fly within the bounded space of the tradition your audience occupies.And when, in the end, you don’t “win,” you don’t figure necessarily that you did it wrong. You look back to finiteness and fallenness and look forward to the eschaton. I love Stanley Fish. I pray that he’ll heed some of his own favorite words, Bunyan’s words, and seek “life, life, eternal life!” I so frequently feel that the clarity with which he sees must mean he’s close to the kingdom.

Paul

March 07, 2017

The title of this book is rather unfortunate and will throw the average genial reader off. Reviews seem to reflect this. This is not a book that will instruct you on how to win arguments in various fields. This is not a manual on rhetoric. The subtitle appears to promise this, however. This work is basically an extended essay on the difficulties inherent in arguing at all, though argument is everywhere we look. In fact, Fish writes near the beginning that "arguments about the world come first, the world second", though the "ways of argument is context-specific". When read through with this in mind connecting all of it together this book becomes more deserving than two stars. Starting off with the Monty Python skit about buying an argument probably didn't help with presenting its material in a serious light at the beginning. Fish states that conducting arguments occur within specific parameters regulated and pertinent to the institutional arenas they take place in. Therefore political arguments will follow different rules than legal arguments, as the Sunday morning political talk show conducts its "debates" differently than those in the courtroom. Procedures are different because the goals are different. Sagely, the author suggests you do what you can to avoid arguments in the "bedroom", as those conflicts are usually aside from the actual point and are typically damaging to a domestic relationship. Yet arguments aside from the point are a common theme and almost a defining feature of "bounded arguments". A politician can find himself punished for venturing beyond his "talking points"; a witness in court may not be able to truly "testify" because laws governing legal argument won't allow it. This means that though argument might be ubiquitous, it is never perfect by definition. Fish touches upon those which purport to be, however. Foundationalists are perfect because they refuse outright to argue, whether they be the religious or liberal variety. Fish's politics may turn some readers off. In our time of political extremes, there seem to be many who are "perfect" on the left as well as right who consider themselves above any real engagement, much less argument. This book could have been organized better, true enough, but there is much in it that is worth thinking through. Not an easy read, but neither is the worldly human commerce which is argument.

Richard

December 24, 2016

If I were a smarter person than I am, I would like this book more than I do, but even so, I gave it 4 stars. There is a lot of meat here, a lot of food for thought.But first, let me say what the book isn't. Despite the title, it isn't a step-by-step guide on how to win an argument, although Fish does a nice job of analyzing the techniques of arguments. And despite the subtitle "What Works and Doesn't Work in... the Bedroom...", you will not learn how to convince your significant other to have (or not have) sex with you. The Bedroom chapter is really about getting along in a relationship.The author doesn't dumb down his ideas or his vocabulary for a general audience. If you aren't comfortable with words like simulacrum, praxis, and pastiche, you might want to have a dictionary handy. But it's not the vocabulary so much as the density of thought that will (or ought to) slow the reader down, and I mean this as a compliment.Fish uses examples from sources as diverse as Milton and Monty Python to make his points. Fish talks about the bounded argument space of the courtroom and the classroom. He examines the struggles of Adam and Eve in Milton's Paradise Lost. He points out that words are very powerful. They can create a marriage ("I now pronounce you man and wife.") and a country (the Declaration of Independence). He gives instances of the minority view becoming the majority and vice versa, and how that can happen.I wish I had the time to go more into depth. I think if you are into philosophy or rhetoric, you would like this book. If you like to question the status quo, especially in the professional or academic spheres, you would like this book.

Kendall

December 17, 2021

Excellent. Everyone should read this book.

Alexander

May 02, 2021

I was wrong last week when I professed that I was done reading for 2020. This past summer in PEI, Val and I happened upon a used book store, and I saw Stanley Fish’s Winning Arguments on one of the back tables, knowing immediately I had to have it. In this text, Fish seeks to define the idea that arguments are not finite, yet they exist in different realms, bounded by the space that is agreed upon originally based on the parameters for the arguments to be had. Looking first at the different basis of arguments to be used, the author quickly dispels various “socially acceptable” methods of arguing. For instance, he points out that the idea of arguments from authority is only valid if such an authority is validated prior. The example he uses is that of parents telling kids “because I said so”, which forms basis of authority that ultimately returns to the point of origin considering that parents give life to their children. However, does this idea of authority hold sway throughout existence then? Should parent organisms always maintain authority over their subordinate or children organisms? This is where the idea of context and bound space of arguments comes in. In fact, as aforementioned, arguments are not actually finite, but rather based solely on persuasion. It is the ability to overpower the adversary in positioning that allows one to see victory in an argument (should that be the goal in the first place). This sets a dangerous precedent, as we know that sufficiently skilled speakers can therefore make the worse appear the better, and ultimately move direction of such an institution or organization as they see fit based on said persuasion. Think of Hitler, Caesar, or any other that underlined the notion of “victory is written by the winners”. It is therefore important to have caution when considering the consequences of arguments, but it is not just of skilled speakers with questionable motives we must be cautious of overall. Moving into a section regarding Merchants of Doubt, Fish emphasizes that others with lesser speech abilities still find the ability to persuade simply by questioning the popular position itself. For example, Big Tobacco got away for a long time with their advertisements not by beating the science against their products, but rather by creating noise and continuously questioning the certainty of the science itself. Most recently, Donald Trump was able to achieve the world stage and proclaim his platform on the basis that he refused to play by the rules of the platform in the first place. In this sense, sometimes the best way to beat the game is to not play the game at all, but rather play a game of your own in which you set the rules. Speaking to the evolution of argument since Aristotle and the idea of rhetoric alone, Fish demonstrates how we’ve moved from an argumentative culture of “What’s the best thing to do?” towards a culture of “What can I do to win?”. The past notion of working based on Logos with supporting notions from Pathos and Ethos have now gone to the wayside as parties no longer seek to analyze both sides of the conflict for a hybrid resolution, but rather simply wait out the argument of their opponent before dishing back a position of their own. This is commonly known hearing versus listening, and I must say that I myself am just as guilty of it as any other. Fish takes the time to actually look at various domains where this holds true, even taking up the devil’s advocacy of creationism and intelligent design vice the evolutionary theory. To this effect, he argues that ID isn’t even able to gain foothold because the presentation of it must be made to the overall scientific community, which maintains its own dogmatic code, ironically to a religious level barring any talk of ideals outside the realm of natural science. With the outline of arguments about arguments in this text coming to a head (because what would be the point of a book about arguments without arguing a position?), Stanley Fish points to the inevitable schism that occurs between two entities over a long enough period of time. In the context of Liberalism versus Religion, the two sides over millennia have outlined their positions to such a razor sharp edge that the arguments no longer become about listening to each side anymore, but rather about catching the other in a tiny mistake to seemingly gain that two meters of ground on the moral battlefield. In the entre-temps, those caught in between just end up being the historical soldiers of the Somme, destined to do and die in the name of such an endless conflict. Try not to let it get you down when you really think about it, the book has other uses that to make you sad! Overall, this was well worth the read, although I expected more of a manual for arguing (sorry Val!) than the discourse I got about society. I would recommend it for anyone interested in rhetoric, but maybe read it with something in between this and other works such as Meditations so you don’t get to the point of questioning your own purpose like True Detective Season 1 has you do anyways. Happy Reading!

Lawrence

October 09, 2021

Stanley Fish provides a very deep yet easy to consume analysis of the concept of argument. I went into this book thinking it was going to be something that would teach me how to be a better debater (and admittedly I did purchase this book at a time when I was itching to overpower my opponents in politics on an argumentative level). That is not what this is however.This book is more of an examination of the nature of argument through language. The opening chapters delve into the history of argument through the use of language and engage the reader in examining the debate over how to get rid of the need for argument (or how to arrive at ultimate truth). The rest of the book details the nuances of argument in politics, marriage, law, and academia, and breaks down the philosophies of argumentation and rhetoric in each field. Though this book wasn't exactly what I was looking for when I purchased it, I must admit I am quite impressed with what I received. Though I do disagree with a few things, a vast majority of Fish's points are well thought out and well presented (no surprise since he is literally writing on the art of argumentation). I will only spoil one thing in this book, and that is Fish's conclusion that there is no winning argument in politics. Current events happen and push or pull political movements as they may. Convincing people of your side is somewhat fruitless without the backing of a society-wide event or movement. I think it's rather safe to spoil this particular point, since we've been treated to an endless buffet of confirmation of this thesis for the past 5-6 years now. Fish's other conclusions on how to work things out in marriage, the courtroom, and in academia I'll leave for you to find out. I did find that he has done an excellent amount of research in the chapter on argumentation in law. I found that part a refreshing review of my criminal justice classes on case law.A definite recommend from me if you're looking for an exploration of why people argue and what can or can't be done about it!

Cathy

March 08, 2018

Ah... I'd recommend this over Xanax for those who want to understand the heated emotions around today's politics. This reinforces my opinion that many "educated" arguments are not "the truth", but basically "talking points" the system has created and these don't coexist with many people's actual experiences/values and what happens in the real world."It may seem paradoxical, but in the contest between rhetoric and truth, truth's best ally is the rhetoric it scorns"I found the writing difficult to comprehend, so I struggled to read this quickly. But there was a lot of good information and ideas I hadn't heard before. I ended up reading the book in this order: Relationships --> Law --> Academia --> Politics --> Intro/Ch 1 --> Conclusion. This order was definitely easier for me to get used to his presentation style and concepts.The major points the author makes are:* Each field of study acts like a clique with their own rules and allows certain topics to be "argued" about and other topics can get you kicked out. For instance, in politics, the political winner needs more than just truth, they need catch phrases. In contracts, the rules don't care if there is a big power dynamic between the people writing up the contract, the contract is based purely on what is written and not based on "intent". For academia, certain topics will get you shunned from the community, similar to history when "the earth revolves around the sun" was not allowed.* Personal note: I just finished reading "How the Hippies Saved Physics by an MIT professor who describes how the physics community shunned many bright physicists for believing their might be a link between quantum physics and alien communication or ESP.

Kent

January 05, 2019

Fish combines many of my loves -- the law, literature, and journalism -- in his discussion on arguments. The title is more for selling the book than indicative of the contents. (Insert argument about judging a book by it's cover here.) This isn't an argument about winning arguments, but more an analysis of how arguments work in real life. A main argument of the book is that arguments are part of the human condition and are often bounded and circumscribed by the realm in which the argument takes place, whether it is the courtroom or the living room or the classroom or the campaign trail, so in that regard the title works, but again, this book isn't about winning, in part because an argument maybe shouldn't be about winning in most circumstances. His takedown of academic arguments confirmed that I made the right choice in my career path as an attorney over a professor. The one down side is the stakes tend to be higher in the law than academe. Bonus points for Fish for quoting Robert Cover, my favorite legal philospher, in the classic Violence and the Word: "Legal interpretation takes place in a field of pain and death." On the domestic front, John Milton through Fish shows the intractability and the unique stance of arguments in that sphere and manages to prove more insightful than any self-help or marriage manual.

Peter

April 11, 2019

Stanley Fish thinks argument is a natural part of life, and won't go away. His argument is unfortunately persuasive. He selects 4 areas: politics; relationships; law and education. Essentially his position is unchanged throughout these categories, although in the education area he discusses what can't be argued about in higher education, the presumptions of the law that make certain arguments dubious; a somewhat stereotypical set of relationship scenarios (which he admits) and, unfortunately, the state of politics today (and maybe yesterday.Fish writes well, although his examples are essentially American and so the niceties of that legal system were not of great interest, for example, and I would have liked more nuance in the relationships area. However, having said that, the norm might be much closer to what he writes about than anything I might think happens.The main point is to make you think, anyway

Dan

February 01, 2022

This is not really a guide on how to win arguments, but more of a series of exploratory philosophical essays. Fish delves into the Bible, Milton, and postmodernism to generate an account of rhetoric as constitutive of our realities. He claims that we are forever embedded in a world of argument, which means we are uncertain about issues and prone to conflict. Like St. Paul said, we see through a glass darkly. We will never be able to produce a neutral language or perspective, because we are always limited by perspective. Fish has a lively and learned mind. I especially appreciate Fish's explanation of the liberal state, which removes a religious orientation for the sake of a procedural system that respects pluralism.

Heather

January 01, 2019

I found the title to be a bit misleading as I thought this book would be more of a practical "how to" develop your arguments. It was really more like a dissertation on how arguments are a pervasive part of our language. The book provides interesting insight into the development of opinions on both sides and how the "standard rules" of language effect how opinions can sometimes be changed. The book was not what I had anticipated but it is written well. Its a short, easy book to read. Nonetheless, my short cynical synopsis is simply...opinions are like a*sholes, everyone has one and mine is better than yours!

Ulrich

April 07, 2018

With his trademark wit, acuity and wisdom, Fish serves as a useful guide in understanding how arguments are won (not how to win them: if you buy this book in order to win an argument, you're in the wrong section at amazon), and how the truth, opinion, and everything in between are related.He gives a great outline of the thinking of Justice Scalia, of the use of fictions in law, and of the way academia handles falsehood, strong opinion, verifiable data, and the quest for the truth. Very timely in light of the resurgence of the culture wars over the topic of free speech in the academy.

The_J

May 24, 2020

Read it. Started as a library rental and then had to get a copy: "For one effect of inhabiting the condition of difference--the condition of being partial, the condition of not being in direct touch with the final unity and full meaning of the universe--is that we long to transcend it; and it is that longing, forever disappointed, that keeps us going." (page 212)

Eliezer

September 24, 2019

What is an interpretive community? Try speaking with someone who is not familiar with the terms of your particular profession or field. It is difficult and there is a lot of room for misunderstanding. Stanley Fish coined this term and his understanding of language and thought is spot on.

Frequently asked questions

Listening to audiobooks not only easy, it is also very convenient. You can listen to audiobooks on almost every device. From your laptop to your smart phone or even a smart speaker like Apple HomePod or even Alexa. Here’s how you can get started listening to audiobooks.

  • 1. Download your favorite audiobook app such as Speechify.
  • 2. Sign up for an account.
  • 3. Browse the library for the best audiobooks and select the first one for free
  • 4. Download the audiobook file to your device
  • 5. Open the Speechify audiobook app and select the audiobook you want to listen to.
  • 6. Adjust the playback speed and other settings to your preference.
  • 7. Press play and enjoy!

While you can listen to the bestsellers on almost any device, and preferences may vary, generally smart phones are offer the most convenience factor. You could be working out, grocery shopping, or even watching your dog in the dog park on a Saturday morning.
However, most audiobook apps work across multiple devices so you can pick up that riveting new Stephen King book you started at the dog park, back on your laptop when you get back home.

Speechify is one of the best apps for audiobooks. The pricing structure is the most competitive in the market and the app is easy to use. It features the best sellers and award winning authors. Listen to your favorite books or discover new ones and listen to real voice actors read to you. Getting started is easy, the first book is free.

Research showcasing the brain health benefits of reading on a regular basis is wide-ranging and undeniable. However, research comparing the benefits of reading vs listening is much more sparse. According to professor of psychology and author Dr. Kristen Willeumier, though, there is good reason to believe that the reading experience provided by audiobooks offers many of the same brain benefits as reading a physical book.

Audiobooks are recordings of books that are read aloud by a professional voice actor. The recordings are typically available for purchase and download in digital formats such as MP3, WMA, or AAC. They can also be streamed from online services like Speechify, Audible, AppleBooks, or Spotify.
You simply download the app onto your smart phone, create your account, and in Speechify, you can choose your first book, from our vast library of best-sellers and classics, to read for free.

Audiobooks, like real books can add up over time. Here’s where you can listen to audiobooks for free. Speechify let’s you read your first best seller for free. Apart from that, we have a vast selection of free audiobooks that you can enjoy. Get the same rich experience no matter if the book was free or not.

It depends. Yes, there are free audiobooks and paid audiobooks. Speechify offers a blend of both!

It varies. The easiest way depends on a few things. The app and service you use, which device, and platform. Speechify is the easiest way to listen to audiobooks. Downloading the app is quick. It is not a large app and does not eat up space on your iPhone or Android device.
Listening to audiobooks on your smart phone, with Speechify, is the easiest way to listen to audiobooks.

footer-waves