2. How does each man structure his argument for effectiveness in communicating his point of view? Montesquieu’s Arguments Madison’s Arguments
Montesquieu's arguments are structured in a systematic manner, starting with an analysis of different types of governments and their corresponding principles. He then goes on to discuss the separation of powers, arguing that power should be divided among different institutions in order to prevent tyranny. He also emphasizes the importance of checks and balances to ensure that no single entity has absolute power. Montesquieu provides historical examples and empirical evidence to support his argument.
Madison's arguments, on the other hand, are structured in a more logical and persuasive manner. He begins by outlining the problems with the current system of government under the Articles of Confederation, such as the lack of centralized power and the inability to effectively address national issues. He then presents the need for a stronger central government, arguing that a well-constructed union would better protect individual liberties and promote the common good. Madison uses theoretical reasoning and logic, as well as historical examples, to support his claims. He also anticipates and responds to potential objections and counterarguments.