ABSTRACT

The significance of the terms special interests, conflict of interest, and special pleading in argumentative rhetoric hinges on definitions of both the words interest and special that differ from everyday usage. Special pleading, then, refers to people arguing for a position that they present as being in the public's benefit when it is secretly for the benefit of special interests. As in many semantic issues, even the definition of "special interests" is largely subjective and partisan. Questions concerning special interests, special pleading, and conflict of interest can be highly complex and disputable. Conflict of interest is a financial investment or some kind of affiliation that is likely to bias the views of a speaker or writer. Conflict of interest becomes a rhetorical issue when it leads to special pleading, as when a legislator who has a personal financial investment benefited by pending legislation conceals that fact and makes a speech falsely arguing that the legislation is in the public interest.