ABSTRACT
I want to consider the advantages of a slow approach to making arguments, focusing on situations where people disagree about issues of procedure or policy. Much of the rhetoric that surrounds us can be called “fast,” I believe, because it’s designed to settle disagreements quickly and efficiently by deploying the tactics of assertion, refutation, and persuasion. By “fast,” I’m referring to the rush to critique and convince, the impatience with wide-ranging deliberation. Fast rhetoric exemplifies the ideology of efficiency and speed (discussed by many authors in this volume) as well as aspects of aggressiveness, expressed in the win-or-lose push to decide or convince.
