𝔖 Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

πŸ“

Media Argumentation: Dialect, Persuasion and Rhetoric

✍ Scribed by Douglas Walton


Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Year
2007
Tongue
English
Leaves
406
Edition
illustrated edition
Category
Library

⬇  Acquire This Volume

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Argumentation theory finds warrant for its claim to analytic superiority from the idea that we naturally evaluate the relative strength of arguments from the standpoint of conventionally established, objective criteria, and not by transposing arguments into deductive schemae and evaluating for validity. Because the claims of the vast majority of arguments are uncertain, we habitually evaluate for strength, rather than try to prove validity. Argumentation theory thus provides tools for the analysis of arguments, more accessible, user-friendly, and utile, to a public not initiated to the rigor of deductive proof, which is, in itself, limited in application, and disputable in its methodology (esp. re:truth-theory, quantification).
Walton is a giant in the burgeoning field of informal logic. In this book, he raises his game to a new level. The claim was once made that "a technological society is inevitably a totalitarian society". Any witness to the little more than half a century old phenomenon of television and its social impact would have to give pause to consider the importance of developing tools for the analysis of arguments we receive by way of electronic media. Walton's project, which examines arguments as they mediate and are mediated by the media, is a major contribution to understanding of a crucial aspect of the way in which most people acquire most of their information: why we are more prone to a seemingly uncritical acceptance of flawed and sometimes dangerous arguments because they are televised. The book is comprehensive in its analysis. While focusing on T.V., Walton delineates a texbook survey of argumentation theory in what most of us would consider its most critical application. The study of propaganda, such a factor in the arguments of corporate owned media pundits (no linguistic confusion intended), is particularly instructive. While the abstract nature of the subject makes for admittedly dry reading, the importance of the discussion here, and its significance for our future, justifies perserverance. Can one really afford to remain unschooled in argument in times like these? This book is the best effort yet at a one-stop shop.

✦ Table of Contents


Cover......Page 1
Half-title......Page 3
Title......Page 5
Copyright......Page 6
Dedication......Page 7
Contents......Page 9
Acknowledgments......Page 13
Introduction......Page 17
1 Logic, Dialectic, and Rhetoric......Page 23
1 The Viewpoint of Informal Logic......Page 24
2 The Old Dialectic of the Greeks......Page 27
3 The Opposition between Rhetoric and Dialectic......Page 31
4 Topics and Fallacies......Page 35
5 Persuasion, Social Influence, and Democracy......Page 39
6 Argumentation Schemes......Page 42
7 Basic Practical Reasoning......Page 46
8 Value-Based Practical Reasoning......Page 50
9 The Star Trek Example......Page 57
10 The Aims of Dialectical and Rhetorical Argumentation......Page 61
2 The Speech Act of Persuasion......Page 66
1 The Belief-Desire-Intention Approach and
the Commitment Approach......Page 67
2 Basic Components of Persuasion......Page 73
Persuasion: The First Definition......Page 74
3 Chaining of Argumentation......Page 76
Example of a One-Step Argument......Page 77
Persuasion: The Second Definition......Page 79
4 Types of Dialogue......Page 80
5 Deliberation......Page 84
6 Closing of the Deliberation Dialogue......Page 86
Case 1: The No-Fault Insurance Example......Page 87
Case 2: The Truck Example......Page 89
8 Negotiation Dialogue and Persuasion......Page 93
Case 3: The Car Negotiation Example......Page 95
9 Relevance and Argument Diagramming......Page 99
10 The Cognitive Component of Persuasion......Page 104
Hypothesis on the Cognitive Component of Persuasion (HCCP)......Page 106
Persuasion: The Third Definition......Page 107
Successful Persuasion: The Definition Based on the Third Definition......Page 109
3 Propaganda......Page 111
1 Negative Connotations......Page 112
2 Public Discourse and Reason......Page 116
3 Appeal to the People Revisited......Page 119
4 The Dialectical Viewpoint on Propaganda......Page 124
5 Persuasion and Propaganda......Page 126
6 Characteristics of Propaganda......Page 129
Case 3.2......Page 132
Case 3.3......Page 134
Case 3.4......Page 135
8 Openness to Contrary Evidence......Page 137
Case 3.5......Page 138
9 Deceptiveness and Relevance in Propaganda......Page 140
10 Evaluating Argumentation in Propaganda......Page 142
Case 3.6......Page 144
4 Appeals to Fear and Pity......Page 147
Case 4.1......Page 148
Case 2.2......Page 150
2 Appeals to Fear......Page 151
Case 4.3......Page 152
3 Appeals to Pity......Page 154
The World Vision Example......Page 155
4 The Respondent-to-Dialogue Problem......Page 158
5 Simulative Reasoning......Page 162
6 The Dual Process Model of Persuasion......Page 165
7 The Structure of Appeals to Fear......Page 167
8 The Structure of Appeals to Pity......Page 170
9 Multi-agent Structure of Both Types of Argument......Page 173
10 When Are Appeals to Fear and Pity Fallacious?......Page 176
5 Ad Hominem Arguments in Political Discourse......Page 181
1 Classifying the Types of Ad Hominem Argument......Page 183
Ethotic (Direct, Abusive) Ad Hominem Argument......Page 184
2 The Circumstantial and Other Types......Page 185
Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument......Page 186
The Sealers Example......Page 187
3 Argument from Commitment......Page 189
Argument from Commitment......Page 191
4 The Gore Case......Page 193
5 The Battalino Case......Page 197
6 Classifying the Argument in the Battalino Case......Page 200
Argument from Pragmatic Inconsistency......Page 202
7 Evaluating the Argument in the Battalino Case......Page 203
8 Implicature and Innuendo......Page 205
9 Evaluating the Argument in the Gore Case......Page 210
10 Evaluating Arguments Rhetorically and Dialectically......Page 212
6 Arguments Based on Popular Opinion......Page 218
1 Influencing the Mass Audience......Page 219
2 Appeal to Popular Opinion as an Argument......Page 222
Case 6.1......Page 224
Case 6.2......Page 225
4 The Form of the Argument......Page 227
5 Fallacious Appeals to Popular Opinion......Page 231
6 Endoxa in Greek Dialectic......Page 233
7 Public Opinion as Informed Deliberation......Page 235
8 A More Careful Basis for Evaluating Cases......Page 238
9 Viewing the Public as an Agent......Page 242
10 Evaluating Appeal to Popular Opinion......Page 244
7 Fallacies and Bias in Public Opinion Polling......Page 248
1 Definitions and Sampling Surveys......Page 249
Case 7.1......Page 252
Case 7.3......Page 254
2 Question Wording and Emotive Bias in Polls......Page 255
Case 7.4......Page 258
3 The Structure of the Question......Page 259
Case 7.5......Page 261
Case 7.6......Page 262
Case 7.7......Page 263
4 Forcing an Answer......Page 264
Case 7.8......Page 268
5 Use of Polls by Advocacy Groups......Page 269
Case 7.9......Page 270
Case 7.10......Page 272
6 The Advent of Deliberative Polling......Page 274
7 Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions......Page 279
Critical Questions for the Report of a Public Opinion Poll Argument......Page 280
The Call for ActionArgument......Page 281
Critical Questions for the Appeal to Popular Opinion Argument......Page 282
8 Using Formal Dialectical Models of Argumentation......Page 283
9 Combining Dialectical and Empirical Methods......Page 287
10 Conclusion and Summary of Fallacies......Page 290
8 Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments......Page 295
1 Stevenson’s Theory of Persuasive Definitions......Page 296
Case 8.1......Page 297
Case 8.1a......Page 298
2 Cases of Public Redefinitions......Page 301
Case 8.2......Page 302
Case 8.3......Page 304
Case 8.4......Page 306
3 Wider Implications of These Cases......Page 308
4 Definitions in the New Dialectic......Page 312
Case 8.5......Page 315
5 Proof of Legitimacy of Persuasive Definitions......Page 317
6 Argumentation Schemes Relating to Definitions......Page 320
The Kangaroo Argument......Page 321
The Contract Argument......Page 322
Critical questions......Page 324
Critical questions......Page 325
7 The Speech Act of Defining......Page 328
8 Evaluating Persuasive Definitions......Page 330
Key List for the Culture Example......Page 331
9 What Should the Rules for Persuasive Definitions Be?......Page 336
10 Conclusions......Page 339
9 The Structure of Media Argumentation......Page 343
1 Rhetoric and Dialectic Reconfigured......Page 344
2 The Respondent-to-Dialogue Problem Revisited......Page 347
Profile 9.1......Page 349
3 Direct and Indirect Media Argumentation......Page 350
4 Star Trek: The Rhetorical Dimension......Page 354
5 Argumentation Strategies......Page 358
Case 9.1......Page 362
Case 9.2: The Motorist Example......Page 365
7 The Solution to the RTD Problem......Page 367
8 Fifteen Basic Components of Media Argumentation......Page 370
9 The Persuasion System......Page 373
10 Computational Dialectics for Rhetorical Invention......Page 375
Bibliography......Page 381
Index......Page 393


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Media Argumentation: Dialect, Persuasion
✍ Douglas Walton πŸ“‚ Library πŸ“… 2007 πŸ› Cambridge University Press 🌐 English

Media argumentation is a powerful force in our lives. From political speeches to television commercials to war propaganda, it can effectively mobilize political action, influence the public, and market products. This book presents a new and systematic way of thinking about the influence of mass me

Argument and Persuasion in Descartes' Me
✍ David Cunning πŸ“‚ Library πŸ“… 2010 πŸ› Oxford University Press, USA 🌐 English

Descartes' <em>Meditations on First Philosophy</em> has proven to be not only one of the canonical texts of Western philosophy, but also the site of a great deal of interpretive activity in scholarship on the history of early modern philosophy over the last two decades. David Cunning's monograph pr

Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woo
✍ Frans H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser (auth.), Frans H. Van Eemeren, Peter Hout πŸ“‚ Library πŸ“… 2002 πŸ› Springer Netherlands 🌐 English

<p>In 1999 we invited a small number of colleagues to take part in a colloquium - voted to the analysis of argumentative discourse from two kinds of perspective: a dialectical and a rhetorical perspective. Our intention was to start a thorough disc- sion on the commonalities and differences between

Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in
✍ Assimakis Tseronis; Charles Forceville πŸ“‚ Library πŸ“… 2017 πŸ› John Benjamins Publishing Company 🌐 English

This collection advances the study of context-dependent characteristics of argumentative discourse by examining a variety of media genres in which text and image (and other semiotic modes) combine to create meaning. The chapters have been written by an international group of senior and junior schola

Renaissance Argument: Valla and Agricola
✍ Peter Mack πŸ“‚ Library πŸ“… 1993 πŸ› E. J. Brill 🌐 English

This book presents a new interpretation of the two most innovative renaissance works on the use of language, Lorenzo Valla's 'Repastinatio dialecticae et philosophiae' (1439) and Rudolph Agricola's 'De inventione dialectica' (1479). Mack attempts to find a path through the controversies which have r