Nature of Argument
Download
Report
Transcript Nature of Argument
NATURE OF
ARGUMENT
What is argument?
Monty Python
sketch: “I’d like to
have an argument”
definition
“Argumentation is a form of instrumental
communication relying on reasoning and
proof to influence belief or behavior
through the use of spoken or written
messages” (Rybacki & Rybacki, 2008, p.
3).
“…a form of instrumental
communication…”
arguing is usually a means to an end,
not the end itself
other types of interactions have
terminal value, e.g., the conversation is
the goal.
“…relying on reasoning
and proof…”
the essence of argument is
reason-giving
an arguer can’t simply make an
assertion; she or he must offer a
reason or proof
“…to influence belief or
behavior…”
arguing is a form of influence or
persuasion
emphasis is on rational rather than
emotional appeals
emphasis is on central rather than
peripheral processing
central versus peripheral
processing
Central processing:
actively thinking about
ideas and processing
available information
reflective, analytical
decision making
reading product reviews
looking up consumer
ratings
seeking out objective,
expert opinions
Peripheral processing:
using mental shortcuts,
“heuristic” cues.
habitual, reflexive decision
making
relying on celebrity
endorsements
giving in to brand loyalty
basing a decision on “bells
and whistels”
focus is on disagreement
Arguing focuses on
disagreement,
controversy
people usually only
argue if one of them
is uncertain of the
outcome
if a conclusion is
certain, inescapable,
there is no need to
argue
argument is audiencecentered
arguing is audience-centered
we fashion arguments with specific
listeners in mind
effective arguments are geared to the
receiver’s frame of reference
an argument that appeals to one
audience may not appeal to another
argumentation is
probabilistic
arguing is always “iffy” because there
is no guarantee the other person(s) will
agree
in argument, success is usually a
matter of degree
the other person might convince us
instead
argument is rule-governed
Conventions for arguing
are based on formal and
informal rules
formal rules in legal
argument: admissibility of
evidence, exclusionary rule
formal rules in social science
argument: p < .05 level of
significance, scale reliability,
replication
NFL challenges and instant
replay
Informal rules in
everyday argument
turn-taking,
interruptions
fairness
requirements for
evidence
ad hominem attacks
availability condition
Three perspectives of
argument
Rhetorical perspective:
views arguments as being audiencecentered
arguing is strategic: arguments must be
adapted to the listener’s frame of reference
• standards for evaluating arguments are
person-specific, situation dependent
Three perspectivescontinued
Dialectical perspective:
views argument as a back and forth, give
and take process
arguments are multilateral, they evolve,
change, and develop over time
involves testing arguments in the
“marketplace of ideas,” assumes the
strongest arguments will prevail
Three perspectives
Logical perspective:
presumes there are objective, universal
standards for evaluating arguments
arguments are unilateral, complete, selfcontained
based upon formal logic, standards for
determining validity/invalidity
Ethical standards for
argument
Teleological ethics: focuses on
consequences
the outcome is what matters
greatest good for the greatest number
example: lying is sometimes necessary and
even desirable, abortion is justified under
certain circumstances
Ethical standards for
argument
Deontological ethics: based on moral
absolutes
principles don’t change due to situations,
circumstances
based on a priori moral standards
example: torture is morally wrong,
abortion is murder, eating meat is
immoral
Ethical standards for
arguing
Clarity: making arguments clear and concise,
avoiding purposeful ambiguity
Honesty: being candid, not relying on deceit,
distortion, misrepresentation
Efficiency: involving the audience, making the
form and content of the argument effective
Relevance: adapting arguments to the
listener’s frame of reference
Pro-social view of
argument
Arguing is a key ingredient in decision
making and problem solving
Arguing gets issues out in the open; lets
people know where they stand
Arguing is a peaceful means of conflict
resolution