The Argumentative Structure of Persuasive Definitions
Tóm tắt
In this paper we present an analysis of persuasive definition based on argumentation schemes. Using the medieval notion of differentia and the traditional approach to topics, we explain the persuasiveness of emotive terms in persuasive definitions by applying the argumentation schemes for argument from classification and argument from values. Persuasive definitions, we hold, are persuasive because their goal is to modify the emotive meaning denotation of a persuasive term in a way that contains an implicit argument from values. However, our theory is different from Stevenson’s, a positivistic view that sees emotive meaning as subjective, and defines it as a behavioral effect. Our proposal is to treat the persuasiveness produced by the use of emotive words and persuasive definitions as due to implicit arguments that an interlocutor may not be aware of. We use congruence theory to provide the linguistic framework for connecting a term with the function it is supposed to play in a text. Our account allows us to distinguish between conflicts of values and conflicts of classifications.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aberdein, A (2000) Persuasive definition. In Tindale CW, Hansen HV, Sveda E (eds) Argumentation at the century’s turn, OSSA (Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation) Proceedings. CD ROM
Aristotle (1851) On rhetoric. Translated by T. Buckley. Henry G. Bohn, London (UK)
Aristotle (1939) Topica. Translated by E. S. Forster, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Aristotle (1985) Nicomachean ethics. Translated by Terence Irwin. Hackett, Indianapolis, Ind.
Baier K (1965) The moral point of view. abridged and rev. ed. Random House, New York
Bench-Capon T (2003a) Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. J Log Comput 13:429–448
Bench-Capon T (2003b) Agreeing to differ: modelling persuasive dialogue between parties without a consensus about values. Informal Logic 22:231–245
Bigi S (2006) Keywords in argumentative texts and their persuasive power. Paper for the ISSA conference
Brown DG (1955) Evaluative inference. Philosophy 30(114):214–228
Burgess-Jackson K (1995) Rape and persuasive definition. Can J Philos 25:415–454
Cigada S (2006) Connectif et relation entre locuteurs. In: Gobber G, Gatti MC, Cigada S (eds) Sýndesmoi. Vita e Pensiero, Milano
Damasio A (1994) L’errore di Cartesio. Aldelphi, Milano
Damasio A (2000) The feeling of what happens. Vintage, London
Ducrot O (1983) L’Argumentation dans la langue. Mardaga, Bruxelles
Ducrot O (1993) Dire et ne pas Dire. Minuit, Paris
Ducrot O, Anscombre J-C (1986) Argumentativité et informativité. In: Meyer M (ed) De la métaphysique à la rhétorique. Bruxelles, Editions de L’Université de Bruxelles
Eco U (1975) Trattato di semiotica generale. Bompiani, Milano
Green-Pedersen NJ (1984) The tradition of topics in the Middle Age. Philosophia, Munich, Germany
Hallden S (1960) True love, true humour and true religion: a semantic study. Gleerlup, Lund
Hare R (1952) The language of morals. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Manicas P, Kruger A (1968) Essentials of logic. American Book, New York
Plantin C (2004) On the inseparability of reason and emotion in argumentation. In: Bollowe J, Weigand E (eds) Emotions in dialogic interaction. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 265–276
Quintilian MF (1996) Institutio oratoria. Translated by H. E. Butler. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press
Rigotti E (2005a) Towards a typology of manipulative processes. In: de Saussure L, Schulz P (eds) New perspectives on manipulation and ideologies: theoretical aspects. Benjamins, Amsterdam
Rigotti E (2005b) Congruity theory and argumentation. Stud Commun Sci 75–96
Rigotti E, Rocci A (2006) Denotation vs. connotation. In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics second edition (pp. 1–9). Elsevier
Rocci A (2005) Connective predicated in dialogic and monologic argumentation. Stud Commun Sci 97–118
Schiappa E (2003) Defining reality: definitions and the politics of meaning. Carbondale, Southern Illinois University Press
Solomon R (2003) Not passion’s slave. Oxford University Press, New York
Stevenson CL (1937) The emotive meaning of ethical terms. Mind 46:14–31
Stevenson CL (1938) Persuasive definitions. Mind 47:331–350
Stevenson CL (1944) Ethics and language. Yale University Press, New Haven
Stump E (1989) Dialectic and its place in the development of medieval logic. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y
Toulmin SE (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Vendler Z (1964) The grammar of goodness. Philos Rev 72(4):446–465
Walton D (2003) Ethical argumentation. Lexington, Lanham, Maryland
Walton D (2005) Deceptive arguments containing persuasive language and persuasive definitions. Argumentation 19:159–186
Walton D (2006) Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge University Press, New York
Walton D, Macagno F (2008). Rhetorical argumentation using emotive words, in press
Walton D, Reed C, Macagno F (2008) Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press, New York
Welsh P (1957) On the nature of inference. Philos Rev 66(4):509–524