Practical Reasoning Arguments: A Modular Approach

Macagno, Fabrizio; Walton, Douglas

doi:10.1007/s10503-018-9450-5

Cited by 34 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1). The latter type of argumentation, on the other hand, justifies a recommendation or an advice regarding our lives: the recommendation whether or not to perform an action regarding an object o situated in the public space (see (Fairclough 2016;Macagno and Walton 2018) for the analysis of practical reasoning in public debates).…”

Section: Scheme Of General Ethotic Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethotic arguments, such as arguments from expert opinion and ad hominem arguments, play an important role in communication practice. In this paper, we argue that there is another type of reasoning from ethos, in which people argue about actions in the world. These subspecies of ethotic arguments are very common in public debates: societies are involved in heated disputes about what should be done with monuments of historical figures such as Stalin or Colston: Should we demolish the building they funded? Should we revere their statues? Should the street named after them be renamed?; and the general public vividly argue about what should be done with the legacy of producers, directors and actors in debates of the #MeToo movement: Should their new movies be distributed? Should their scenes be deleted from motion pictures? Should their stars from the Hollywood Walk of Fame be removed? Many arguments in these debates boil down to the character of the public figures: He was a slave trader!—But he is a part of our history; He harassed a young girl!—But he is an important actor. The reasoning step here is legitimised by the association between a person and an extra-linguistic object: the association between a historical figure and their statue or between an actor and their movie. The nature of this association is explained in the paper using Peirce’s theory of signs. We propose to extend an existing approach to patterns of reasoning from ethos that will help us to shed new light on ethotic argumentation and open an avenue for a systematic account of these unexplored argument forms.

show abstract

Section: Scheme Of General Ethotic Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3. La conclusión de la inferencia en la forma: para lograr Y debo realizar X. Para analizar textos o diálogos en los que el razonamiento práctico abunda existen diversos modelos, como el de Fairclogh y Fairclough ( 2012) o, el más reciente, la aproximación modular de Macagno y Walton (Macagno & Walton, 2018). Sin embargo, por un lado, en el presente análisis utilizaremos las listas de esquemas argumentativos compiladas por Huberto Marraud y por Douglas Walton, Fabrizio Macagno y Christopher Reed, (Marraud, 2016;Walton, 2000Walton, , 2013bWalton et al, 2008) consignados en la Tabla 1 y analizaremos la subargumentación que les corresponde: cuántos argumentos presenta el autor, cuál es el contenido temático de estos argumentos, qué esquemas utiliza y con qué frecuencia lo hace.…”

Section: Esquemas De Argumentaciónunclassified

Razones de excepción

Castañeda

2021

RIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

En el presente artículo analizaremos la Memoria sobre la necesidad de reformar la ley del Congreso Constituyente de 1821 escrita por el entonces senador Joaquín Mosquera con el fin de derogar una ley previa sobre la manumisión de esclavos. Para el presente análisis, nos serviremos de algunas herramientas de las Teorías de la Argumentación: Identificaremos el contenido argumentativo del texto, estandarizaremos las partes de los argumentos y la estructura de la argumentación, representaremos esta estructura en un diagrama, clasificaremos los argumentos en esquemas y luego analizaremos la frecuencia de estos esquemas en la argumentación. Esperamos que los resultados presentados a lo largo de esta investigación sirvan como insumo para futuras pesquisas acerca del contexto social en el que emergen no sólo este discurso sino otros del mismo tipo y para la revisión o formulación de los modelos con los que se analizan las deliberaciones en general.

show abstract

“…Here, the physician is providing a reason for an action, i. e., measuring the blood pressure, expressing the inferential principle connecting a condition to a recommendation. This inference is commonly described as a type of practical argument (Macagno and Walton 2018;Walton 1990b), which can be reconstructed considering only the minimum role of the metaphor, namely indicating a condition of the organism that justifies the need of action.…”

Section: Metaphorical Arguments: "Dancing"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The metaphorical move thus presents a reason for action based on specific properties of a state of affairs, whichconsidering the definition(s) of the vehicle and the properties resulting from its dictionary meaningare purely descriptive. For this reason, the only scheme that can represent the relationship between a state of affairs not assessed as positive or negative nor defined in terms of the interlocutor's interests and a practical recommendation is a rule-based argument (Macagno and Walton 2018).…”

Section: Metaphorical Arguments: "Dancing"mentioning

confidence: 99%

How can metaphors communicate arguments?

Macagno

2020

Intercultural Pragmatics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metaphors are considered as instruments crucial for persuasion. However, while many studies and works have focused on their emotive, communicative, and persuasive effects, the argumentative dimension that represents the core of their “persuasiveness” is almost neglected. This paper addresses the problem of explaining how metaphors can communicate arguments, and how it is possible to reconstruct and justify them. To this purpose, a distinction is drawn between the arguments that are communicated metaphorically and interpreted based on relevance considerations, and the ones that are triggered implicitly by the use of a metaphorical expression. In both cases, metaphorical arguments are reconstructed through different patterns of argument, called argumentation schemes (Walton, Reed and Macagno 2008). However, while the purpose of a metaphorical sequence of discourse (called metaphorical move) can guide and justify the reconstruction of the argument that can sufficiently support the intended conclusion in a persuasive move, a more complex analysis is needed for analyzing the additional inferences that a metaphorical move can trigger. These inferences are claimed to represent part of the connotation of the metaphorical expression and can be captured through its most frequent collocations, determinable using some tools of the corpus linguistics.

show abstract

Practical Reasoning Arguments: A Modular Approach

Cited by 34 publications

References 62 publications

Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World

Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World

Razones de excepción

How can metaphors communicate arguments?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About