Why Images Cannot be Arguments, But Moving Ones Might

Abstract

Some have suggested that images can be arguments. Images can certainly bolster the acceptability of individual premises. We worry, though, that the static nature of images prevents them from ever playing a genuinely argumentative role. To show this, we call attention to a dilemma. The conclusion of a visual argument will either be explicit or implicit. If a visual argument includes its (explicit) conclusion, then that conclusion must be demarcated from the premise(s) or otherwise the argument will beg the question. If a visual argument does not include its (implicit) conclusion, then the premises on display must license that specific conclusion and not its opposite, in accordance with some demonstrable rationale. We show how major examples from the literature fail to escape this dilemma. Drawing inspiration from the graphical logic of C. S. Peirce, we suggest instead that images can be manipulated (erased, dragged, copied, etc.) in a way that overcomes the dilemma. Diagrammatic reasoning can take one stepwise from an initial visual layout to a conclusion-thereby providing a principled rationale that bars opposite conclusions-and the visual inscription of this correct conclusion can come afterward in time-thereby distinguishing the conclusion from the premises. Even though this practical application of Peirce's logical ideas to informal contexts requires that one make adjustments, we believe it points to a dynamic conception of visual argumentation that will prove more fertile in the long run.

Creative Reconstructions of Political Imagery in an Instagram-Based Election Campaign: Implications for Visual Rhetorical Literacy

“…This is not to say that rhetorical literacy, as any set of human competencies, is a panacea that will dismantle barriers and prevent fraud. In fact, it can also perpetuate inequality between those with and without the cultural capital to acquire it (Young & Kendall, 2009;Champagne & Pietarinen, 2020).…”

“…However, to offer implications for visual literacy, it is important to work within a methodological frame that is not only clearly articulated but also non-reductionist, given that visual communication is much more diffuse and unstructured than verbal communication. Indeed, in argumentation theory, there is an ongoing debate whether there indeed are "visual arguments" in photographs (Champagne & Pietarinen, 2020). In this section we calibrate our approach by bringing together two wellknown frameworks that can enhance the task of mapping visual persuasion in political campaigning.…”

Diagrams and alien ways of thinking

“…Observe that, despite the fact that I have redrawn the diagram-the static format of this publication compels me to-everything could (and should) transpire at the same location. The Peircean view thus regards inferences, not as frozen patterns in some Platonic realm, but as tangible manipulations of signs unfolding in time (see Champagne & Pietarinen, 2018).…”