Media Argumentation: Dialect, Persuasion and Rhetoric

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\rthe 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