'Dialogue, Argumentation, and Belief Revision: A study of apologetic conversations in West ...

377 Pages·2016·1.88 MB·English

by  Gary Stephens

Middlesex University Research Repository
An open access repository of
Middlesex University research
http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk
Stephens,GaryAllen(2016)Dialogue,argumentation,andbeliefrevision: astudyofapologetic
conversations in West Cameroon. PhD thesis, Middlesex University. [Thesis]
Final accepted version (with author’s formatting)
This version is available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/21224/
Copyright:
MiddlesexUniversityResearchRepositorymakestheUniversity’sresearchavailableelectronically.
Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners
unlessotherwisestated. Theworkissuppliedontheunderstandingthatanyuseforcommercialgain
is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study
without prior permission and without charge.
Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or
extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining
permissioninwritingfromthecopyrightholder(s). Theymaynotbesoldorexploitedcommerciallyin
any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s).
Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the
author’s name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pag-
ination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the
date of the award.
If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the
Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address:
[email protected]
The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated.
See also repository copyright: re-use policy: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/policies.html#copy
‘Dialogue, Argumentation, and Belief Revision: A study of apologetic
conversations in West Cameroon’

Gary Allen Stephens
OCMS, Ph. D

ABSTRACT

This work studies dialogue, argumentation, and their relationship to belief revision in
person-to-person apologetics in five West Cameroonian dialogues. The seeming
irrelevance of Western Apologetics to West Cameroonian thought is the problem that
stimulated the study. The primary methodological steps of the study include obtaining
meticulously transcribed scripts of unrehearsed conversations, and subjecting those
transcripts to an inquiry about the presence and nature of dialogue, argument patterns,
commitment, questions, rhetoric, and belief revision in the conversations. These primary
tools are drawn from Commitment in Dialogue (1995), Argumentation Schemes (2008),
‘A Truth Maintenance System’ (1979), ‘Reason Maintenance and Belief Revision’
(1992), and related sources. The initial premise, to be tested by the research, is that these
conversational elements are present, and that the theories are useful in understanding the
dialogues’ rationality. The second, but no less important, premise of the study is that this
research contributes to an understanding of the nature and role of the cumulative case in
the practice of person-to-person apologetics in West Cameroon and cultural situations
dominated by relativism. Chapter 1 introduces the background of the research and the
questions of the inquiry, which I call ‘tools’. Chapter 2 questions the significance of the
tools and the analysis of the data for person-to-person apologetics in pluralistic contexts.
Chapters 3-7 document the analysis of the dialogues. And chapter 8 ends with a
summary of the evidence for the thesis of the work: ‘A belief’s entrenchment, the result
of argument patterns converging into a cumulative case for the belief, is primarily
sensitive to understanding and revision in the context of dialogue.’ This work
contributes to the understanding of modern African rationality, and the relationships of
dialogue, argument, belief revision, and the cumulative case in relativistic contexts.
‘Dialogue, Argumentation, and Belief Revision:
A study of apologetic conversations in West
Cameroon’

by

Gary Allen Stephens
B.A. (University of Victoria)
D.C.S. (Regent College)
M. Div. (Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary)

Studies in Apologetics
Primary Supervisor: Dr. Benno van den Toren
Second Supervisor: Dr. Emma Wild-Wood
House Tutor: Dr. David Singh

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
At Middlesex University

February 2016
Oxford Centre for Mission Studies

Declaration Page
This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not
being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree.

Signed
Date 9-10-2016
Statement One
This thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated.
Where correction services have been used, the extent and nature of the correction is
clearly marked in a footnote.
Other sources are acknowledged by midnotes or footnotes giving explicit
references. A compilation of the complete dialogues and a bibliography is appended.

Signed
Date 9-10-2016
Statement Two
This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and
that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I
hereby give consent for my thesis, if approved, to be available for photocopying by the
British Library and for Inter-Library Loan, for open access to the Electronic Theses
Online Service (EthoS) linked to the British Library, and for the title and summary to be
made available to outside organizations.

Signed
Date 9-10-2016

i
Dedication

First, this work is dedicated to the students I taught in West Cameroon over a
period of twenty five years. My interaction with these men and women taught me much
about the culture and rationality on display in the following dialogues.
Furthermore, this thesis is dedicated to missionaries everywhere who are called to
communicate with those who have different ways of reasoning about the world. Though
it contains no method that guarantees understanding or communication between those
of different cultural backgrounds, it chronicles a creative approach to understanding and
communication.
Lastly, and most importantly, it is dedicated to furthering St. Paul’s mission ‘to
demolish arguments and every pretention that sets itself up against the knowledge of
God, and…take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ’ (The Bible, 2
Corinthians 10: 5).

ii
Acknowledgements

Churchill defined courage as ‘grace under pressure’. I could never have finished
this work without the grace of God faithfully operating in my life over the ten years this
project has taken.
That grace has been expressed to me through the friendly, listening ear of
Professor David Singh, my mentor, and the entire OCMS staff who have often softened
the blows of my own incompetence for which I claim full responsibility.
I acknowledge the gracious willingness of Dr. Benno van den Toren and Dr. Emma
Wild-Wood to take me and an unconventional research project under their wings. Their
patience and willingness to work with my idiosyncrasies is hereby acknowledged and
deeply appreciated. Dr. Wild-Wood played an important role in questioning me about
the project’s cultural setting. Dr. van den Toren provided valuable insight into the
structure or lack of structure in my work.
I deeply appreciate the hospitality that Elaine Lee has shown in hosting me over
the last few years. Her graciousness made Enysham seem like home.
Dr. Alexander Bochman’s encouragement was crucial at a point when I had almost
lost the confidence to finish the task.
Mrs. Laurie Alloway was of inestimable help in proofreading this dissertation and
engaging its structure and ideas.
Lastly, certainly not least, I express my deepest appreciation to my wife Ruth for
her support over these years. In difficult circumstances, she has gracefully
accommodated my involvement in the project. Without her commitment, the project
could not have been finished.

iii
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................ III
CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... IV
PREFACE: THE AUTHOR’S PERSPECTIVE AS A RESEARCHER ...... IX
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION.................................................................. 1
1.1 The Research Setting 2
1.2 Reasoning and Cognition 2
1.3 Difficulties in Teaching Logic as a Cognitive Process 3
1.4 Reasoning Together in a Dialogue 6
1.5 The Thesis of the Dissertation 14
1.6 Aims & Objectives 14
1.7 The Epistemological Problem 16
1.7.1 Solutions to the Problem 17
1.7.2 A Solution to the Problem Employed Here 17
1.7.3 A Factive State of Mind and Belief Revision 18
1.7.4 Limitations and Strengths of this Epistemology 21
1.8 Methodology: An Overview 22
1.9 Methodology: Data Gathering 23
1.10 Methodology: Analysis 26
1.10.1 Methodology: Dialogue and Dialogue Type 27
1.10.2 Methodology: Argumentation Schemes 30
1.11 Critical Questions in Argumentation Schemes 33
1.12 Methodology: Questions and Answers in Dialogues 35
1.12.1 Methodology: Questions 35
1.12.2 Questions in the Context of Belief Revision 36
1.13 Methodology: Dialogue Structure 37
1.14 Methodology: Revealing Commitments 41
1.15 Methodology: Belief Revision Theory 43
1.15.1. AGM Theory: The Basics 44
1.15.2 Questioning the Property of Success 46
1.15.3 Reason Maintenance System (RMS) 49
1.16 Methodology: Interviews of the Apologists 51
1.17 The Argument of the Work 52
1.17.1 The Background and Tools of the Argument 52
1.17.2 Person-to-Person Apologetics and African Conversations 52
1.17.3 Argument, ‘Life Scripts’, and Entrenchment 52
1.17.4 Curiosity, Questions, and Knowledge 53
1.17.5 Rhetoric and Evidence 53
1.17.6 An African Socratic Dialogue 53
1.17.7 Commitment and Identity 53
1.17.8 The Evaluation of the Theories 53
1.18 The Contributions that this Research Makes to Knowledge 54
iv
CHAPTER TWO: APOLOGETIC INSIGHTS OUT OF AFRICA ............... 55
2.1 One Study in Cognition: Two Dimensions 55
2.2 The Isolation of Apologetics from Relevant Disciplines 57
2.3 The Vagueness of ‘Dialogue’ and ‘Conversation’ in Works on
Apologetics 58
2.4 Different Views of Dialogue and Conversation in Four
Apologists 59
2.5 The Difficulty and a Way Forward 62
2.6 A Limited View of Informal Argument 63
2.7 A Sampling of Recent Informal Arguments 65
2.8 The Way Forward: Managing Informal Arguments 70
2.9 A Inadequate View of What Might be Accomplished in a
Dialogue 72
2.10 The Goal(s) of an Apologetic Conversation in a Pluralistic Context
72
2.11 Moving Forward: Belief Revision in Apologetic Conversations 75
2.12 Dialogue Research in West Cameroon 76
2.13 Western Cameroon: A Significantly Educated, Multi-ethnic Society
77
2.14 The Factive Status of Ethnic Belief 79
2.15 The Social Nature of Cameroon 80
2.16 Reasoning Driven by Explicit Theoretical and Practical
Concerns 80
2.17 Moving Forward: The Significance of this Research for Western
Apologetics 81
CHAPTER THREE: A PRACTITIONER OF ETHNIC MEDICINE ............ 82
3.1 Introduction 82
3.2 A Summary of lines 1-52 84
3.3 The Dialogue: Lines 1-52 85
3.4 Narrative 86
3.5 An Analysis of lines 1-52 91
3.6 The dialogue: (54-72, 84-91) 95
3.7 The Nature of the Dialogue and its Argument 95
3.8 An Analysis of Lines 51-107 98
3.9 Ernest’s Primary Argument (117-138) 101
3.10 A Narration of the Passage 102
3.11 Analysis 103
3.12 The argument from Scripture (176-193) 104
3.13 Narration and Analysis (174-193) 105
3.14 Argument from Motivation 107
3.15 Summary/Narrative 107
3.16 Analysis 108
3.17 The Literary Argument (227-238, 253-269) 114
3.18 Context, Summary and Narrative 114
3.19 Analysis 116
3.20 Ernest’s Commitments and Concession (350-370) 117
3.21 Context and Narrative 118
3.22 Analysis 119
v