Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument

402 Pages·2000·14.77 MB·English

by  Ralph H. Johnson

MANIFEST RATIONALITY
A Pragmatic Theory of Argument
Ralph H. Johnson
Universitu ofWindsor
LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS
2000 Mahwah, New Jersey London
Copyrig©h t2 000b yL awrenEcrleb aumA ssociaItnecs.,
Alrli ghrtess ervNeod p.a rto ft he bookm ayb er eproduicne d
anyf ormb,yp hotosmtiactr,o forrme,tri evsaly steomra, n yo ther
means,w ithotuhtpe ri orw ritten permiosfts hipeou nb lisher.
LawrenEcrel bauAms sociaItnecsP.,u, b lishers
I 0 IndustriAa vle nue
MahwahN,e wJ ers0e7y4 30
Covedre sibgynK athryHno ughtalLiancge y
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
JohnsoRnalp,h H .
Manifersatt ion:a lpiart ayg matthieco oryf ar gumenI tR alpHh. Johnson.
p.cm.
Inclubdiebsl iograrpehfiecraelan ncdei sn dexes.
ISBN0 -8058-21(7c3l-o:2t a hlkp.a pe-r-)ISBN0 -8058-21(7p4b-:k0a . lkp.a per)
I. ReasoninIg.T. i tle.
BC177. J5240 00
153.4'3--dc21
99-058491
Bookpsu blisbhyeL da wrenEcrel bauAms sociaartee psr intoenad c id-fpraepee r,
andt hebiirn diarneg sc hosefno srt renangdt hd urability.
Printientd h Uen iteSdt atoefsA merica
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
To Maggie,
for her love and support through all these years
Contents
Preface xi
Introduction
PART 1: THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT 9
1. CONTEXT: ARGUMENTATION AS A CULTURAL PRACTICE 11
Argumentation and Rationality 12
Argumentation Under Seige 14
The Network Problem 21
The Centrality and Importance of Argumentation 23
Argumentation Distinguished 24
The Benefits of Argumentation 26
Conclusion 27
2. CONTEXT: THE STUDY OF ARGUMENTATION 28
The Re-emergence of Argumentation Theory 28
Argumentation Theory Versus the Theory of Argument 30
Informal Logic as a Theory of Argument 31
Setting the Stage 32
The Nature of Theory of Argument 37
Govier's Typology 42
Previous Theories of Argument 46
Adequacy Conditions for-�-Theory of Argument 52
Conclusion 56
3. PARADIGM ABANDONED: CRITIQUE OF DEDUCTIVISM 57
FDL: A Monistic Theory 58 ,.
· ·
FDL Criticized 59
FDL Rejected 78
Positivism: A Dualist Theory of Argument 81
Conductivism: A Pluralistic Theory of Argument 84
Conclusion 88
vii
viii CON'IENTS
4. LESSONS FROM THE PAST 91
The Truth Behind Conductivism 92
Excursus: The Theory of Reasoning 95
Hamblin on the Concept of Argument 98
The pr·oblems With FDL: An Alternative View 102
The Mathematicization of Logic 104
Lessons From the Past 105
Conclusion 107
PART II: A PRAGMATIC THEORY OF ARGUMENT 109
5. INFORMAL LOGIC: AN ALTERNATIVE THEORY OF ARGUMENT 111
A Brief Account of the Rise of Informal Logic 112
What.Is Informal Logic? 116
Informal Logic and the Theory of Analysis 123
Informal Logic and the Theory of Appraisal 135
Who, or What, Then, Is an Informal Logician? 140
Conclusion 142
6. ARGUMENT AS MANIFEST RATIONALITY: 143
A PRAGMATIC CONCEPTION
Critique of Current Definitions of Argument 144
A Brief Detour Into the History of Argumentation 150
A New Framework for the Theory of Analysis 154
Fundamental Characteristics of Argumentation 159
Rethinking the Nature of Argument 164
Objections and Replies 169
Walton on Argument and Reasoning 175
Benefits of the Pragmatic Approach 177
7. WHAT MAKES A GOOD ARGUMENT? TOWARD 180
A THEORY OF EVALUATION
Further Reflections on Hamblin 182
Criteria for Good Argument 189
Other Normative Criteria 209
Satisfaction of the Adequacy Conditions 213
Conclusion 216
8. PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM 217
Criticism and Evaluation 217
The Principle of Vulnerability 223
The Principle of Parity 236
The Principle of Logical Neutrality 237
The Principle of Discrimination 240
Responding to Criticism 247
Concluding Reflections on Criticism 248
CON1ENTS ix
PART Ill: MATTERS DIALECTICAL 249
9. CRITICISMS, OBJECTIONS, AND REPLIES 251
Informal Logic-An Oxymoron 252
Informal Logic-see Formal Logic 260
Informal Logic-see Rhetoric 263
Informal Logic-See Epistemology 271
Informal Logic-See Sexism 283
Conclusion 289
10. ALTERNATIVE THEORIES OF ARGUMENT 290
Dialogue Logics 290
Field Theories 291 I
The Pragma-Dialectical Approach 309
Willard's Theory of Argumentation 320
Conclusion 324
11. OUTSTANDING ISSUES AND THE RESEARCH AGENDA 326
Possible Solutions to Outstanding Problems 326
Research Agenda for Informal Logic 343
Research Agenda for the Theory of Argument 351
Conclusion 353
12. RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT 354
The Gap Between Theory and Practice: Some Reflections
on Toulmin's Revolution 354
Future Directions for the Theory of Argument 359
The Theory of Reasoning 362
The Significance of Informal Logic 365
ConClusion 369
References 371
Author Index 381
Subject index 385

Preface
1his book is an attempt to work through some of the theoretical issues that
have been accumulating in informal logic since the 1980s. At the same time,
it is an �ttempt to define a core position in the theory of argument in which
those issues can be further explored. As my position develops, other issues
will arise that transcend this discussion and can only be answered by the
development of a theory of reasoning. That is a recurrent theme in what
follows.
When I began thinking about arguments and how to appraise them more
than 25 years ago, I thought of an argument mainly as a product. Under the
influence of people like my colleagues, Tony Blair, Joe Wenzel, Charles
Willard, and other members of the speech communication community, I
gradually came to an appreciation of an argument as a process. Under the
influence of Dewey (as interpreted by Bernstein, 1971) and more recently
having benefited from the work of Govier, Barth, and Walton, I have begun
to see the importance of viewing an argument as the product of the practice
of argumentation. A satisfactory theory of argument must include all three
dimensions of argument: product, process, and practice. That, too, is a
recurrent theme in this book.
In this volume, I have attempted to occupy middle ground. The approach
to argument I advocate is broader than that of traditional logic, which sees
argument as a formal structure. On the other hand, it is narrower and stricter
than that advocated by some other theorists; for example, Willard and
Gilbert, who view argument as a type of communication.
The underlying concern that motivates this work is the health of the
practice of argumentation as an important cultural artifact. As I read the
signs of the times, they are not propitious as far as argumentation is
concemed.lf, as I believe, argumentation belongs on the list of endangered
species, we must take special pains to protect it, to ensure its survival, and
to nourish it. Part of what this entails is distinguishing it carefully from,
while still seeing it in relationship to other forms of reasoning and other
sociocultural practices that it resembles. That, too, is a recurrent theme in
this book.
xi
xil PREFACE
A further concern underlying this work is for logic as a discipline. In the
20th century, logic turned to mathematics for insight and focus. Once result
was the development of powerful theories-logic became a science rich in
theory, whereas a focus on logic as a craft virtually disappeared.P erhaps
that is what Nietzsche (1976) was thinking about when he wrote, "Learning
to think: in our schools one no longer has any idea of this, Even in
universities, even among the real scholars of philosophy, logic as a theory,
as a practice, as a craft, is beginning to die out ... (p. 512).1
As is evident, I have been influenced in the development of my views by
the work of a great many philosophers, logicians, speech communication
theorists, and discussions and correspondence over the years. I mention
only four here. First, the work of Stephen Toulmin provided important
leads and support but whose work I now see as limited in important ways.
Second, I am also heavily indebted to E. M. Barth, whose approach to
argumentation combines the desire for rigor associated with formal logic,
along with the recognition that logic must be engaged in the sociopolitical
sphere. Third, it has been with the greatest pleasure that toward the end of
the writing of this book, I had the opportunity to read again a series of
papers by Henry W. Johnstone, Jr. I was pleased to find that, in many ways,
our ideas are similar. His work was particularly helpful in the rewriting of
chapter 8. Finally, I am deeply indebted to my colleague and friend, Tony
Blair, for more than 25 years of a continuing and fruitful conversation about
these (any many other) matters.
-Ralph H. Johnson
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A great many friends and colleagues have read various parts of this work,
and provided me with first-rate criticism, often accompanied by suggestions
about how to do it better.I have not taken them all but I am certainly grateful
for having had the benefit of their ideas. These colleagues and friends have
also provided the kind of moral support without which this book could
not have been written. Here, discrimination (in the sense talked about in
this book) is scarcely possible and so they are listed here alphabetically. I
thank you all, each and every one, and ask forgiveness and understanding
from those whose names I have failed to include.
1Twilight of the Idols (The "'Improvers"' of Mankind), p. 512.
PREFACE xlii
I alswoi stho t hankt heed itaotrL sa wrenEcrel baAusms ociaItnecfs.o, r
shepherdtihnipgsr ojeaclto nbge,g innwiinthgL indBaa thgatthee,an n
assiducooupsy ediwhtoosre nIa dmoen ot know ath foorro ugjho obn t he
typescarnidep stp,e citaoSl olnyd Gruai demfaonhr e cro ntinguueidd ance
ands upporctr uanttic mhe I. a lsthoa nkm yr eseaarscshi stGaanrFtyo, g al,
fohirs h elnpa ilidnogw nr efereanncdceo sm piling thiend ex.
Colleagues: Fonner students:
Jonathan Adler Jill Binker
Derek Allen Brad Bowen
Else Barth Oonald Caron
Robert Binkley Debra Cox
Tony Blair Wichert Hochert
Jerry Cederblom Takuzo Konishi
Frans van Eemeren Jay Latkoczky
Alec Fisher David Macdonald
James Freeman Salim Murad
Dick Fulkerson Jessica Shumake
Michael Gilbert Matthias Mooij
Jen Glaser Elizabeth Skakoon
Jean Goodwin
Trudy Govier
LeoGroarke
Rob Grootendorst
Hans Villem Hansen
David Hitchcock
John Hoaglund
Sally Jackson
Scott Jacobs
Fred Kauffeld
Erik C. W. Krabbe
Michael Leff
John Mackenzie
Dennis Matthies
Gerald Nosich
Richard Paul
Bob Pinto
Nicholas Rescher
Michael Scriven
Harvey Siegel
Christopher Tindale
Marius Vermaak
Douglas Walton
Perry Weddle