The New Dialectic. Conversational Contexts of Argument

318 Pages·1998·40.92 MB·English

by  Douglas N. Walton

THE NEW DIALECTIC
CONVERSATIONAL CONTEXTS OF ARGUMENT
Because developments in informal logic have been based, for the most
part, on idealized and abstract models, the tools available for argument
analysis are not easily adapted to the needs of everyday argumentation
In this book Douglas Walton proposes a new and practical approach
to argument analysis based on his theory that different standards for
argument must apply in the case of different types of dialogue
By refining and extending the existing formal classifications of dia-
logue, Walton shows that each dialogue type, be it inquiry, negotiation,
or critical discussion, has its own set of goals He goes on to demon-
strate that an argument can best be evaluated m terms of its contri-
bution, positive or negative, to the goals of the particular dialogue it is
meant to further In this way he illustrates how argument can be
brought into the service of many types of dialogue, and thus has
valuable uses that go well beyond the mere settling of disputes and
differences
By reaching back to the Aristotelian roots of logic as an applied,
practical discipline and by formulating a new framework of rationality
for evaluating arguments, Douglas Walton restores a much-needed
balance to argument analysis This book complements and extends his
Argument Structure A Pragmatic Theory
(Toronto Studies in Philosophy)
DOUGLAS WALTON is Professor in the Department of Philosophy, Univer-
sity of Winnipeg

DOUGLAS N WALTON
The New Dialectic:
Conversational Contexts of
Argument
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS
Toronto Buffalo London
© University of Toronto Press Incorporated 1998
Toronto Buffalo London
Printed in Canada
ISBN 0 8020-4143-4 (cloth)
ISBN 0 8020-7987-3 (paper)
©
Printed on acid-free paper
Toronto Studies m Philosophy
Editors James R Brown and Calvin Normore
Canadian Cataloguing m Publication Data
Walton, Douglas N (Douglas Neil), 1942-
The new dialectic conversational contexts of argument
(Toronto studies in philosophy)
Includes index
ISBN 0-8020-4143-4 (bound) ISBN 0-8020 7987-3 (pbk )
1 Reasoning 2 Logic I Title II Series
BC177 W341998 168 C97-932464-5
University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its
publishing program of the Canada Council for the Arts and the Ontario Arts
Council
This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Humanities
and Social Sciences Federation of Canada, using funds provided by the Social
Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
For Karen,
With love

Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IX
Chapter 1 Introduction 3
1 Statement of Purpose 4
2 Informal Logic and Fallacies 7
3 Aristotle's Five Types of Arguments 11
4 The Wanmg of Dialectic 14
5 Locke's Four Kinds of Arguments 16
6 Fallacies of Relevance 21
7 Other Important Fallacies 25
8 The New Approach to Dialectic 28
9 Types of Dialogue 30
10 Dialectical Relevance 34
Chapter 2 Persuasion Dialogue 37
1 Mam Characteristics 37
2 Argument m Persuasion Dialogue 41
3 Commitment 43
4 Critical Discussion 46
5 Nonexplicit Commitments 49
6 Rigorous and Permissive Persuasion Dialogue
7 Maieutic Function 57
8 The Problem of Enthymemes 60
9 Relevance m Persuasion Dialogue 63
10 Evaluating Criticisms of Irrelevance 65
viix Contents
Chapter 3 The Inquiry 69
1 Main Characteristics 70
2 Advancing States of Knowledge 72
3 Aristotelian Demonstration 76
4 Is Scientific Argumentation an Inquiry7 78
5 Other Subtypes of Inquiry 81
6 Argument and Explanation 85
7 Black and Beardsley on the Inquiry 87
8 Cases of Public Inquiries 91
9 Profiles of Dialogue m the Inquiry 94
10 Relevance m the Inquiry 97
Chapter 4 Negotiation Dialogue 100
1 Mam Characteristics 100
2 Subtypes 103
3 The Game-Theory Model of Negotiation 104
4 Commitment m Negotiation Dialogue 106
5 Relevance and Irrelevance 109
6 Threats as Arguments 113
7 Dialectical Shifts from Negotiation 116
8 Solutions for Deadlock 119
9 Bias and Advocacy 121
10 Advocacy Advertising 122
Chapter 5 Information-Seeking Dialogue 126
1 Mam Characteristics 126
2 The Interview 130
3 Searchmg a Database 132
4 Position to Know 134
5 Classification of Questions 136
6 Presuppositions of Questions 140
7 ITow Can a Question Be a Fallacy7 141
8 Expert Consultation Dialogue 143
9 Peirastic and Exetastic Dialogues 145
10 Relevance m Information-Seeking Dialogue 147
Chapter 6 Deliberation 151
1 Main Characteristics 151
2 Practical Reasonmg 153
3 Argument from Consequences 157
Contents ix
4 The Dilemma 160
5 Stages and Dynamic Aspects of Deliberation 161
6 Aristotle's Account of Deliberation 166
7 The Town Hall Meeting 169
8 Public and Political Deliberation 171
9 Relevance in Deliberation 173
10 Relevance Across Joined Dialogues 175
Chapter 7 Eristic Dialogue 178
1 The Quarrel as Paradigm 178
2 Eristic Dialogue 181
3 Stages of the Quarrel 183
4 Closed Attitude of Eristic Dialogue 186
5 Plato on Eristic Argument 187
6 Aristotle on Contentious Argument 189
7 Modern Revival of Eristic Argument 191
8 Relevance m Eristic Dialogue 193
9 Subtypes of Eristic Dialogue 194
10 Identifying Characteristics of Eristic Dialogue "196
Chapter 8 Dialectical Shifts 198
1 Types of Shifts 198
2 Licit and Illicit Shifts 200
3 Licit Shifts to and from Expert Consultation Dialogue 203
4 Illicit Shifts and Fallacious Arguments 205
5 The Infomercial 206
6 Deceptive Format 208
7 Success and Evolution of Infomercials 210
8 Educational and Print Formats 212
9 Contextual Evidence for Retrospective Evaluation 214
10 Obstruction of Goals by Dialectical Shifts 215
Chapter 9 Mixed Discourse 218
1 The Case of Question Period 218
2 The Problem of Fallacies m Political Discourse 221
3 Political Debate as Mixed Discourse 223
4 Evaluatmg Arguments in Political Discourse 224
5 The Case of Sales Dialogue 227
6 Evaluating Fallacies m Sales Dialogue 230
7 Argumentation in a Legal Trial 232
x Contents
8 Pedagogical Dialogue 235
9 Aristotle's Five Types of Arguments Revisited 237
10 Aristotle on Dialectical Argument 240
Chapter 10 The Dialectical Method of Evaluating
Arguments 245
1 Argument Evaluation 246
2 The Four-Step Method 249
3 Evaluating Dialectical Relevance 252
4 Evaluatmg a Case for Relevance 254
5 Fallacies, Blunders, and Errors 257
6 Fallacies and Dialectical Shifts 261
7 Fallacies Reconceptualized m the New Dialectic 265
8 Dialectical Advice for Using These Arguments 269
9 Evidence Required to Support a Dialectical Evaluation 272
10 Prospects for the New Dialectic 275
NOTES 279
REFERENCES 285
INDEX 295