Customer Reviews

Media Argumentation: Dialect, Persuasion and Rhetoric

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Argumentation theory finds warrant for its claim to analytic superiority from the idea that we naturally evaluate the relative strength of arguments from the standpoint of conventionally established, objective criteria, and not by transposing arguments into deductive schemae and evaluating for validity. Because the claims of the vast majority of arguments are uncertain, we habitually evaluate for strength, rather than try to prove validity. Argumentation theory thus provides tools for the analysis of arguments, more accessible, user-friendly, and utile, to a public not initiated to the rigor of deductive proof, which is, in itself, limited in application, and disputable in its methodology (esp. re:truth-theory, quantification).
Walton is a giant in the burgeoning field of informal logic. In this book, he raises his game to a new level. The claim was once made that "a technological society is inevitably a totalitarian society". Any witness to the little more than half a century old phenomenon of television and its social impact would have to give pause to consider the importance of developing tools for the analysis of arguments we receive by way of electronic media. Walton's project, which examines arguments as they mediate and are mediated by the media, is a major contribution to understanding of a crucial aspect of the way in which most people acquire most of their information: why we are more prone to a seemingly uncritical acceptance of flawed and sometimes dangerous arguments because they are televised. The book is comprehensive in its analysis. While focusing on T.V., Walton delineates a texbook survey of argumentation theory in what most of us would consider its most critical application. The study of propaganda, such a factor in the arguments of corporate owned media pundits (no linguistic confusion intended), is particularly instructive. While the abstract nature of the subject makes for admittedly dry reading, the importance of the discussion here, and its significance for our future, justifies perserverance. Can one really afford to remain unschooled in argument in times like these? This book is the best effort yet at a one-stop shop.

Three children grew up together in a Greek garden: Logic, Dialectic and Rhetoric. According to Walton, Logic became rigorous and formalized and after the Enlightenment was seen as the only true method of argumentation. The problem though is that logical argument is not necessarily persuasive and persuasive argument is not necessarily logical. Rhetoric survived somewhat altered, and dialectic "faded into obscurity". Thus begins a fairly interesting book.

Canadian philosopher Douglas Walton makes a delightful case for reviving the empirical study of the techniques of discourse. Early on he differentiates types of dialog by purpose: persuasion, inquiry, negotiation, information seeking, deliberation and eristic (rhetoric that serves to attack one's opponent) - useful to reflect which mode each "side" may be in at any given time. He discusses the use of emotion and imagery to short circuit long chains of evidence and logic and the role of inducement, temptation and threats (ad baculum). He covers classical fallacies coming up with five variations of the "ad hominem" argument. Ad populum, an appeal to popular opinion is no longer considered completely disreputable - voting itself is a use of the technique. Another interesting topic is the use (or abuse) of definition. Terms such as "unemployment", "justice" or "rape" vary across jurisdictions and over time so comparison of different contexts can be very misleading. A rise or fall in drug related crime may be the result of a change in legislation, not a change in current social behaviour.

Many of the examples are based on topical items that would be familiar to most readers. Star Trek illustrates an amusing appeal to values where Jean Luc Picard tries to convince Klingon, Ferengi and Federation listeners to engage in a dangerous mission by invoking the ideals of honour, profit and exploration respectively. To illustrate a complex ad hominen he uses and aspect of the Clinton impeachment hearings (the Battalion case) and the charge that Al Gore's appeal to pathos in the death of his sister to smoking related cancer was hypocritical (poisoning the well) as hi as an ad hominem; there are examples of "push polls" which are designed to implant information rather than to gather it in. He applies an anti-drunk driving campaign in Canada and an AIDS information campaign in Australia (featuring the Grim Reaper bowling down average Australians) as appeals to fear. The coverage surveying and polling is informative and the author describes the use of the relatively high touch high cost "deliberative poll" where respondents are gathered together for several hours or even days to discuss the issues and propose solutions - I'll add that this method was recently tried here (it failed) in Canada where the government of the day had proposed to introduce a form of proportional representation in parliament.

I liked the book but it did have a couple of problems. The first chapter is a bit of a barrier - Walton references theories of some other writers but doesn't fill in enough detal as to their key arguments, making one feel like a wallflower at the party. Another is that the author spent very a great deal of his time discussing the philosophical groundings of rhetoric, but very little effort in looking at the difference modes of interaction in different hot media such as online discussions, blogs and social media - this was the promise that brought me to the book in the first place. IMV the human dimension of time and permanence has shifted - not only do we have an extensive record of previous statements can gleefully be picked apart, the rate at which we return to the record and our degree of willingness to change it is something worth looking at. Broadcast media is touched upon in the discussion of the Respondent-to-Dialog Problem (pp138) where argument is made to a mass audience, seemingly inviting dialog, but its really a proposed discussion framework to be carried out in the outside world - an actual dialog with the framers does not actually occur. Similarly the discussion of media argumentation in the last chapter, while detailed and useful, seems a bit old school with it's focus on traditional advertising. Nevertheless I found Walton to be an interesting writer with a lot to tell us.

Recommended.