Arguments,Meta-arguments,and Metadialogues: A Reconstruction of Krabbe,Govier, and Woods

Krabbe (2003, in F.H. van Eemeren, J.A. Blair, C.A. Willard and A.F. Snoeck Henkemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, pp. 641–644) defined a metadialogue as a dialogue about one or more dialogues, and a ground-level dialogue as a dialogue that is not a metadialogue. Similarly, I define a meta-argument as an argument about one or more arguments, and a ground-level argument as one which is not a meta-argument. Krabbe (1995, in F.H van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, C.A. Willard and A.F. Snoeck Henkemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, pp. 333–344) showed that formal-fallacy criticism (and more generally, fallacy criticism) consists of metadialogues, and that such metadialogues can be profiled in ways that lead to their proper termination or resolution. I reconstruct Krabbe’s metadialogical account into monolectical, meta-argumentative terminology by describing three-types of meta-arguments corresponding to the three ways of proving formal invalidity he studied: the trivial logic-indifferent method; the method of counterexample situation; and the method of formal paraphrase. A fourth type of meta-argument corresponds to what Oliver (1967, Mind 76, 463–478), Govier (1985, Informal Logic 7, 27–33), and Copi (1986) call refutation by logical analogy. A fifth type of meta-argument represents my reconstruction of arguments by parity of reasoning studied by Woods and Hudak (1989, Informal Logic 11, 125–139). Other particular meta-arguments deserving future study are Hume’s critique of the argument from design in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, and Mill’s initial argument in The Subjection of Women about the importance of established custom and general feeling vis-à-vis argumentation.     

A robot’s sense-making of fallacies and rhetorical tropes. Creating ontologies of what humans try to say

In the design of user-friendly robots, human communication should be understood by the system beyond mere logics and literal meaning. Robot communication-design has long ignored the importance of communication and politeness rules that are ‘forgiving’ and ‘suspending disbelief’ and cannot handle the basically metaphorical way humans design their utterances. Through analysis of the psychological causes of illogical and non-literal statements, signal detection, fundamental attribution errors, and anthropomorphism, we developed a fail-safe protocol for fallacies and tropes that makes use of Frege’s distinction between reference and sense, Beth’s tableau analytics, Grice’s maxim of quality, and epistemic considerations to have the robot politely make sense of a user’s sometimes unintelligible demands.     

Toward a Theory of Progressive Evolution (Large-Scale Stages of Evolutionary Progress)

Here I discuss the basic elements, major stages, and completion of progressive evolution. The cosmic world of self-realization is based on extensive self-development within a closed contour: temporal counter-transitions of spatial counter-elements (energy bonds and media and, basically, substance structures) form of local worlds within it through evolution of informational structures.

• The organic world of reproduction develops through the open informational path: the initial substance, through energy exchange and metabolism, reproduces similar substance; the latter interacts with the environment and, subsequently, reproduces its like, and so on.

• The animal world of self-regulation builds up a closed informational contour in the environment through the informational input and command output.

• The human world of self-cognition forms the intensive type of development within the internal closed informational contour of cognition. Counter-transitions of ideal images and signs relate to their real prototypes. In the course of cognition, abstractive thinking develops and brings man to the possibility of reflection of the initial world in its integrity (thus, elevates man to the infinite, by Hegel).

     

‘WITH PSYCHOSIS IN MIND’ – the reverberations of the psychotic encounter

Psychoanalytic theory offers a varied conceptual system for considering psychosis by providing a coherent representation of the anxieties and processes at work in adult patients. But at the practical clinical level, it is not enough simply to ‘think about psychosis’ and have a theoretical system in place. The therapist must also ‘have psychosis in mind’, that is, get to grips with its forms of logic, gain familiarity with its workings, and learn to understand and accept the effects it has on the therapeutic relationship and on their own expectations. Clinicians engaged in this type of work must be able to tolerate getting back in touch with processes deemed archaic at the core of their own psychological functioning, which will impact their ability to listen and think. These chaotic processes demand a change of approach since they cause a ‘desymbolisation’ that perturbs the internal mental structure of the therapist. This ‘desymbolisation’ is therefore the locus of the therapeutic work, which must attempt to render it comprehensible and represent it. A case study illustrates these processes.     

Reflections on the clinical implications of symbolism

We start by stressing the idea that the process itself of constructing the symbol in its different components and its vicissitudes is centrally important to contemporary psychoanalysis as symbols are essential for thinking and for storing emotional experiences in our memory and for conveying our affects to others and to ourselves. Our implicit idea is that internal attacks are not directed only at the internal objects, but also include attacks on the structure or forms of the mental representations before and while they become constituted in symbols. It is by this means that destructive impulses invade the processes of symbolic construction. Symbols can lose their plasticity and thus silence the emotions and therefore cut off the patient from their meanings. Our clinical material allows us to increase our understanding of how the formal qualities of symbols operate in mental life, and how they can interfere in the capacity to work through emotional experiences. Finally, our reflections based on the analysis of a patient with difficulty in relating with the meanings of the symbols he produced will highlight the importance of the analyst's reverie along the process of formulating an interpretation. This paper is also part of a development in the study of the process of reverie.     

Semantic coherence and fallacies in estimating joint probabilities

In three experiments on joint probability estimation, gist representations were manipulated with analogies, and the suboptimal strategy of ignoring relevant denominators was counteracted with training in using 2 × 2 tables to clarify joint probability estimates. The estimated probabilities of two events, as well as their conjunctive and disjunctive probabilities, were assessed against two benchmarks, logical fallacies and semantic coherence—a constellation of estimates consistent with the relationship among sets. Fuzzy‐trace theory (FTT) predicts that analogies will increase semantic coherence, and a table intervention affecting denominator neglect will both increase semantic coherence and reduce fallacies. In all three experiments, analogies increased semantic coherence. In both experiments training participants to use 2 × 2 tables, such tables reduced fallacies and increased semantic coherence. As the relations among sets in the problem materials progressed in cognitive complexity from identical sets, mutually exclusive sets, and subsets to overlapping sets, fallacies generally increased, and semantic coherence generally decreased. These findings indicate that denominator neglect is pervasive, but that it can be remedied with a straightforward intervention that clarifies relations among sets. Further, intuitive gist‐based probability estimation can be improved through the use of simple analogies. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Yet Another Run around the Circle

In a recent article, D. A. Truncellito (2004, ‘Running in Circles about Begging the Question’, Argumentation 18, 325–329) argues that the discussion between Robinson (1971, ‘Begging the Question’, Analysis 31, 113–117), Sorensen (1996, ‘Unbeggable Questions’, Analysis 56, 51–55) and Teng (1997, ‘Sorensen on Begging the Question’, Analysis 57, 220–222) shows that we need to distinguish between logical fallacies, which are mistakes in the form of the argument, and rhetorical fallacies, which are mistakes committed by the arguer. While I basically agree with Truncellito’s line of thinking, I believe this distinction is not tenable and offer a different view. In addition, I will argue that the conclusion to draw from the abovementioned discussion is that validity is not a sufficient criterion of begging the question, and that we should be wary of the containment-metaphor of a deductive argument.     

'You’re Being Unreasonable’: Prior and Passing Theories of Critical Discussion

A key and continuing concern within the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation is how to account for effective persuasion disciplined by dialectical rationality. Currently, van Eemeren and Houtlosser offer one response to this concern in the form of strategic manoeuvring. This paper offers a prior/passing theory of communicative interaction as a supplement to the strategic manoeuvring approach. Our use of a prior/passing model investigates how a difference of opinion can be resolved while both dialectic obligations of reasonableness and rhetorical ambitions of argumentative success are simultaneously accommodated. The paper explores the model with particular reference to the pragma-dialectical rules of critical discussion, strategic manoeuvring and fallacious reasoning.     

Two Forms of the Straw Man

The authors identify and offer an analysis of a new form of the Straw Man fallacy, and then explore the implications of the prevalence of this fallacy for contemporary political discourse.     

So That He Might Fill All Things: Comprehending the Cosmic Love of Christ

What does Jesus Christ have to do with the starry skies above and the good earth under our feet? Although theological discussions of cosmic and ecological issues have often been developed in dialogue with the natural sciences, “cosmic christology” is itself intrinsically a theological theme. In response to the cosmic vision of Ephesians, this paper explores the contributions of two contemporary theologians who have developed cosmic christologies, Colin Gunton and Jürgen Moltmann, and then seeks to build critically on their achievements by reclaiming Luther's ubiquity christology and by calling upon the Johannine witness to Christ as the light and the shepherd of the cosmos.