Modes of Arguing

8 modes of arguing \ We build arguments in many different ways. To expand the account of argument we have already introduced, this chapter discusses four different modes of arguing often use. It discusses expanding the scope of arguing beyond verbal arguing (i.e., arguing that depends only on wor...

8 modes of arguing \ We build arguments in many different ways. To expand the account of argument we have already introduced, this chapter discusses four different modes of arguing often use. It discusses expanding the scope of arguing beyond verbal arguing (i.e., arguing that depends only on words). The account that we develop will help you understand, build, and evaluate arguments that have **non-verbal elements that are the basis of auditory, emotional, intuitive, and visual ways of building arguments.** \ Most of the examples of argument we have examined so far are instances of the verbal mode of argument. We employ a **verbal argument** when we argue in speech or writing using words literally or metaphorically. The verbal mode of arguing is an important mode that is emphasized in the history of logic, and in this and other logic books. But real-life arguing employs, in central ways, many other kinds of reasoning and communication. Recent research on argument has emphasized this by promoting a "multimodal" approach to arguing that recognizes these other modes of argument. Attempts to communicate are commonly called **speech acts**. The most obvious kind of speech act is the uttering of a literal statement, but speech acts also include emojis, political cartoons, films, maps that show you where someone lives, or thumbs-up gestures. Artwork, emotional gestures, emojis, facial expressions, photographs, and metaphors are speech acts that play an important role within our arguments. In this chapter we discuss four non-verbal modes of arguing that have been proposed in studies of argument: - Arguments in the **visual mode** use non-verbal images of some sort (photographs, video, drawings, diagrams, emoji, maps, etc.). - Arguments in the **auditory mode** depend on non-verbal sounds (a certain tone of voice, natural sounds, music, etc.). - Arguments in the **emotional mode** depend on expressions of emotion (which can be communicated verbally, but also by gestures, facial expressions, etc.) - Arguments in the **intuitive mode** depend on non-verbal intuition. When we consider specific instances of argument, it is important to remember that arguers often mix different modes of arguing, producing arguments which are verbal and emotional, verbal and visual, visual and auditory, and so on. In the case of very complex arguments (say, the arguments propounded in a documentary film), you may need to consider components of an argument that are auditory, emotional, intuitive, verbal, and visual. **\1 Argument Flags** In the course of argumentation, non-verbal forms of communication can be used in a variety of ways. Often, they function as argument components---as ways to express the premises or conclusion of an argument. In other cases, they are used to introduce and organize arguments---regulating the flow of real-life arguing. In this regard, we might compare the world of argumentation to the streets of a major city. An argument is a vehicle that takes us through the streets, from one position (place) to another. The traffic flows at many speeds and in many (and sometimes opposite) directions. What makes travel possible in a city are "rules of the road" that are frequently enforced via non-verbal means of communication: traffic lights tell us to stop, go or be cautious; traffic signs use arrows and visual symbols that indicate direction, the curve of a road, or that no bicycles are allowed; traffic police use whistles, sirens, signs, and hand signals to direct and stop cars, trucks, and other vehicles. In the world of argumentation non-verbal cues often play a similar role, regulating arguments. In a court room, the banging of a judge's gavel demands silence (and "order in the court"). In a formal debate, a buzzer or bell may indicate when arguing can commence and when it must end. In an interpersonal exchange, the dismayed look on your partner's face may be a warning sign that tells you that this is not the time to argue. One important way in which arguers use non-verbal elements is as **argument flags**---attention grabbers that draw attention to an argument. Flags of this sort are important because an argument (however strong it is) cannot convince an audience of its conclusion unless an arguer finds a way to attract attention to it. Sometimes arguers attract and maintain the attention of an audience with words. Strong speakers often preface an argument with a witty quote, a joke, or a moving story that captivates their audience and makes them interested (sometimes intensely interested) to hear what follows. Words that are used like this function as *verbal* argument flags. In other cases, non-verbal cues are argument flags. Sometimes such flags are auditory. An arguer who wants us to listen to their argument may raise their voice or shout at us, whistle, or clap their hands three times. A drum roll or a riveting piece of music may precede an argument in a documentary film or podcast. In other cases, captivating images are used as flags. A haunting image of someone sobbing, a stunning photograph of a natural landscape, or a disturbing image of war may grab our attention in a social media post. Advertisers often hire famous actors, athletes, reality stars, influencers, or models to present their arguments because we are instinctively inclined to pay attention to them. How they captivate target audiences changes over time. Twenty years ago, we witnessed famous athletes promoting brands in television commercials. Today we also see product endorsements promoted on Instagram and TikTok. In a world in which we are constantly bombarded by arguments---in advertisements, on the internet, in political debates, at home, at school, in a public restroom, and at work. Effective argument flags attempt to break through the argumentation clutter in creative ways that tell an audience that it should "Read! Listen! Look! Think About!" the arguing that follows. We have reproduced a vintage example of a visual flag below \ A close-up of a bug Description automatically generated It is a 1920s illustration of a cricket, featured in an advertisement for Traveler's home insurance. The image is a *visual argument flag* because it is used to attract the reader's attention to the verbal argument that accompanied it. In the context in which it occurred, the image's success in catching its viewer's eye was enhanced by the quality of its artwork and its vividness, at a time when colour printing was rare and remarkable. Against a background that consists of pages of black and white print and advertising, the cricket picture "jumps out" at viewers and piques their interest. When they read the text, they are told that the painting depicts a field cricket building its home, a theme that introduces the idea that building homes is important, not only for crickets, but for humans. In a case like this, the visual flag that catches our attention is just a flag and not an element of the argument. It does not give us a significant reason why we should protect our homes or consider buying Traveler's insurance, functioning only as a way to direct us to the accompanying text, which presents a verbal argument. Visual and auditory flags are increasingly common elements of everyday arguing, because technology is making it easier and easier to create them. Some flags serve only to attract attention to an argument, others do so at the same time that they offer evidence for its conclusion. A shocking picture of migrants at sea may disturb us and attract our attention, at the same time that it serves as evidence of their plight in an argument that infers the conclusion that we should financially support a campaign to help them. Argument flags are relevant when you construct an argument and when you consider the arguments of others. When you argue, you can improve the chances that your reasoning will be considered by a broader audience by including an effective argument flag---verbal or non-verbal. In other cases, argument flags can help you locate and identify arguments. The importance of the arguments attached to argument flags is sometimes forgotten by audiences who are captivated by visually or sonically clever flags and pay more attention to them than the credibility of the argument they are planted in. We all know people who want to buy a particular brand of car, or soda pop, or sneakers, because they are entranced by the advertising for it. Not because the advertisement contains a compelling argument, but because it is presented in an alluring way they find funny or attractive. In situations in which a flag is just a flag, and not a part of the argument it flags, we need to treat a flag as *noise* when we turn to argument assessment (captivating noise in many cases, but still noise). Exercise 8-1 1\. Go to your university or college website. Go to the section for prospective or future students. Identify and analyze the non-verbal elements it contains (photographs, music, sounds of students, tone of voice, etc.). Identify argument flags. How do they and the other non-verbal aspects of the pages contribute to the overall attempt to attract students to your school? 2\. Think of a product endorsed by a famous person (e.g., YouTube star, actress, content creator, etc.). You probably already can think of an instance; or scroll social media to find a celebrity-endorsed product. Once you decide on a product and endorsement analyze the argument flag(s) at work in the marketing with direct reference to the endorsement. \2 Modes of Presentation We have already defined an argument as an attempt to provide evidence for a conclusion. In a purely verbal argument this evidence is presented with words and sentences. In a visual argument, images of some sort (a photograph, a video, a drawing, a blueprint, etc.) are used (usually with words as well). Visual arguments can be stronger than purely verbal arguments, because the images they contain may provide a better account of the subject of the argument. If you want to prove that your twelve-year-old son looks just like Uncle Carlos did when he was twelve, this can best be done by comparing what he looks like to what you *see* when you look at an old photograph of Carlos. Someone's statement that they performed some action---surfed a 30-foot wave, met a movie star, got their hair coloured green, etc.---is just a string of words that can be put together by anyone who speaks the language. In contrast, a trustworthy video or photograph of the claimed action provides independent visual evidence that they did what they claim to have done. This evidence is not perfect---photographs can be photoshopped---but good visual evidence is one of the strongest ways to confirm or refute purely verbal claims. **\ The Visual Mode** A "visual" argument has premises (or a conclusion, and sometimes premises and a conclusion) which are rooted in a visual image of some sort---in photographs, signage, a cartoon, artwork, video, gestures, pictographs, etc. In most cases, visual arguments have verbal components. The use of visual arguments is expanding rapidly as the technology for producing and distributing images makes it easier and easier to create and distribute images. Every day we see thousands of images---in social media platforms (Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, etc.), magazines, public transit advertisements, newspapers, billboards, etc. As arguers, we need to be ready to analyze and assess the images used in arguments.  Great Blue Heron. Photograph by Glennice Burns Let's begin with a simple example. Suppose someone who is an avid kayaker returns from a paddle in the river. "That was a wonderful paddle," they say, with a big smile on their face. When we ask them why, they show us the photograph above and say "I saw *this*!" In doing so, the kayaker presents an argument, for they are backing their claim that they have had a wonderful paddle with a reason for believing that this is so. The conclusion of the argument is the claim "That was a wonderful paddle." The premise is the verbal/visual claim that "I saw *this*" where *this* is what we see when we look at the photograph. We can represent this argument as follows. I saw this: A bird standing on a branch Description automatically generated That was a wonderful paddle. Like any other argument, this one can be assessed using the basic principles we have already outlined for evaluating arguments: by asking whether the premise of the argument is true and whether the conclusion follows from it. It is important to note that the content of the premise is visual as well as verbal, and is defined by the image the paddler presents. The image used in this case is a powerful way to present what the kayaker saw because it reproduces it, allowing us to "see for ourselves" what they have seen. The image could be used in another argument to identify the bird as a great blue heron, by comparing this photograph to a photograph of a great blue heron in Cornell University's guide to birdwatching, *All About Birds*. In cases of identification, images are more useful than words because they replicate what their subjects look like. In legal cases, images can be decisive evidence offered in support of a conclusion. When the Toronto Raptors won the NBA title over the Golden State Warriors in 2019, video obtained by KTVU FOX 2 showed a county sheriff's deputy shoving Masai Ujiri, the president of the Toronto Raptors basketball team, during a sideline altercation at Oakland's Oracle Arena. In body-camera footage which was secured through a federal lawsuit, Ujiri is seen trying to get on the court to celebrate the Raptor's championship win before the altercation occurred. In the video the deputy, Alan Strickland, can be seen pushing Ujiri in the chest twice before the Raptors president shoved him back. In a lawsuit launched by Deputy Strickland against Ujiri the former alleged he suffered "injury to his head, body, health, strength, nervous system and person, all of which caused and continue to cause great mental, physical, emotional and psychological pain and suffering." A statement by a Raptors spokesperson responded: \ In the end, the Strickland *vs*. Ujiri dispute was settled out of court. Both sides dropped their lawsuits. The details were never released. In our discussion it is enough to note that there are many court cases in which the visual mode of arguing is the key mode used in an attempt to prove or disprove that someone is guilty of a crime. The kinds of images used in visual arguments come in all shapes and sizes. They are not restricted to photographic displays. In some cases, they use visual signs and symbols. In 2015, for the first time, the Oxford Dictionary's "Word of the Year" was an emoji rather than a word: ("face with tears of joy"). In a discussion of multimodal communication, emojis are of special interest because they occupy a mid-point between pictures and words---attempting to visually capture facial expressions and their meanings. Like other images, emojis (and visual expressions themselves) can play a role in visual arguments. Imagine a case in which Rashid in Edmonton texts Emma in Vancouver, advising her not to come for a planned visit in the first week of January. When Emma asks why, Rashid texts the following emoji.  **Illustration:** Cold face Emoji This is a case of argument, for the emoji Rashid sends offers a reason why it may not be a good idea to visit someone in Edmonton at the beginning of January (because the experience one would have is represented in the emoji). We can diagram this simple argument as: P1 C where: Like our other visual example (and like any other argument), this argument can be assessed as strong or weak using the tools introduced in this book---by asking if the visual premise (the emoji) really does properly represent what it is like to be in Edmonton in the first week of January, and by asking whether it validly implies that it would not be a good place to visit. In the latter case one might argue otherwise by contending that there are many recreational opportunities indoors, or that winter sports (skating, hockey, cross country skiing, etc.) make Edmonton a desirable location to visit in the winter. **\ The Auditory Mode** When we use the verbal mode of arguing, we use words and sentences to provide evidence for some conclusion. When we use the visual mode of arguing we use pictures or some other kind of image to do so. We use the "auditory" mode of arguing when we present evidence by using non-verbal sounds as evidence in support of a claim. Consider another case of birding. We go home in the evening and our partner tells us that wild canaries (the species *serinus canaria*) were in the yard in the morning. Perhaps he will say that he didn't see them, but heard their song. If he knows their song well, this is good evidence that the birds were there. In an argument, he might prove that they visited by playing a video. When we watch it, we might see nothing but trees and dense foliage, but clearly hear the bird song. We can diagram the auditory argument this evidence allows as follows. If the recording in question is an accurate (and in this sense "true") recording of what happened in the morning, then **P** is an acceptable premise. If the song in question really is the song of wild canaries, then the inference to **C** is also valid. If there is a dispute about the recording or the inference (where it was recorded, what wild canaries sound like, etc.), we may need to add hidden premises to our diagram: premises that claim "This was recorded in our yard," "This is the sound of wild canaries," and so on. Arguments which depend on sounds that function as auditory premises are common in situations in which listening provides key evidence for conclusions. Two doctors arguing about the condition of your heart may develop arguments based on what they hear when they listen to your heart with a stethoscope. Mechanics who diagnose problems with automobiles have their own version of a stethoscope designed to help them listen to an automobile engine in a way that allows them to conclude that it has this or that problem (a leaky gasket, a failing oil pump, etc.). A radio advertisement has to depend on words and on the additional cues provided by non-verbal auditory cues like tone of voice, music, etc. Like other arguments, auditory arguments can be evaluated by asking whether their premises should be accepted (as a correct and not misleading presentation of some sound), and whether we can reasonably infer the conclusion from it. This means that auditory arguments, like verbal and visual arguments, can be strong or weak, good or bad. A 2021 incident that received a great deal of media attention occurred in St. George, Utah, when police were told of gunshots near an elementary school. The evidence they and others were directed to was a popping sound interpreted as the sound of a gun. This is an auditory argument, the sound leading to a conclusion: that a shooter was on the loose. In response, the Police Department dispatched twenty officers to secure the nearby schools. In the investigation that followed, the popping sound was confirmed but investigators determined that the police and those who reported it had mistakenly (i.e., invalidly) inferred that it was the sound of the gun. As it turned out, the source was not a gun, but "a backfiring, late-80's Ford pickup truck." Auditory arguments are not as common as visual arguments but they are still common. When an academic music program considers applications for admissions, it considers past experience, marks and accomplishments, but serious music schools also conduct auditions. They do so because the best way to know whether someone plays an instrument or sings with exceptional ability is by *listening* to them perform. After they have listened, the judges will probably discuss what they have heard, in ways that use particular segments of their performance (quite possibly recorded) to support the conclusion that the performer should or should not be admitted to their program. Exercise 8-2 A toy staircase with a lamp and a lamp Description automatically generated **Illustration**: "Stairs" Ad by Del Campo Saatchi & Saatchi Buenos Aires for subbrand: Kinder Plan - Health Plan For Children (Hospital Aleman) in Argentina. 1\. The image above is one of the advertisements in an award-winning advertising campaign for a children's health plan offered by Hospital Aleman in Argentina in 2009. The advertisement contains an extended argument which is visual and verbal. What is the conclusion? What are the premises? Diagram the argument, indicating the premises and the inferences it proposes. How strong an argument is it? Explain your answer. 2\. The following link will take you to an advertisement for the Audi R8 V10 that was used in movie theatres. Standardize, diagram, and discuss the auditory argument it presents (to experience the full cinematic impact, be sure to turn up the volume on your computer when you listen to it!). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XflP9D53slY 3\. In a society where words are valued, we might not be used to interpreting images to convey arguments. We do this more than we realize though. Think about a virtual disagreement you have had or witnessed that made use of gifs or other non-verbal communication. Explain how the non-verbal communication presented an argument---standardize the argument. \3 Modes of Feeling Our first two modes of arguing are modes "of presentation." They are ways of arguing that present premises and conclusions using images or non-verbal sounds (in most cases, in combination with words). The defining characteristics of two other modes which have been proposed are their connection to "feelings"---to emotions and intuitions---which are often difficult to express in words. When arguers use these modes, they may invoke them with non-verbal gestures, a caring tone of voice, sobs, or tears **\ The Emotional Mode** Emotions---psychological states that characterize our *feelings* and *attitudes---*are a central element of our lives. They are our responses to moral issues, politics, art, technology, discovery, and many other facets of our lives. They are an especially significant element in human interactions, in argument and debate. We understand an argument as an instance of the emotional mode of arguing when it is rooted in emotions. Typically, such arguments depend on premises or offer conclusions because they are emotionally attractive in some way. In many situations, the emotional mode is used in combination with other modes of arguing. We have already noted that visual arguments may employ emojis. They are significant from an emotional point of view, for they are an attempt to visually capture emotions in a way that does not depend on verbal descriptions. Consider a situation in which you have a problem with your car and you text a message to all your friends asking "Can someone help me fix my car?" Let's imagine that one of them, Tom, sends back the following emoji.  **Illustration:** Pointing at the self smiley emoji In this case, Tom's sending of the pointing-at-self smiley emoji is plausibly understood as an argument. He is suggesting that you should pick him to help you with your car and giving you a reason to do so which is expressed in the emoji smile. Though words are not as expressive as smiles in emojis, we can verbally paraphrase his argument as: "*I'm* the person to help you, for I'd be happy to do so." Tom's happy-to-help disposition is a good reason why you might choose him to help you (rather than someone who will be grumpy). Of course, there are other issues that matter so the conclusion that you should pick him may not follow. Tom's positive attitude is a *relevant* consideration when you consider whether you should accept his offer, but not sufficient if he doesn't know anything about cars. In 2020 Hayley Paige, a wedding gown designer for the (in)famous *Say Yes to the Dress* reality television series, went to court regarding rights to her legal name, to her bridal gown designs, and to her social media accounts. They were claimed by the multi-label bridal company she was working for, which appealed to through a noncompete clause in a contract she had signed approximately 10 years earlier. The designer was forced to create a new Instagram account without her legal name---a name which served as the brand name of the line of gowns she had designed for the bridal house in question. On her new social media account, she posted a video which explained what happened to her. The video was emotional; in it she paused between sobs as she explained that her legal name had been taken away from her. She complained that her identity and her creativity had been taken too. She was especially upset that her social media name, which included the preface "Miss"---a special term of endearment that her mother had always used to refer to her, was now controlled by a company. The eight-minute video post on her then new account let her followers know that her original accounts across all platforms---still actively posting content under her name---were not controlled by her (!). She made it clear that she would seek "justice" in court, claiming that the bridal company was acting in bad faith, demonstrating unethical behaviour, and guilty of talent-crushing tactics. In telling her followers what had happened to her, the designer implicitly suggested that her audience should not support the label in question. This is an implicit conclusion backed by her account of what happened---and by the emotional mode of arguing, which is evident in the very expressive way in which she communicates it. Should we accept her emotional appeals? Our tentative answer is that "it depends." If a viewer cares about her in a deep way, then what makes her so unhappy is a relevant consideration when one decides whether to buy a wedding gown she designed from the bridal company. In 2024, after a four-year legal battle, a judge ruled in favour of the designer. Hayley Paige (\@misshayleypaige on Instagram) now controls her name, her social media accounts, and is able to design wedding gowns again as Hayley Paige. In view of her court battle, the United States Federal Trade Commission has moved to ban noncompete clauses in employee contracts. In a presentation to the United States Senate committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Paige's explanation of what happened to her is mixed with the emotional mode of argument. This and other appeals to emotion are powerful ways to communicate the importance of issues that play an important role in our well-being---or our lack of it. The general form of an emotional argument can be summarized as follows, where **E** is some set of emotions and **C** is a proposed conclusion. **E** **C** When we deal with emotional arguments this means that we must judge them as we judge other arguments: by asking whether emotions which function as premises are acceptable and whether we can validly infer the conclusion that is proposed. In the first case, we may question whether emotions are genuine or exaggerated. In the second, we may ask whether they are relevant and sufficient to warrant the conclusion. In many cases, such inferences are not valid because they focus on emotional impacts that affect one set of stakeholders and ignore those that affect others. In other cases, fallacious appeals to emotion ignore good moral, political and social reasons for doing something, even though they are emotionally upsetting for some. **\ The Intuitive Mode** Visual, auditory, and emotional modes of arguing are ways of arguing that depend on premises and conclusions that can be difficult to describe in words. The intuitive mode of arguing is a more controversial mode of arguing which is used when arguers base conclusions on their gut feelings or hunches, or on dreams or visions and other kinds of personal revelations (the latter play a major role in many religious and Indigenous traditions). Some would say that such appeals depend on a decision not to reason, but to take a "leap of faith" instead. Is this always a bad idea? In any case, inferences based on intuitions play a role in real life discourse, and even philosophical debate, so we will treat arguments by intuition as a mode of arguing. For thousands of years, philosophers, theologians, and ordinary people have struggled with the question whether God exists. Philosophers have focused on the question whether there are arguments that support a belief in God. Some philosophers have proposed specific arguments, but many philosophers have concluded that there is no physical or logically compelling evidence that can be adduced in favour of God's existence, and that a belief in God (or a decision to be an agnostic or an atheist) ultimately rests on a "leap of faith" that is based on what "feels" right to the person who decides to take it. A reliance on intuitions like this is more common than you might at first imagine. Some realtors passionately advocate that we should invest in new properties because we will make money doing so. Such arguments are overstated. Those people who invested in real estate before the 2008 North American fiscal crisis often lost money and their houses. But people find more plausible the idea that investing *at this time* will make them money. Perhaps one could build some empirical arguments for or against these points of view---by looking at historical trends, etc. But these matters are impossible to predict with accuracy and inevitably depend on events which can't be known. The COVID-19 epidemic, which no one predicted, led to major increases in the value of real estate investments. In the end, realtors and investors who recommend investing in a particular real estate deal must use their intuition to decide whether this is a good thing to do. There are realtors, for example, who have demonstrated their conviction and commitment to their own intuition with their own actions, telling their clients that: "We have personally invested in this project because we *believe* in it." Such reasoning has the general form: **I** **C** Where **I** is some intuition and **C** is a conclusion inferred from it. In such cases, the challenge is that there may be little explicit evidence that backs the appeal to **I.** But it can still be asked whether it is an acceptable basis for an inference by asking how strong (how deep) the intuition is, whether it has been confirmed (or disconfirmed) in any way, and whether one has at least considered the possibility that it might be mistaken. Even if it is judged acceptable, we may ask whether we should accept the inference to conclusion **C**. Even if you feel very strongly that this would be a good time to invest in a new property, it may be reckless to use this as a basis for a decision to risk losing all the wealth you have accumulated. Consider a controversial case in a different area of sales. Gwyneth Paltrow is an American actress and business woman who has been criticized for her promotion of alternative healing and wellness methods through her business "Goop." She has been roundly criticized for her "new age" recommendations. In an Op-ed piece in the *New York Times* in February 2020 (available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/opinion/goop-gwyneth-paltrow-netflix.html?auth=link-dismiss-google1tap) feminist writers Elisa Albert and Jennifer Block noted that her Netflix show was characterized as promoting "cold therapy, energy healing, longevity diets, and therapeutic use of psychedelics," and other practices whose effectiveness has not been sufficiently demonstrated. Albert and Block went on to offer a spirited defence of Gwyneth Paltrow and her commercial endeavours, writing that: When Albert and Block refer to the negative response accorded to "things we cannot see, touch, authenticate, prove, own or quantify," they are talking about the kinds of things that are appealed to when one uses the intuitive mode of arguing---something they attribute, in this case, to a way of knowing that they historically associate with women. They suggest that views of argument which leave little (or no) room for the intuitive mode have a Western bias, and there is an element of patriarchal authority involved. These suggestions raise many questions worth exploring. What do they imply about the women who criticize Paltrow and Goop---some suggesting that it has built a nearly billion-dollar brand that takes advantage of women? How does the tradition Albert and Block refer to intersect with other alternative traditions---acupuncture, Ayurvedic Medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, naturopathy, chiropractic, sweat lodges, fasting, the use of the I Ching, etc.? Where do the men who have been part of intuitive traditions---as prophets, Indigenous shamans, mystics, seers, poets, gurus, etc.---fit in? We will not attempt to answer these questions here, but we invite you to think about them. When you come across intuitive arguments (which are also used by scientists and mathematicians), we encourage you to engage them---to ask questions, be a critical thinker, and have an open mind. Exercise 8-3 1\. Analyze the modes of arguing and any arguments or reasoning used in the following examples. A picture containing text Description automatically generated **Illustration** PETA ad campaign \4 Symbols and Metaphors In a number of ways, the modes of arguing we discuss in this chapter raise questions of meaning, and interpretation. There is no perfect way to determine meaning in such cases, but it is less difficult than it might at first appear, for there are many ways in which non-verbal speech acts function like verbal speech acts. The Principle of Charity is a basic principle of communication which tells us to begin the interpretation of someone's speech act by assuming that it is an intelligible attempt to communicate. In analyzing what it means we must also look for an interpretation of it which makes sense in the context in which the act occurs (a context which may include the activities, persons, relationships, power dynamics, subject matter, etc.). A third consideration in interpretation is that we seek one that makes sense of its explicit elements (verbal, visual, auditory, emotional, intuitive, etc.), which are the vocabulary that arguers use to create non-verbal arguments. Often, non-verbal elements of an argument function as **symbols** that can replace words, represent some idea, or refer to someone or something. A political cartoon that depicts a politician as a devil with horns is not claiming that they actually have horns, but depicting them in a way that suggests that they are a person engaged in wrongdoing---the business of the devil. You use and interpret visual and auditory symbols every day. You know that a crucifix represents Christ; that an emoji represents a particular emotional state; that a skull represents death; that the song, "The Star-Spangled Banner", symbolizes the United States of America; that a siren and flashing lights on a police car beside your vehicle is an order to pull over and stop; and that an image of apple with a bite out of it represents Apple computers. Usually, the interpretation of symbols is not difficult, for you know the meaning of most common symbols, though there can be complicated cases. In North America, a thumbs-up gesture means "Okay!" but it is a rude gesture (equivalent to "flipping the bird") in Iran, Greece, and Sardinia. A swastika sign signifies the Nazi legacy in Europe and North America, but it has, for thousands of years, meant good luck and good wishes in India. A metaphor is a figure of speech that describes one thing as though it were another. "Jill is a block of ice" and "The world's a stage" are verbal metaphors. They make no sense if we try to understand them literally, for people are not made of ice and the world is not a theatre. We therefore understand them, in a figurative way, as claims that Jill is unfriendly and that our lives can be compared to the roles played on a stage play. **Non-verbal metaphors** play an important role when arguers use visual, auditory, emotional and intuitive modes of arguing. The following cartoon, drawn by Benjamin Franklin, is often said to be the first  **Illustration**: Benjamin Franklin, "Join, or Die" North American political cartoon. It was published during the debate over the question whether the early American colonies (New England, New York, Vermont, etc.) should join together and create a unified colonial government. It argues that they must, using a visual metaphor that compares their situation to that of the severed snake that it depicts---suggesting that they will, like its severed parts, not survive (but "die") unless they join together. Franklin's argument can be diagrammed as below. It is an argument which mixes verbal and visual modes of arguing---the visual metaphor suggesting that the situation of the colonies is analogous to that of the severed snake. Comparing the situation of the American colonies to a snake severed into pieces is a powerful analogy which functions as an argument flag, but also as an argument from analogy which leads to his "Join, or Die" conclusion. That argument can be judged by applying the criteria for good arguments by analogy we develop in Chapter 13, which suggests that it is not a good argument (for the American colonies were independent and self-sufficient in a way the severed parts of the snake are not). Image result for join or die The colonies must (like the parts of the snake) "JOIN, or DIE." (Hidden Conclusion:) The colonies must join together. The use of non-verbal metaphors is, as in this case, often imbued with great emotional force. Symbols are similarly powerful---that is why people salute and demonstrate with flags---and when they are angry, burn them. The *Victoria Times* cartoonist, Adrian Raeside, uses a ladder metaphor in a cartoon that comments on house prices (Dec 27, 2023). She is responding to widespread concerns that the cost of house in Canada (and especially British Columbia) were making it impossible for families to own a house. The metaphor refers to the traditional way to acquiring a good house---by purchasing a starter house for a cheap price and "laddering" up over time, exchanging one's house for one that is more expensive. At the same time the cartoon was published, this process was described by a commentator on reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/PersonalFinanceCanada/comments/107wmbv/is\_it\_still\_possible\_to\_climb\_the\_real\_estate/): In the cartoon, the missing rungs in the ladder tell us---and the despondent family looking at it---that this is no longer possible because cheaper houses (priced at \$700K, \$800K, \$900K, etc.) are not available.  **Illustration:** Adrian Raeside, *Victoria Times*, Dec. 27, 2023 This cartoon explains why families cannot acquire good housing, but also an argument that provides a reason for believing that the traditional "property ladder" cannot be used by families who are looking to improve their lot with better housing. In a newspaper, it is plausibly understood as a way to publicly declare that this is a problem and something needs to be done about it (a hidden conclusion). Editorial cartoons are a popular place for argument, in part because they are effective argument flags, catching the eye of readers, providing cleverness and humour in addition to their message. They often exploit commonly used visual memes, and appeal to our emotions as well as our reason, condensing issues down to easily understood inferences that aim to capture the essential issues in some political context. Sometimes they oversimplify an issue, and different cartoonists often provide contrary views of whatever issue is in question. This is why we need to recognize their arguments and assess their premises, inferences and conclusions, as weak, strong, plausible and implausible. Our last example of a non-verbal metaphor employs sounds rather than images. It is taken from a series of radio advertisements that helped Durex Condoms become the largest condom manufacturer in the world (a series available on the Durex website: www.durex.com). One of the advertisements can be summarized as follows: The message of this advertisement is tied to the difference between the two pieces of music it contains: the first representing ordinary condoms, the second representing Durex. In a context in which Durex is obviously promoting its product, everyone recognizes that the energy and the driving beat in the second musical interlude, contrasted with the boredom and lack of vigour conveyed in the first, suggests that sex with an ordinary condom is ho-hum and that Durex condoms can "set you free" so that you can "enjoy all of love's pleasures." We can diagram this auditory argument as follows. P1 = This is what sex is like with an ordinary condom: \[first music clip\]. P2 = This is what sex is like with a Durex Sheik condom: \[second music clip\]. P1 + P2 C This a captivating advertisement. Its juxtaposition of two pieces of music is creative, and the music clips it uses very strongly convey the emotional elements of a boring and then an exciting sex life. Music is a very effective way to arouse our emotions. In the Durex ad, a woman's silky voice (designed to appeal to the male buyers of condoms) highlights this suggestion. We might ask how one could prove that a particular condom can turn a pedestrian sex life into rock and roll? There may be ways to do so---by comparing the properties of competing brands of condoms, by appealing to surveys of users, and so on. Instead, the radio advertisement for Durex tries to sell their product by charming us with music and humour rather than a reasonable attempt at argument. Exercise 8-4 1\. Select one of the non-verbal instances of arguing in this chapter, and one which you find outside this text (on the internet, in a magazine, on a podcast, etc.). In both cases, explain the meaning of the act of arguing using the three principles we have introduced, i.e., the Intelligibility, Context and Component principles. 2\. Discuss the United Nations ads, below, used to promote social distancing during the COVID pandemic. Explain their non-verbal elements. What arguments to they convey? Do you think they were strong arguments? Why or why not? Visual Fusion United Nations **Illustration** United Nations COVID-19 ad campaign **\ 5 Alternative Dispute Resolution** Most non-verbal arguments mix different modes of arguing. We instinctively weave in and out of different modes depending on our audience, the kind of issue in play, how important it is to us, and the way our audience views it. Context in this way shapes the modes of arguing we employ. Counsellors, front-line service workers, judges, lawyers, mediators, parents, teachers, and others, can benefit by learning how to decipher and respond to mixed modes of arguing in appropriate ways in particular contexts. **Alternative Dispute Resolution** (ADR) is a field devoted to the resolution of disagreements in ways that will eliminate (or reduce) the need to settle them in court. In its attempt to deal with stakeholders who disagree with one another, sometimes vehemently, it is often important to deal with the emotional side of an argument and the verbal and non-verbal emotional cues that characterize the exchanges that take place. Simply telling arguers to "calm down" or "compose themselves" in such circumstances ignores emotional issues that may need to be addressed in one way or another. If you deal with emotional arguments in a way that does not recognize their emotional force and ignore it in your response, you may fail to resolve a disagreement. In such situations, it can be exacerbated by an attempt to convert such arguments into the kinds of arguments that the history of logic has frequently emphasized---as collections of sentences (unemotionally) providing evidence for some conclusion. What is communicated through emotional expression, gestures, or intuition is far more than words, and this may be lost if it is reduced to an argument in this narrow sense. An example of mixed-mode arguing may illustrate this point. In June 2020, Jagmeet Singh, the Leader of the Canadian NDP party, was removed from the Canadian House of Commons for calling Bloc Québécois MP Alain Therrien a racist, and then refusing to withdraw the comment. His remarks were rooted in Therrien's reaction when Singh put forward a motion that expressed concern about systemic racism in the RCMP. Singh's motion was denied because there wasn't unanimous consent. Singh noticed that Therrien responded by saying "no" loudly, brushing away his hand as if he were brushing away a fly. Singh complained that this gesture was *dismissive* in nature. In a subsequent news video he stated, "That's what racism looks like when someone dismisses the reality of what people are going through" (CBC News footage). At the same time, Singh shared his anger over the Bloc MP\'s gesture and his opposition to the motion to scrutinize the RCMP. This is an exchange in which there are multiple modes of communication at play. We could describe Therrien's response to Singh's resolution as verbal (when he says "no" to the motion put forward), and auditory, visual, and emotional---auditory because of the loudness of his voice, visual because his verbal comment was accompanied by a visual gesture (the brushing away of his hand), and emotional because these elements made his "no" an aggressive one. Singh argued that Therrien was a racist. His evidence for this was Therrien's voting against the motion, but also the *way* he did so, in particular his hand gesture, which Singh found to be dismissive in nature. This revealed something more than mere disagreement, the meaning of the physical gesture extending beyond a verbal rejection. Whether Therrien's actions were or were not racist provoked much discussion and debate. Whatever one concludes in this regard, it illustrates the importance of non-verbal means of communication and modes of arguing that address them. This particular instance is in keeping with a large body of research in linguistics and the neurosciences that corroborates gestures as a powerful way to signify meaning. In this case, it seems that Therrien communicated more strongly with his hand gesture and his loud voice than with his words. Some of the emotional issues that accompany arguments will be evident if we imagine an attempt to resolve the dispute between Singh and Therrien. Singh admitted that he was angry at Therrien's response to his resolution. Therrien's gesture was one that displayed his own refusal to take Singh's motion seriously. The emotional standoff worsened after their conflict, Therrien claiming that he received many offensive messages and threats, Singh reiterating his claim that Therrien was racist. Exercise 8-5 1\. In an attempt to deal with many disagreements that arose over social media posts, a company called Heurism decided to look for ways to resolve disagreements among its members. As a result, Heurism created message templates that members could use to object to particular posts. In explaining why they objected, they could select options like "It's embarrassing" or "It's a bad photo of me." Complainants were also asked to indicate how the post made them feel---e.g., angry, sad, or afraid---and how strongly they felt about this. What do you think of this as a way to resolve disputes, for example, in the workplace? Does it adequately respond to the modes we have discussed? How or how not? 2\. Jackie and Hema live together. They get along well, but disagree about food: Hema is a vegetarian (a vegan) and Jackie is not. It is a matter that leads to many disagreements about meals, what food is in the house, on the table, etc. For her birthday, Jackie asks Hema to make her a meat dish. When the day arrives Hema says she has made a chicken salad, using a recipe from the *Vegan & Fabulous* Facebook page, which directs one to make a chicken salad in two steps: Step 1. Prepare a salad. Step 2: Give it to a chicken. What is Hema's argument? How would you analyze it from the point of view of different modes of arguing? \6 A Complex Example Many arguments mix modes of arguing. Images and music captivate us. Intuitive discoveries can prompt emotion, as can the sound of the human voice. They make us laugh and smile and can play upon our fears and frustrations, our likes and dislikes. At times, the emotional pull of non-verbal messages can be used legitimately in argument. In an attempt to convince you that you should help the homeless, photographs (or an actual tour) of a shelter may be the best way to convey to you the needs of homeless people. One might describe the resulting argument as an **appeal to pity** (in Latin an *argumentum ad misericordiam*). Often this has been treated as fallacious reasoning, but there are circumstances in which appeals to pity are a reasonable response to a situation that calls for some remedial action on the part of the audience. As we will see when we turn to argument schemes in later chapters of this book, there are times when appeals to emotion are legitimate, and times when they produce fallacious reasoning. In the latter case, emotional impact is employed *instead of* giving evidence which cogently supports a conclusion. In many circumstances, it is reasonable to use emotion to draw an audience's attention to an issue, but it is unreasonable to do nothing more than provoke their emotions. There is a distinction to be drawn between reasonable and fallacious instances of an argument scheme. In part, it is important to recognize the communicative role that non-verbal elements play in many arguments, because this encourages us to properly recognize them as something that needs to be subjected to criticism and inquiry. We might compare non-verbal elements to hidden premises and conclusions in this regard. In many circumstances, we communicate in ways that are not entirely explicit from a verbal point of view. If we could communicate only in ways that were entirely explicit and used only words, communication would be cumbersome, difficult, and mundane. That said, there are circumstances in which explicitness is a goal to aim for. The attempt to analyze, identify and diagram an argument is one such case, for it is an attempt to reveal *all* the important parts of the argument. Identifying these parts prepares us for the inspection of them that allows us to decide whether the argument is strong or weak. The Durex radio advertisements already noted are clever and witty, but when we recognize the verbal and non-verbal elements they emphasize, we can see that their attempt to persuade us to buy Durex condoms rather than some other brand has little argumentative force because it fails to provide strong reasons in support of this conclusion. Many of the arguments we encounter are complex combinations of verbal and non-verbal elements. In such cases, we need to consider all the elements of the argument. In the history of advertising, one remarkably successful ad campaign was Mazda's "zoom, zoom" series of advertisements for its cars. You can find the ads on YouTube. One of the ads in the series promoted the Mazda Tribute, the company's popular sport utility vehicle. Like other "zoom, zoom" advertisements, it was carefully crafted to include stirring music with an African beat, stunning visuals, and a verbal commentary that all pointed to the inevitable conclusion that one should drive a Tribute. When we diagram and analyze the argument, we need to recognize that these different elements are parts of a package designed to convince us of this conclusion. We might begin analyzing the advertisement for the Tribute by summarizing its contents, as follows: What is the message conveyed in this advertisement? Clearly, it is an attempt to sell the Mazda Tribute. But what are the reasons it offers for the conclusion that this is a car one would want to own? To understand these reasons, we need to understand both the ad's verbal and non-verbal elements. The non-verbal elements include instances of all the modes of non-verbal communication we have already noted. They might be summarized as follows: When we combine these non-verbal elements with the statements made in the advertisement, we can see an argument that can be verbally paraphrased as follows: We can develop this analysis further by recognizing that the sub-argument from P2 to MC depends on two unstated premises that can be expressed as follows: HP3 is needed because the fun of driving a Tribute provides significant support for the conclusion that one should purchase the Tribute only if this is what really matters in an automobile (and not safety, economy, etc.). HP4 rejects the suggestion that the Tribute is *not* more fun than its competitors, for in those circumstances, the assumption that one should buy a car that is fun and appeals to one's youthful sense of play (HP3) may lead to the conclusion that one should not purchase a Tribute but that one should purchase a competing vehicle. Our full diagram is: Once we have this diagram, a number of debatable aspects become apparent. Despite its emotional appeal (especially to the "boy inside the man" that Mazda is targeting), HP3 could easily be debated. HP4 is also open to debate, as is the staged visual presentation that is supposed to demonstrate the qualities claimed in P1. But these and other concerns lie beyond the scope of our present discussion, where we want only to demonstrate that complex arguments employing non-verbal elements can be identified and diagrammed by recognizing the different forms of non-verbal meaning we have noted. Once we have identified and diagrammed the elements of such arguments, we can assess them the same ways we will assess other arguments, by asking whether their premises are plausible and their conclusions follow. \ FOUR KINDS OF NON-VERBAL MEANING There are four kinds of non-verbal elements that may function in an argument: In some complex arguments, all four kinds of non-verbal meaning---verbal meaning as well---be employed. Sometimes the same non-verbal elements (e.g. a particular piece of music) may convey more than one kind of non-verbal meaning. \ \ A Final Note on Argument Construction In the process of standardizing and diagramming other people's arguments, we can recognize their implicit aspects by applying the principles of communication outlined in this chapter (intelligibility, context, components). They suggest that the interpretation of a speech act should aim for a coherent meaning that is in keeping with its context and the likely meaning of its explicit elements. In earlier chapters, we implicitly relied on the process of interpretation this suggests in deciding what is and is not an argument and how the components of an argument should be identified and diagrammed. In Chapter 3, we explained how this process can be used in identifying hidden premises and conclusions. In this chapter, we've applied it to our understanding of the non-verbal elements of arguments. In constructing arguments of your own, you should aim for arguments that do not depend on implicit elements in a way that makes them misleading, difficult to interpret, or easy to misconstrue. One way to do this is by using premise and conclusion indicators when you can. In the body of your arguments, you can avoid confusion by using words and non-verbal elements that clearly and precisely express what you want to say. No one can expect to avoid hidden premises in every circumstance (because it is impossible to predict what assumptions audiences will take issue with), but you should try to explicitly express any important premise---verbally, visually, etc.---on which your argument depends. In Chapter 1, we suggested that you imagine an opponent for your argument as a way to determine what objections might be raised. You can use the same device to anticipate whether your argument is clear or needs to be clarified in some way. In constructing arguments, especially in public contexts that are conducive to images, music, and other elements, you can add to your arguments and often strengthen them by using non-verbal elements, so long as they are not exploited as a way to promote poor reasoning or substitute purely emotional appeals for combinations of premises and conclusions that will stand up to scrutiny. Exercise 8-6 1\. Visit the web site "Ads of the World" at http://adsoftheworld.com. Pick an advertisement that can be understood as an argument. Diagram and analyze the argument(s), and then explain how the principles (of intelligibility, context, and components) were applied in your treatments of the arguments. What kinds of non-verbal meaning were evident? 2\. The political cartoon below on AI is titled "AI Replacement." What is the message? How can you analyze it as an argument? Is it a strong, weak, or plausible argument?  **Illustration** "AI Replacement," Rivers, CagleCartoons.com, April 23, 2024. 3\. The lithograph reprinted below was created by Adolfo Mexiac and turned into a political poster during the 1968 Mexico Olympics, when over 300 student protestors were killed in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas, in an incident known as the Tlatelolco Massacre. Explain the message in terms of our account of non-verbal meaning. A poster with a person with a chain in his mouth Description automatically generated **Illustration** "Libertad de Expresion: Mexico 68" by Adolfo Mexiac Image © Victoria and Albert Museum, London. [Major Exercises]{.smallcaps} 8-M **[(A) Knowledge Exercises]{.smallcaps}**  1\. The following are key terms discussed in this chapter. Review them. If there are any that are unfamiliar, or confusing, look them up in the Glossary. You should leave this chapter comfortable with this language. -- -- -- -- 2\. How can the study of arguments help us with alternative dispute resolution mechanisms? 3\. **Think about the definition of argument provided in chapter 1. Discuss how the argument modes presented in this chapter relate back to this definition.** **[(B) Skills Exercises]{.smallcaps}** A head with a cloud and arrow Description automatically generated 1\. An appeal to pity is an argument pattern that can be either strong or weak (fallacious). Develop two appeals to pity---one that is strong and one that is weak. Explain why each is so. 2\. Pick a topic (e.g., women's or men's health, government debt, the environment, human rights, poverty, etc.) and construct an argument using visual images you create or find on the internet, in a newspaper, on YouTube, etc. If you have access to https://openart.ai/ you can use AI to create your argument. Then swap visual arguments with a peer and standardize and evaluate each other's arguments. Were your respective arguments obvious to each other? 3\. Assume the role of an influencer. Construct an argument for or against the death penalty for your followers. Use non-verbal elements if you choose. Think about your specific audiences and decide on the appropriate mode for argument. After you have constructed the argument, discuss it from the point of view of clarity: How have you presented your argument and structured it so that what you are saying is clear? What potential confusions did you need to avoid? How have you avoided them? What mistakes might occur in a poorly constructed version of your argument? 4\. Visit a tourism website that aims to convince you that you should take a trip somewhere: to a particular place, on a cruise, etc. Identify a visual argument they use. Is it a strong argument or not? 5\. For each of the following passages, say whether it contains an argument. If it contains an argument, diagram it, adding hidden premises and conclusions as necessary. Where any of this chapter's modes are involved, identify them and discuss their role in the argument. If the passages are primarily verbal, would any be strengthened with use of non-verbal modes?  iew image on Twitter h\) \[From a radio advertisement for a Subaru four-wheel drive\] i. **Adrian:** Move in together? It seems like a big step for us. I'm afraid. Are you sure you want to? © American Bus Association A smokestacks with a black smokestack Description automatically generated **Illustration** "Save Miguel" Smoke stack, Amorium Source: savemiguel.com **[(C) Reflective Questions]{.smallcaps}**  1\. Think about your arguing style. What modes do you rely on more often? How do people respond to your arguing style? 2\. Think about friends or family members who you have had arguments with. What modes did they rely on more often? How did you react to them? 3\. When you have different preferences for one arguing mode than others, do you think there are paths to mutual agreement, or will there continually be misunderstandings between multi-modal arguers? Use an example to demonstrate your point. 4\. Choose one or more questions below. Respond to each with a maximum of five minutes of writing. a. At what moment while reading Chapter 8 were you most engaged with the material? b. At what moment while reading Chapter 8 were you most distanced from the material? c. What material while reading Chapter 8 did you find most affirming or helpful? d. What material while reading Chapter 8 did you find most puzzling or confusing? e. What about the material in Chapter 8 surprised you the most? (This could be about your own reactions to the content or exercises, something that someone (e.g. your peer or instructor) did, or anything else that relates to reading this chapter). \ For more online exercises, review questions, and quizzes related to the material in this chapter, please go to https://sites.broadviewpress.com/reasoning