Mrs burns could have argued logically and at some

Info iconThis preview shows pages 10–12. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Mrs. Burns could have argued logically and at some length with Mr. Burns and still not have made any persuasive progress. It was her choice of mode that allowed her to persuade him she was right. This is not to say that a logical argument could not have worked. Mrs. Burns might have said, "Don't be silly. Anyone who slams the door, snarls at his wife, and storms about is tense." And, Mr. Burns might have thought it over and concurred, but I believe most of us would agree that Mrs. Burns' argument was the more effective. One might, at this point, agree that Mrs. Burns' technique was effective, but at the same time claim that example [8¡ is not an argument at all. But why not? There was disagreement and there was communication. The communication was used to influence the disagreement. Mrs. Burns intended, at least in part, to move Mr. Burns from a position of disagreement to one of agreement. It is clearly an attempt on Mrs. Burns part to get Mr. Burns to see the world from her perspective and admit her insights. In fact, the only reason for denying its status as an argument is that it is not linguistic, and to do that is to beg the entire question. Only by assuming in the first place that all arguments are ultimately linguistic, or even \linguistically expressible] to use O'Keefe's (1982) expression, can one prove that there are no non-linguistic arguments. One more brief example in the visceral mode. Example 9. Diane is about to reach for the window crank to open the kitchen window. \Don't touch that!] Michael calls, \it's broken.] Diane looks at him sceptically, starts to turn the handle, then jumps back as the window comes crashing down at her feet. She looks back at Michael and says, \Hm, I guess you were right.] In this case, as for example in an argument over who is the faster runner, swiftest swimmer or strongest person, the evidence \speaks for itself], and it does so physically. The term ¢kisceral£ derives from the Japanese word ¢ki£ which signifies energy, life-force, connectedness. I introduce it as a generic, non-value-laden term to cover a wide group of communicative phenomenon. The kisceral is that mode of communication that relies on the intuitive, the imaginative, the religious, the spiritual, and the mystical. It is a wide category used M.A. GILBERT MULTI-MODAL ARGUMENTATION PHIL OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES VOL 24 NR 2 .11 fequently beyond the halls of academe. And before the category is disdained it should be understood. To begin with, we all refer to such phenomena as \hunches], \feelings], even \coincidences]. These occurrences are common and ordinary, even, for the rationalist, entirely explicable in ordinary terms. 4 That is fine. The category, kisceral, carries with it no metaphysical, and certainly no spiritual, baggage. It refers to a category of communication recognizable to most people. Going further, making that category into something that is very extraordinary, that includes, say, life regressions or tarot readings, is entirely up to the individual arguer. The researcher, however should bear two things in mind. First, the category is not empty by even the most positivist standards. empty by even the most positivist standards....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page10 / 13

Mrs Burns could have argued logically and at some length...

This preview shows document pages 10 - 12. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online