Posts Tagged ‘visual arguments’

4th Summer Institute On Argumentation:-

Multi‐Modal Arguments: Making sense of images (and other non‐verbal content) in Argument

May 22-25, 2013

  • Can works of art, films, virtual realities and other kinds of non-verbal content operate as arguments?
  • Why have some objected to this suggestion? What can we learn from their objections?
  • How can the various theoretical perspectives that make up argumentation theory, such as informal logic, rhetoric, dialectics, dialogue theory, and discourse analysis, account for multi-modal arguments?
  • How can we construct a comprehensive theory of argument that makes room for, explains, and allows us to assess, arguments of this sort?

In conjunction with the tenth OSSA (Ontario Society for the Study of Argument) conference, CRRAR will offer a summer institute on multimodal arguments.

One trend in the development of argumentation theory is an  increasingly broad conception of argument which recognizes (among other things) the use of “multi-modal”  elements – images, music, and other non-verbal components – as key components of many arguments. In this course we consider the questions that this raises.

Lectures and discussion will emphasize the development of perspectives that can be used to analyze, explain and evaluate such arguments, and on the analysis of concrete examples of multi-modal arguments and will consider objections to “visual arguments” and other forms of multi-modal argumentation. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Have a look at this short talk by David McCandless on data visualization:

There are a number of interesting things for argumentation theorists to think about here.  For one, if McCandless is right then clearly what he says is wind in the sails for those who rate argument diagramming highly among our various tools of analysis.

While watching this presentation I also found myself wondering if McCandless’ technique might provide aid and comfort to the cause of those who believe in visual arguments too.   To be clear, I don’t think that any of the visuals he presents here is an argument. He makes visual statements, sure, and at times draws inferences from them, but that would make his arguments (in my book at least) arguments with visual elements–not visual arguments per se.  Still I found myself wondering if maybe purely visual arguments might be a possible innovation that could come from the kind of work McCandless is doing, somewhere down the line.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: