Page 190 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 190
What Do We Know about the World?
ly a normative, separation of reason and emotion. Standardly, appeals to
fear or pity are considered means of audience exploitation and manipu-
lation, and are therefore considered fallacious. However, contemporary
scholarship especially in the rhetorical tradition of argument analysis
suggests a more nuanced understanding, and indeed provides some jus-
tification for the use of emotions in argumentation, especially in politi-
cal discourse and the mass media.
For Walton (1992: 68) for instance, once one departs from the par-
adigm equating good arguments with deductively valid forms of in-
ference, one finds numerous legitimate contexts for emotional appeals
in argumentation such that appeals to emotion may be more general-
ly recognized as legitimate arguments under the right conditions. Mc-
Clurg (1992) argues that such appeals are not always fallacious, espe-
cially not in democratic societies where political action rightly depends
on persuasion, and persuasion in turn depends on rhetoric. Based on
Walton (2007: 131), the appeal to fear is currently recognized within so-
cial sciences as a distinct argument scheme, used by those in the busi-
ness of changing public opinion and attitudes through mass media. Al-
though some empirical investigations in the social sciences have claimed
to demonstrate the effectiveness of this type or argumentation scheme,
Trip and Devenport (1988) submit that such arguments are ultimately
negative insofar as they sustain inaction, and thus the status quo, while
positive arguments work better to persuade an audience to take action.
Arguments that appeal to fear are typically used in issues of health and
safety. However, legitimate or not, argumentation cannot be based dom-
inantly or solely on appeal to fear. A complete absence of rational reason-
ing makes the argumentation weak and represents a short-cut solution
to a complex question.
Table 3: Appeal to fear in argumentation
Europhobes Europhiles
If Croatia becomes a member of the EU If we miss this chance, the alternative is
without consulting its people, the demon- a Western Balkan. Our standard [of liv-
strations in Greece and on Wall Street are ing] will decrease. We will suffer. (J. Radoš,
going to be a “piece of cake” compared to HNS)
Croatia (I. Vekić, former minister internal
affairs)
ly a normative, separation of reason and emotion. Standardly, appeals to
fear or pity are considered means of audience exploitation and manipu-
lation, and are therefore considered fallacious. However, contemporary
scholarship especially in the rhetorical tradition of argument analysis
suggests a more nuanced understanding, and indeed provides some jus-
tification for the use of emotions in argumentation, especially in politi-
cal discourse and the mass media.
For Walton (1992: 68) for instance, once one departs from the par-
adigm equating good arguments with deductively valid forms of in-
ference, one finds numerous legitimate contexts for emotional appeals
in argumentation such that appeals to emotion may be more general-
ly recognized as legitimate arguments under the right conditions. Mc-
Clurg (1992) argues that such appeals are not always fallacious, espe-
cially not in democratic societies where political action rightly depends
on persuasion, and persuasion in turn depends on rhetoric. Based on
Walton (2007: 131), the appeal to fear is currently recognized within so-
cial sciences as a distinct argument scheme, used by those in the busi-
ness of changing public opinion and attitudes through mass media. Al-
though some empirical investigations in the social sciences have claimed
to demonstrate the effectiveness of this type or argumentation scheme,
Trip and Devenport (1988) submit that such arguments are ultimately
negative insofar as they sustain inaction, and thus the status quo, while
positive arguments work better to persuade an audience to take action.
Arguments that appeal to fear are typically used in issues of health and
safety. However, legitimate or not, argumentation cannot be based dom-
inantly or solely on appeal to fear. A complete absence of rational reason-
ing makes the argumentation weak and represents a short-cut solution
to a complex question.
Table 3: Appeal to fear in argumentation
Europhobes Europhiles
If Croatia becomes a member of the EU If we miss this chance, the alternative is
without consulting its people, the demon- a Western Balkan. Our standard [of liv-
strations in Greece and on Wall Street are ing] will decrease. We will suffer. (J. Radoš,
going to be a “piece of cake” compared to HNS)
Croatia (I. Vekić, former minister internal
affairs)
