Page 117 - Žagar, Igor Ž. 2021. Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 117
perception, infer ence, and understanding in visual argumentation (and beyond)
P2 = Marat’s assassin herself recognized his reputation as a benefactor of
the unfortunate;
P3 = Marat gave his last penny to the poor;
C1 = Marat was, like Christ, a great moral martyr;
MC = You must strive to emulate Marat in support of the revolution.
After giving a series of detailed, but disputed, historical facts, Groarke
rejects all the above premises (P1, P2, P3), as well as the claims (C1, MC),
and concludes:
These criticisms of the argument in Marat cannot undermine the
fact that it displays a magnificent ability to paint. But one arti-
ficially ignores the meaning of the painting if one does not rec-
ognize that David was a social commentator as well as a painter
when he created Marat. It is not insignificant that he wielded tre-
mendous influence and contributed to out-of-control executions by
propounding faulty arguments that glorified Marat. One might
best compare his masterpiece to a rhetorically powerful verbal ar-
gument, which is nonetheless founded on false premises and invites
a faulty inference. (Groarke ibid.: 122)
Not just everybody can follow this chain of reasoning (and those who
can would certainly not agree on all the points Groarke is making), not
everybody can recognize David’s painting of Marat as a powerful argu-
ment, based on a series of (disputed) social, cultural, political and religious
details (that have different evaluations, depending on class, religious pref-
erence and many other socio-cultural factors).
A prototypical consumer of Groarke’s reasoning, of his detailed ‘ar-
gument’ about Marat resembling Christ, could only be constructed as a
well-educated western male/female, educated in the humanities and espe-
cially in the art history, with (rather) good social and economic standing,
profound interest in history, culture and religion, and strong inclination
for (visual) arts.
But this hypothetical construct represents a very thin segment of
mostly ‘Western’ population. Most of the younger or elderly people (even
if Westerners), don’t qualify. Neither do ‘average’ people, ‘everyday’ people,
‘people from the street’. Probably not even most of the professionals from
natural sciences and technology, unless they’ve had good, probably ‘classi-
cal’ education, and share special interest in arts.
117
P2 = Marat’s assassin herself recognized his reputation as a benefactor of
the unfortunate;
P3 = Marat gave his last penny to the poor;
C1 = Marat was, like Christ, a great moral martyr;
MC = You must strive to emulate Marat in support of the revolution.
After giving a series of detailed, but disputed, historical facts, Groarke
rejects all the above premises (P1, P2, P3), as well as the claims (C1, MC),
and concludes:
These criticisms of the argument in Marat cannot undermine the
fact that it displays a magnificent ability to paint. But one arti-
ficially ignores the meaning of the painting if one does not rec-
ognize that David was a social commentator as well as a painter
when he created Marat. It is not insignificant that he wielded tre-
mendous influence and contributed to out-of-control executions by
propounding faulty arguments that glorified Marat. One might
best compare his masterpiece to a rhetorically powerful verbal ar-
gument, which is nonetheless founded on false premises and invites
a faulty inference. (Groarke ibid.: 122)
Not just everybody can follow this chain of reasoning (and those who
can would certainly not agree on all the points Groarke is making), not
everybody can recognize David’s painting of Marat as a powerful argu-
ment, based on a series of (disputed) social, cultural, political and religious
details (that have different evaluations, depending on class, religious pref-
erence and many other socio-cultural factors).
A prototypical consumer of Groarke’s reasoning, of his detailed ‘ar-
gument’ about Marat resembling Christ, could only be constructed as a
well-educated western male/female, educated in the humanities and espe-
cially in the art history, with (rather) good social and economic standing,
profound interest in history, culture and religion, and strong inclination
for (visual) arts.
But this hypothetical construct represents a very thin segment of
mostly ‘Western’ population. Most of the younger or elderly people (even
if Westerners), don’t qualify. Neither do ‘average’ people, ‘everyday’ people,
‘people from the street’. Probably not even most of the professionals from
natural sciences and technology, unless they’ve had good, probably ‘classi-
cal’ education, and share special interest in arts.
117
