Abstracts
Abstract
Of the different modes that characterize Michael Gilbert’s multi-modal theory of argumentation, the kisceral is in many ways the most challenging to understand and employ. It appears to bypass the processes of reason that have dominated accounts in the Western tradition, diverting us toward the private worlds of hunches and gut reactions. This paper explores the nature of kisceral arguments, comparing them to the way intuition operates in William James’ examination of mystical experience. Having provided an account of kisceral arguments and their operation, the discussion turns to the even more challenging issue of how such arguments should be evaluated.
Keywords:
- informal logic,
- intuition,
- kisceral argument,
- multi-modal argumentation,
- mysticism
Résumé
Parmi les différents modes qui caractérisent la théorie multimodale de l'argumentation de Michael Gilbert, le kiscéral est à bien des égards le plus difficile à comprendre et à utiliser. Il semble contourner les processus de la raison qui ont dominé les récits dans la tradition occidentale, nous détournant vers les mondes privés des intuitions et des réactions viscérales. Cet article explore la nature des arguments kiscéraux, en les comparant à la manière dont l'intuition opère dans l'examen de l'expérience mystique par William James. Après avoir fourni un compte rendu des arguments kiscéraux et de leur fonctionnement, la discussion se tourne vers la question encore plus difficile de savoir comment ces arguments doivent être évalués.
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Albert, Elisa and Jennifer Block. 2020. Who’s afraid of Gwyneth Paltrow and Goop? The New York Times. URL: <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/opinion/goop-gwyneth-paltrow-netflix.html?auth=link-dismiss-google1tap>.
- Bataille, George. 2014. Inner experience. Trans. S. Kendall. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
- Brockriede, Wayne. 2006. What is argument. In Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede. Eds. Robert Trapp and Janice Schuetz. New York: International Debate Education Association.
- Foot, Philippa. 1967. The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review 5: 1-5.
- Gilbert, Michael A. 1994. Multi-modal argumentation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences. 24(2): 159-77.
- Gilbert, Michael A. .1997. Coalescent argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Gilbert, Michael A. .2011. The kisceral: Reason and intuition in argumentation. Argumentation 25: 163-170.
- Gilbert, Michael A. .2015. Arguing with people. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
- Groarke, Leo and Christopher W. Tindale. 2013. Good reasoning matters: A constructive approach to critical thinking. 5th edition. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
- Haidt, Jonathan. 2012. The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon Books.
- James, William. 1897/1956. The will to believe and other essays in popular philosophy. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
- James, William. 1902. The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature; Gifford lectures delivered at Edinburg in 1901-1902. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.
- Johnson, Ralph H. and J. Anthony Blair. 1993. Logical self-defense. 3rd edition. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
- Luria, Alexander F. 1976. Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Trans. M. Lopez-Morillas and L. Solotaroff. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Perelman, Chaïm. 1982. The realm of rhetoric. Trans. William Kluback. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
- Perelman, Chaïm and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. The new rheto-ric: A treatise on argumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
- Plato. 1966 Plato in twelve volumes, vol. 1. Trans. Harold North Fowler.. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd.
- Plato. 2012. Crito. Trans. Cathal Woods and Ryan Pack. URL: <https://www.pitt.edu/~mthompso/readings/crito.pdf>
- Rawls, John. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA. Belknap Press.
- Thagard, Paul. 2006. Hot thought: Mechanisms and applications of emotional cognition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
- Thomson, Judith Jarvis. 1985. The trolley problem. Yale Law Review94(6): 1395-1415.
- Tindale, Christopher W. 2020. Argumentation schemes and audiences: What rhetoric can bring to scheme theory. In Rigour and reason: Essays in honour of Hans Vilhelm Hansen, eds. J.A. Blair and C.W. Tindale. WSIA: 252-76.
- Tindale, Christopher W. 2021. The anthropology of argument: Cultural foundations of rhetoric and reason. New York: Routledge.
- Toulmin, Stephen. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Walton, Douglas, Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Wittgenstein, L. 1961. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Trans. D.F. Pears and B.F. McGuinness. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- Zaehner, Richard C. 1957. Mysticism sacred and profane: An inquiry into some varieties of praeternatural experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.