Words and Images in Argumentation

Argumentation

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 355-368

  Barceló Aspeitia, Axel Arturo ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Heterogenous argumentation; Images; Interpretation; Propositions; Sentences; Visual argumentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864586735     PISSN: 0920427X     EISSN: 15728374     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10503-011-9259-y     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Alcolea-Banegas, Jesús. 2009. Visual arguments in film. Argumentation 23: 259-275.
2. Areni, Charles S. 2002. The proposition-probability model of argument structure and message acceptance. Journal of Consumer Research 29: 168-187.
3. Barceló, Axel, (forthcoming), Subsentential Logical Form. Crítica.
4. Barwise, Jon. 1993. Heterogenous Reasoning. In Working Papers on Diagrams and Logic, ed. Jon Barwise and Gerard Allwein, 1-13. Bloomington: Indiana University Logic Group Preprint No. IULG-93-24.
5. Bealer, George. 1993. A solution to Frege's puzzle. Philosophical Perspectives 7: 17-60.
6. Bealer, George. 1998. Propositions. Mind 107: 1-32.
7. Birdsell, David S., and Leo Groarke. 1996. Toward a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy 33: 1-10.
8. Birdsell, David S., and Leo Groarke. 2008. Outlines of a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy 43: 103-113.
9. Blair, John Anthony. 1995. Premise Adequacy. In Analysis and Evaluation (Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, University of Amsterdam, June 21-24, 1994), Vol. II, ed. F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard, 190-202. Amsterdam: SicSat.
10. Blair, John Anthony. 1996. The possibility and actuality of visual arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy 33: 23-39.
11. Blair, John Anthony. 2003. The rhetoric of visual arguments. In Defining visual rhetorics, ed. C. A. Hill and M. Helmers, 137-151. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Carney, Russell N., and Joel R. Levin. 2002. Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review 14: 5-26.
13. Copi, Irving M. 1961. Introduction to logic. New York: Mac Millan.
14. Crane, Tim. 2009. Is perception a propositional attitude? Philosophical Quarterly 59: 452-469.
15. Gaskin, Richard. 2008. The unity of the proposition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Gilbert, Michael. 1994. Multi-modal argumentation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 24: 159-177.
17. Gilbert, Michael. 1997. Coalescent argument. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Goodwin, William Mark. 2009. Visual representations in science. Philosophy of Science 76: 372-390.
19. Groarke, Leo. 1996. Logic, art and argument. Informal Logic 18: 105-129.
20. Groarke, Leo. 2002. Towards a pragma-dialectics of visual argument. In Advances in pragma-dialectics, ed. F. H. van Eemeren, 137-151. Amsterdam: SicSat, and Newport News: Vale Press.
21. Groarke, Leo. 2008. Informal Logic. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta, URL = & http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/fall2008/entries/logic-informal/.
22. Groarke, Leo. 2009. Five theses on Toulmin and visual argument. In Pondering on problems of argumentation: Twenty essays on theoretical issues, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen, 229-239. Amsterdam: Springer.
23. Groarke, Leo, and C. Tindale. 2004, 2008, Good Reasoning Matters! (3rd edn, 4th edn, Toronto: Oxford University Press.
24. Holliday, William G. 1975. The effects of verbal and adjunct pictorial-verbal information in science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 12: 77-83.
25. Johnson, Ralph H. 2000. Manifest rationality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Johnson, Ralph H. 2003. Why 'visual arguments' aren't arguments. In Il@25. A Conference Celebrating the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the First International Symposium on Informal Logic. URL = & http://web2. uwindsor. ca/courses/philosophy/johnsoa/visargtext. htm.
27. Johnson, Ralph H., and J. Anthony Blair. 2000. Informal logic: An overview. Informal Logic 20: 93-107.
28. King, Jeffrey C. 1996. Structured propositions and sentence structure. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25: 495-521.
29. Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. 2005. Everything's an argument, 3rd ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.
30. Malinas, Gary. 1991. A semantics for pictures. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21: 275-298.
31. Perini, Laura. 2005. The truth in pictures. Philosophy of Science 72: 262-285.
32. Prakken, Henry. 2011. Argumentation without arguments. Argumentation 25: 171-184.
33. Richards, Thomas J. 1978. The language of reason. New York: Pergamon.
34. Richards, Daniel Thomas. 2009. Visual argument reconsidered: "Objective" theory and a classical rhetorical approach. A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Professional Communication.
35. Shelley, Cameron. 1996. Rhetorical and demonstrative modes of visual argument: Looking at images of human evolution. Argumentation and Advocacy 33: 53-68.
36. Shelley, Cameron. 2001. Aspects of visual argument: A study of the March of progress. Informal Logic 21: 85-96.
37. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell (revised edition, 1995).
38. Stainton, R. J. 2006. Words and thoughts: Subsentences, ellipsis and the philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
39. Suppe, Frederick. 1977. The search for philosophic understanding of scientific theories. In The structure of scientific theories, ed. Frederick Suppe, 1-232. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
40. Tarnay, László. 2003. The conceptual basis of visual argumentation. In Proceedings of the fifth conference. ISSA, ed. F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, and A. F. Snoeck Henkemans, 1001-1005. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
41. Tindale, Christopher W. 1999. Acts of arguing: A rhetorical model of argument. Albany, New York: University of New York Press.
42. Toulmin, Stephen Edelston. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Tversky, Barbara, and Paul U. Lee. 1999. Pictorial and verbal tools for conveying routes. In Spatial information theory: Cognitive and computational foundations of geographic information science, ed. Christian Freksa and David M. Mark, 51-64. Berlin: Springer.
44. van Eemeren, F. H., and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Walton, D. N. 1990. What is reasoning? What is an argument? Journal of Philosophy 87: 300-419.