fundamentals of argumentation theory curs 4 (unexpressed standpoints and unexpressed premises)

7/28/2019 Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory Curs 4 (Unexpressed Standpoints and Unexpressed Premises)

1/24

Fundamentals of

Argumentation Theory

Unexpressed Standpoints and

Unexpressed Premises


2/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises

In argumentative discourse, it is quite common for premises orstandpoints to be left unexpressed they are indirectly indicated inthe discourse

By openly and intentionally appearing to violate one or more of thecommunication rules usually followed by anyone who observes theCommunication Principle, the speaker conveys something more than theliteral content of an utterance

With the aid of the Communication Principle, the communication rules, and

some basic principles of logic, such indirectness can be understood, andspecific types of indirectness (i.e., unexpressed premises and unexpressedstandpoints) can be identified and reconstructed in the analysis.


3/24


1.1 Implicit Elements in Argumentative Discourse

Certain elements of argumentation may often be left out in practicewhen this is done intentionally and when the omitted elements are implicitlypresent in the argumentation, these elements are called unexpressed

(1) I wouldnt even consider getting a different job, because in most jobs I wouldntbe able to bring along my dog Sherry.- unexpressedpremise: I have to be able to bring Sherry

(2) Mark is unhappy. If his wife were more kind to him, he wouldnt be so unhappy.

- unexpressedstandpoint: Marks wife is not very kind to him

Although one might think otherwise, the reason for omitting a premise or a stdpis not always the intention to deceive others. Premises or arguments are usuallyleft out because they seem obvious


4/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises Sometimes premises & standpoints are left unexpressed in order to cover up the weakness of

the argument

(3) a. It is obvious that children should ideally be raised in a family with both a mother and afather, because it has been that way for thousands of years.

- unexpressed premise: Everything that has been done for thousands of years is good(this additional element is implicitly present in the explicit argumentation = unexpressedpremise)

- Even though an unexpressed premise is not explicitly presented, it may still be criticized bythe other party:

(3) b. I completely disagree. Why should something be good just because its been done that wayfor a long time? Wars have been waged for thousands of years, but that doesnt prove war isgood.


5/24


Even though implicit, unexpressed elements can crucially influencehow the discussion proceeds and therefore its outcome.

Both protagonistsand antagonistscan pursue an unexpressedpremise.

In evaluating argumentation, unexpressed elements can be veryimportant, particularly when evaluating the soundness of that

argumentation when analyzing argumentation, it is important tonote what elements have been omitted and to figure out whichstatements need to be added to complete the arguments


6/24


1.2 Indirectness and the Rules for Communication

Indirectness = the speaker says what he means in a roundabout wayrather than in an indirect way

(1) Would it be too much trouble to take this package to the post office?indirect request

Indirectness = a special kind of implicit language use

(2) Shop assistant: Its 170. < I inform you that the price of that suit is 170dollars (= ordinary implicit language use, there is no attempt to convey

something additional in a roundabout way)

In indirect language use speakers do not only mean to convey morethan what they say, but also indicate this to the listener i.e., indirectnesscommunicates sth.


7/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises How do speakers convey that they are saying something indirectly? How is one supposed to know that something different is meant from what is said?

When people really want to communicate with each other, they follow theCommunication Principle

The Communication Principle: when communicating, one tries to make onescontribution to communication match the purpose of their communication as much aspossible.

One must observe the general rules of communication:

1. Be clear2. Be sincere3. Be efficient4. Keep to the point


8/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises Rules for Communication:

1. Be clear = the clarity rule:whatever is said/written should be as easy to understand aspossible

2. Be sincere= the sincerity rule:whatever you say must not be insincere3. Be efficient= the efficiency rule:whatever you say must not be redundant or pointless

4. Be relevant= the relevancy rule:whatever you say must appropriately connect with what hasgone before

The communication rules are formulated as commandments: any efficient communicationpresupposes the use of CRs

It is immediately noticeable when someone does not obey the rules speakers takeadvantage of this whenever they want to convey something over and above the literal content

of their words i.e., by violating or appearing to violate one or more of the CRs, yet at thesame time not abandoning the Communication Principle entirely, they make it clear to thelistener that they mean something different or something more than what they are saying.

Thus, the CP and the CRs give language users the opportunity to be indirect and to recognizeindirectness in others.


9/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises1.3 Correctness Conditions for Speech Acts

- CRs are always applicable regardless of the function of an utterance (e.g., making anannouncement, making a promise, explaining something, defending a standpointetc.) in performing any of these speech acts, the communication rules must beobserved

- The CRs that need to be observed vary according to the speech act that oneperforms:

e.g., a promise: the CR Be sincere requires that the speaker must really intend to do what they promise

a request: the speaker must sincerely wish the listener to comply with his request

> for each of the various kinds of speech acts, one can give a more precisedescription of what it means to follow the CP this is done by formulating specificcorrectness (felicity) conditions that each kind of speech act must meet.


10/24


11/24


Responsibility conditions: describe what the speaker must believe in orderto follow the sincerity rule

For Argumentation = the speaker will try to convince the opponent without

deceiving

The responsibility conditions that must be met for argumentation statethatthe speaker believes that:

a. the standpoint is acceptable

b. the statements used in argumentation are acceptable

c. the argumentation is an acceptable defense (or

refutation) of the proposition to which the standpoint refers.


12/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises1.4 Violations of the Communication Rules

- Both the speaker and the listener try to observe the CP and the CRs problems arisewhen it appears that one of the CRs has been violated without it being the case that thespeaker has abandoned the CP

> in response to this, the listener does not immediately assume that the speaker(through unclarity, insincerity, inefficiency, or pointlessness) has disrupted thecommunication for no good reason he will, instead, try to interpret the speakers words insuch a way that the apparent violation acquires a plausible meaning.

e.g., Someone interrupts an animated conversation about a mutual friends love life with theirrelevant remark Its a little windy today listeners are likely to interpret (to rationalize)the remark: as a warning that the friend in question has just entered the room

Speakers can take advantage of this rationalizing tendency on the part of their listeners andintentionally convey something more than they are literally saying by means of an openviolation of one of the CRs = this is what happens in indirectness


13/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises1.5 Different forms of indirectness

All communication rules can be used to convey something indirectly, and violationsof different communication rules lead to different forms of indirectness.

1. The Clarity Rule: speakers must make sure that listeners understand what theymean

> on the grounds of this rule, listeners can assume that it is possible for them tofigure out the speakers meaning

a promise expressed vaguely or clearly can be interpreted as an indirect

expression of reluctance or even refusal:

(1) Gary: When are you going to fix that broken coffee grinder?Mary: Sometime


14/24


2. The Sincerity Rule: the speaker must be sincere

> on the grounds of this rule, the listener can assume

that the speaker means what he says

by saying something obviously insincere, the speakercan ironically (and indirectly) convey the opposite of

what he actually says:

(2) So you didnt even recognize your ex-boyfriend any more?

He must have been flattered.


15/24


3. The Efficiency Rule: the speaker may not say anything that heknows to be redundant or pointless

> on the grounds of this rule, the listener can assume that whatever

the speaker says is not flawed in terms of efficiencyby using obvious redundancy, a speaker may convey someinformation indirectly

(3) I hereby open this meeting!(uttered by a committee member who thinks the meeting time is being wasted onchit-chat and who wants to make it clear (indirectly) that it is high time they gotdown to business)

(4) When will I ever find happiness?(a pointless question as it has no answer- can be used to indirectly express acomplaint)


16/24


4. The Relevancy Rule: the speaker must ensure that their statementsare a suitable response to what has preceded them

On the grounds of this rule, listeners can assume that the speakers

statements are suitable responses to the prior utterances

a response that obviously does not connect up with what has justbeen said, can be used to convey that the speaker refuses todiscuss he topic:

(5) Mary: How would you feel about inviting John to have supper with ussometime?

Gary: I think Ill go look and see if theres a can of beer in the fridge.


17/24


In all these variants of indirectness, speakers choose not to saydirectly what they mean

In practice this phenomenon is quite widespread + there exist a

great number of reasons:

E.g., they might consider a question more polite than a direct request orcommand

They might be afraid of losing face if their suggestion is rejectedThey might consider it to be more strategic no to express their intentions

too openly

Irrespective of the reason, what they say has an indirect meaning this meaning will only be understood if speakers ensure that theirviolation of the communication rules is noticed and correctly interpreted

by the listener


18/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises1.6 Making Unexpressed Standpoints Explicit

When speakers do not explicitly express their standpoint, they usually expect the listener to beable to infer this standpoint from the arguments put forward (Why else would they bother topresent argumentation?)

An unexepressed stp may be identified by using logic as a tool all argumentation is based on reasoning and if speakers argue sincerely, they believe that their reasoningis valid

a listener who takes the speaker seriously must assume that the latter has at least made an attempt topresent valid reasoning

(6) The only good museum director is, of course, one who buys your work. If he doesnt do that, hes a real jerk.Now Mr. Bianchi has never bought anything of mine. (uttered by a sculptor)

the stp is unexpressed. It is, however, defended and the defense consists of one single argument, which isbased on one line of reasoning. The stdp is not expressed therefore the conclusion of the line of reasoningthat is being presented is missing. The speaker who takes the argument seriously will assume that thereasoning is valid and will supply the missing conclusion themselves i.e., they will try to formulate aconclusion that logically follows from the reasoning presented.


19/24


it is easy to reconstruct the reasoning of this argument:

1. If a museum director does not buy my work, then hes a real jerk.2. Mr. Bianchi has never bought any of my work.

3. Therefore: Mr. Bianchi is a real jerk.

The reasoning is valid as there are no holes in the logic. If one acceptsstatements 1 and 2, one is forced to accept the conclusion as well assumingthat the sculptor does not intend to abandon the CP, statement 3 can beconsidered to be the unexpressed standpoint.

Procedure: one must first determine what the logical conclusion would be. Ifthere exist more than one posibility, one should choose the standpoint that inlight with the context and background information is most in accordance with allthe communication rules.


20/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises1.7 Making Unexpressed Premises Explicit

With the aid of the CP, the CRs and logic, one can render unexpressed premisesexplicit

Technically, any piece of argumentation missing one of the premises amounts to aninvalid reasoning:

(7) Olga: Claus likes to yodel, because he comes from Tyrol.

- the statement that Claus comes from Tyrol does not justify the conclusion that helikes to yodel the reasoning is only valid if another statement is added to it: wecan identify this statement by connecting the explicit premise to the stp by means ofan if.then statement:

If Clause comes from Tyrol, then he likes to yodel.- if this statement is added to the argument, then the reasoning is logically valid

(modus ponensreasoning: if the premises are valid, then the conclusion isnecessarily valid):

1. Ifpthen q(If Claus comes from Tyrol, then he likes to yodel.)2. p(Claus comes from Tyrol)

3. Therefore q(Claus likes to yodel)


21/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises The reasoning underlying the argumentation above became valid when it was

supplemented with an Ifthen statement

< this is not, however, sufficient: the added statement is a merely literal repetition ofwhat was already implied by the other statements = it is redundant violates theefficiency rule

> it would be more constructive if one attributed to the speaker a statement that ismore informative and which does not violate the efficiency rule:

> one may add one of the following statements, the one which best fits the verbaland non-verbal context of the argument and that can be reasonably attributed to thespeaker:

a. Every Tyroler likes to yodel.b. All Tyrolers like to yodel.c. Tyrolers like to yodel.d. Most Tyrolers like to yodel.

> the statement which gets added to the argumentation counts as an unxepressedpremise:

(8) Olga: Claus likes to yodel, because he comes from Tyrol (and Tyrolers like to yodel).


22/24


1.8 Unexpressed Premises in a Well-defined Context

The context may be well-defined, providing specific clues about the way inwhich the unexpressed premise should be formulated one must be carefulnot to formulate the unexpressed premise too hastily or by relying on preconceived

notions.

Procedure: it is best to start from the assumption that argumentationtakes place in a context that is not well defined unless such a non-specificinterpretation is unfair to the speaker i.e., if the nonspecific interpretationattributes to the speaker a violation of the CRs, then one should checkwhether the context also allows for another, more specific interpretationthat does not entail a violation of the communication rules


23/24

Unexpressed Standpoints andUnexpressed Premises(9) (Sally responding to her friend who has invited her to a party):

I dont think you should ask me to go with you to that party. Ronald and Marlene arein Portugal!

- Without further information about the context, there is no apparent connection

between the argument (Ronald and Marlene are in Portugal!) and the standpoint (Idont think you should ask me to go with you to that party.). In this case, thelistener trying to identify the unexpressed premise can do little more than tosupplement the reasoning with an if..then statement, so that at least therequirement for logical validity be met.

- If more is known about the context, then a more meaningful statement (and closerto the intention of the speaker) can be reformulated: e.g., if Sally is known to be very

sad because her boyfriend Ronald has gone on holiday with her friend Marlene, thenthe following formulation is possible:

(10) Someone who is disappointed in love cannot be expected to want to go to a party.


24/24

Bibliography

Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, A.F. Snoek Henkemans. 2002.Argumentation: analysis, evaluation, presentation. London: LawrenceErlbaum Associates.

Eemeren, F.H. van (ed.). 2001. Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory.

Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, A.F. Snoek Henkemans, J.A. Blair,Johnson, E.C.W. Krabbe, C. Plantin, D.N. Walton, C.A. Willard, J. Woods,and D. Zarefsky. 1996. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst. 1984. Speech Acts in ArgumentativeDiscussions. Berlin/Dordrecht: Walter de Gruyter/Foris

fundamentals of argumentation theory curs 4 (unexpressed standpoints and unexpressed premises)

Documents