Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy - Springer978-3-319-06334-8/1.pdf · & Kritik, 2012) and “Knowledge by ... “In varietate concordia—United in diversity: European

Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy

Argumentation LibraryVOLUME 25

For further volumes:http://www.springer.com/series/5642

Series Editor

Frans H. van Eemeren, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Editorial Board

Bart Garssen, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands Scott Jacobs, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Erik C.W. Krabbe, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

John Woods, University of British Columbia, Canada

Henrique Jales RibeiroEditor

Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy

2123

ISSN 1566-7650ISBN 978-3-319-06333-1 ISBN 978-3-319-06334-8 (eBook)DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-06334-8Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London

Library of Congress Control Number: 2014939428

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recita-tion, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or infor-mation storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar meth-odology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplica-tion of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publica-tion does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publica-tion, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

EditorHenrique Jales RibeiroPhilosophy, Communication

and InformationUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal

v

Contents

1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1Henrique Jales Ribeiro

Part I Theoretical Approaches to Argument by Analogy

2 Argumentation Schemes for Argument from Analogy ......................... 23Douglas N. Walton

3 Argumentation by Analogy in Stereotypical Argumentative Patterns ..................................................................................................... 41Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen

4 The Uses of Analogies .............................................................................. 57Lilian Bermejo-Luque

5 Analogy and Redefinition ........................................................................ 73Fabrizio Macagno

6 Arguments from Parallel Reasoning ...................................................... 91Jan Albert van Laar

7 A Systematic Review of Classifications of Arguments by Analogy ...... 109André Juthe

8 Messing Up the Mind? Analogical Reasoning with Metaphors ........... 129Eugen Fischer

Part II Applied Approaches to Argument by Analogy

9 How to Make Figures Talk: Comparative Argument in TV Election Night Specials ............................................................................ 151Marianne Doury

vi Contents

10 Analogical Argumentation in Text Genres: Empirical Studies .......... 171Rosalice Pinto

11 Classical Fables as Arguments: Narration and Analogy .................... 189Paula Olmos

12 Analogies in Scientific Explanations: Concept Formation by Analogies in Cultural Evolutionary Theory ........................................ 209Christian J. Feldbacher

13 Analogy and Interpretation in Legal Argumentation ......................... 227Damiano Canale and Giovanni Tuzet

14 Analogia Legis and Analogia Iuris: An Overview from a Rhetorical Perspective ............................................................... 243Giovanni Damele

15 Analogical Reasoning in Clinical Practice ........................................... 257Nino Guallart

16 The Role of Analogy in Philosophical Discourse ................................. 275Henrique Jales Ribeiro

Index ................................................................................................................ 291

vii

Contributors

Lilian Bermejo-Luque Department of Philosophy I, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Damiano Canale Department of Legal Studies, Bocconi University, Milano, Italy

Giovanni Damele Institute for Philosophy of Language, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Marianne Doury French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), Paris, France; University of Paris 3 (New Sorbonne), Paris, France

Frans H. van Eemeren Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Christian J. Feldbacher Duesseldorf Center for Logic and Philosophy of Science, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany

Eugen Fischer School of Philosophy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Nino Guallart Department of Philosophy, Logic and Philosophy of Science, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain

Bart Garssen Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

André Juthe Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Fabrizio Macagno Institute for Philosophy of Language, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Paula Olmos Department of Logic, History and Philosophy of Science, National Distance Education University (UNED), Madrid, Spain

Rosalice Pinto Research Centre for Linguistics, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

viii Contributors

Henrique Jales Ribeiro Department of Philosophy, Communication and Information, Faculty of Letters, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Giovanni Tuzet Department of Legal Studies, Bocconi University, Milano, Italy

Jan Albert van Laar Faculty of Philosophy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Douglas N. Walton Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada

ix

About the Authors

Lilian Bermejo-Luque is research fellow at the Department of Philosophy I of the University of Granada (Spain). Her areas of expertise are argumentation theory and theories of rationality. She has published several articles in well-known journals in those fields, such as Informal Logic or Argumentation, and in edited volumes such as Arguing on the Toulmin model (2006) or Understanding argumentation (2008). She is the author of the monograph Giving reasons: A linguistic-pragmatic approach to argumentation theory (2011). She is member of the editorial board of several academic journals and member of the AILACT board of directors.

Damiano Canale is full professor of legal philosophy and head of the Department of Legal Studies at Bocconi University, Milan. He is a member of the editorial board of Law and Philosophy, the Journal of Argumentation in Context, and Ars Interpretandi. His research interests cover language philosophy, legal argumentation, and history of legal and political concepts. His publications include the books La costituzione delle differenze. Giusnaturalismo e codificazione del diritto civile nella Prussia del ‘700 (2000) and Forme del limite nell’interpretazione giudiziale (2003). He is co-editor of A history of the philosophy of law in the civil law world, 1600–1900 (2009), The rules of inference. Inferentialism in law and philosophy (2009) and The planning theory of law: A critical reading (2013). His papers on legal theory and legal argumentation have been published in Ratio Juris; Informal Logic; and Argumentation.

Giovanni Damele is post-doctoral fellow at the Institute for Philosophy of Language of the New University of Lisbon. His main fields of academic interest include philosophy of law, philosophy of politics, argumentation theory and rhetoric. He is particularly focused on legal argumentation and, generally speaking, on the persuasive and strategic dimension of practical argumentation.

Marianne Doury is tenured researcher at the “Laboratoire Communication et Politique” (Paris, CNRS) and associate researcher at Cediscor-Syled (University of Paris 3–New Sorbonne). She is a member of the editorial board of the journal Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, and of the book series Argumentation in Context (AIC); and a referee for the journals Communication, Mots—Les Langages du Politique; Langage et Société; Argumentation. Marianne Doury’s key

x

publications include: Le débat immobile (1997), Les émotions dans les interactions (editor with C. Plantin and V. Traverso, 2000), L’argumentation aujourd’hui: Positions théoriques en confrontation (editor with S. Moirand, 2004). She teaches argumentation at Paris 3 University.

Frans H. van Eemeren is Emeritus Professor of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric. He is a Distinguished Scholar of the American National Communication Association and Doctor Honoris Causa of the University of Lugano. His book publications include: Speech acts in argumentative discussions (1984); Argumentation, communication, and fallacies (1992), Reconstructing argumentative discourse (1993), Fundamentals of argumentation theory (1996), A systematic theory of argumentation (2004), Argumentative indicators in discourse (2007), Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness (2009), and Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse (2010). Professor van Eemeren is President of ISSA, editor of the journal Argumentation, the Journal of Argumentation in Context, and the accompanying book series.

Christian J. Feldbacherc is enrolled in the Ph.D programme of the University of Innsbruck. His thesis addresses analogies in scientific explanations. He is research fellow at the DCLPS (Duesseldorf Center for Logic and Philosophy of Science) and lecturer at the University of Duesseldorf. His main area of research is analogies as well as strategy-selection by meta-induction and social opinion pooling. His area of interest is mainly social epistemology, ethics, and general philosophy of science. Recent publications: “Meta-induction and the wisdom of crowds” (Analyse & Kritik, 2012) and “Knowledge by narratives: On the methodology of Stump’s defence” (EJPR, 2012).

Eugen Fischer (BPhil, DPhil Oxford, PD Munich) is a senior lecturer of Philosophy at the University of East Anglia. He has been a Heisenberg Research Reader (DFG) and Fellow at the Netherlands Institute of Advanced Study and the Collegium of Budapest. One focus of his research is how analogies, metaphors, and “philosophical pictures” shape philosophical thought. He authored Philosophical delusion and its therapy (2011) and Linguistic creativity (2000), and co-edited Philosophical insights: Essays in metaphilosophy (in press) and Wittgenstein at work—Method in the ‘Philosophical Investigations’ (2004).

Nino Guallart Forés is B.A. in Philosophy (Universidad de Zaragoza, 2010), Master in Logic and Philosophy of Science (Universidad de Salamanca, 2012). He is currently working on his Ph.D under the supervision of Dr. Ángel Nepomuceno (Universidad de Sevilla). His thesis aims to explore different types of lambda calculi, mainly intuitionistic type theory. Along with logic, other relevant lines of research are argumentation and philosophy of science, especially philosophy of biology and questions related to statistics, induction and verification.

Bart Garssen is lecturer at the Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, at Amsterdam University. His research interests include argument schemes, fallacies and political argumentation. He is editor of

About the Authors

xi

the Journal of Argumentation in Context (Benjamins) and book review editor of Argumentation (Springer). His main publications are: Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness: Empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules (2009), “In varietate concordia—United in diversity: European parliamentary debate as an argumentative activity type” (2010), and “The disguised ‘abusive ad hominem’ empirically investigated: Strategic maneuvering with direct personal attacks” (2012).

André Juthe is a Ph.D student in Argumentation Theory at the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. His thesis focuses on arguments by analogy. He has published the articles “Arguments by analogy” (2005) and “Refutation by parallel argument” (2009) in the journal Argumentation: An International Journal on Reasoning. He received his undergraduate degrees (Ma; Ba; Ma) from the University of Uppsala, in Sweden.

Jan Albert van Laar is working at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Groningen (the Netherlands). He defended his Ph.D dissertation on The dialectic of ambiguity in 2003, and has worked ever since on the philosophy of argument, publishing in journals such as Argumentation; Informal Logic; Synthesis and Argument & Computation. Some of his current interests are: argument and emotion; norms for argumentative criticism; and political deliberation.

Fabrizio Macagno (Ph.D in Linguistics, UCSC, Milan, 2003) works as a researcher and senior lecturer at the New University of Lisbon. His current research is focused on the persuasive use of emotional language and on the dialectical dimension of discourse implicitness. He is author of several papers on definition, informal fallacies, argumentation schemes and dialogue theory, published in major international peer-reviewed journals. His most relevant publications include Argumentation schemes (2008) and Emotive language in argumentation (in press).

Paula Olmos has conducted research in Philosophy and Classical Studies in several Spanish academic centres (UC3M, UNED). Her research lines include different aspects of the History of Logic, Argumentation and Rhetoric as well as the contemporary Theory of Argumentation, in which she takes a rhetorical stance. She has published papers on these issues in journals like Informal Logic; Theoria; Renaissance Studies; Argumentation or Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. She is the author of a monographic volume on Spanish sixteen-century philosopher Pedro Simón Abril (2010), editor of the collection of essays Greek science in the long run (2012) and co-editor of the collective volume Compendio de lógica, argumentación y retórica (2011, 2012).

Rosalice Pinto is a researcher of the Centre for Linguistics at the New University of Lisbon. Her main interests are argumentation, rhetoric, texts in professional contexts, Portuguese for specific purposes. She has a Ph.D in linguistics from Lisbon New University, in Portugal, and a post-doctoral degree in “Social Media” from the University of Geneva and Lisbon New University. She has published papers in peer review and prominent international papers in Portugal and abroad.

About the Authors

xii

Henrique Jales Ribeiro is associate professor at Coimbra University’s Faculty of Letters (Portugal), Department of Philosophy, Communication and Information. He is the principal investigator of the research group “Teaching logic & argumentation” of the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT). His core areas of research are logic, argumentation theory and philosophy didactics. His publications include: Rhetoric and argumentation in the beginning of the XXIst Century (2009); Inside arguments: Logic and the study of argumentation (2012); and Aristotle and argumentation theory (2013).

Giovanni Tuzet is assistant professor of philosophy of law, at Bocconi University (Italy). He studied law and philosophy in Turin and Paris and wrote his Ph.D thesis on Peirce’s theory of inference. His publications include several papers on legal theory, legal reasoning, and legal argumentation, and the books La prima inferenza. L’abduzione di C.S. Peirce fra scienza e diritto (2006), Dover decidere. Diritto, incertezza e ragionamento (2010), La pratica dei valori. Nodi fra conoscenza e azione (2012) and Filosofia della prova giuridica (2013). He co-edited The rules of inference: Inferentialism in law and philosophy (2009) and The planning theory of law: A critical reading (2013).

Douglas N. Walton is a Canadian academic, well known for his many widely published books and papers on argumentation. He is at present Distinguished Research Fellow of the Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric at the University of Windsor, Canada. His theories are increasingly finding applications in education, computer science, especially artificial intelligence, and evidential reasoning in law.

About the Authors