The Virtues of Argument
Andrew Aberdein
Florida Institute of Technology
[email protected]
my.fit.edu/~aberdein
Joint Session, University of Bristol, 8th July 2007
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Aristotle’s Moral Virtues
Irascibility ←−
Gentleness
−→ Spiritlessness
Rashness ←−
Courage
−→ Cowardice
Shamelessness ←−
Modesty
−→ Diffidence
Profligacy ←−
Temperance
−→ Insensitiveness
Envy ←− Righteous Indignation −→ [Malice]
Profit ←−
The Just
−→ Loss
Prodigality ←−
Liberality
−→ Meanness
Boastfulness ←−
Sincerity
−→ Self-depreciation
Flattery ←−
Friendliness
−→ Surliness
Subservience ←−
Dignity
−→ Stubbornness
Luxuriousness ←−
Hardiness
−→ Endurance
Vanity ←− Greatness of Spirit −→ Smallness of Spirit
Extravagance ←−
Magnificence
−→ Shabbiness
Rascality ←−
Wisdom
−→ Simpleness
Eudemian Ethics 1220b–1221a.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Aristotle’s Intellectual Virtues:
knowledge;
art;
prudence;
intuition;
wisdom.
Nicomachean Ethics, Book VI
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Modern Virtue Epistemology:
Sosa/Greco/Goldman:
sight;
hearing;
introspection;
memory;
deduction;
induction.
Heather Battaly, 2000, ‘What is Virtue Epistemology?’ In Proceedings of the
Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Zagzebski’s Intellectual Virtues:
the ability to recognize the salient facts;
sensitivity to detail;
open-mindedness in collecting and appraising evidence;
fairness in evaluating the arguments of others;
intellectual humility;
intellectual perseverance, diligence, care and thoroughness;
adaptability of intellect;
the detective’s virtues: thinking of coherent explanations of the facts;
being able to recognize reliable authority;
insight into persons, problems, theories;
the teaching virtues: the social virtues of being communicative,
including intellectual candour and knowing your audience and how they
respond;
intellectual courage, autonomy, boldness, creativity, and inventiveness.
Linda Zagzebski, 1996, Virtues of the Mind, pp. 114, 220, 225.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Universality
Brahma Viharas (Divine abiding practices) of Buddhism:
metta (loving-kindness);
karuna (compassion);
muddita (appreciative joy);
uppeka (equanimity).
Two worries:
1
Incommensurability?
2
‘Local’ virtues?
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Universality
Brahma Viharas (Divine abiding practices) of Buddhism:
metta (loving-kindness);
karuna (compassion);
muddita (appreciative joy);
uppeka (equanimity).
Two worries:
1
Incommensurability?
2
‘Local’ virtues?
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Applicability
When I started off my career in defended divorce cases I greatly admired the
smooth and elegant advocacy of Lord Salmon, who . . . seemed to me to win
his cases with all the noise and bluster of a perfectly tuned Rolls-Royce
coasting down hill. Cyril Salmon would take out his more valuable
possessions, his gold watch and chain, his heavy gold key-ring and cigarettelighter, and place them on the bench in front of him. Then he would . . .
plunge his hands deep into his trouser pockets and stroll negligently up and
down the front bench lobbing faultlessly accurate questions over his shoulder
at the witness-box. Here, I thought, was a style to imitate. For my early
cross-examinations I would . . . take off my battered Timex watch, lug out my
bundle of keys held together with a piece of frayed string and pace up and
down firing off what I hope were appropriate questions backwards. I
continued with this technique until an unsympathetic Judge said, ‘Do try and
keep still Mr Mortimer. It’s like watching ping-pong.’
John Mortimer, 1984, Clinging to the Wreckage, p. 96.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Status of Arguments
Must agent-based appraisal of argumentation commit the ad
hominem fallacy?
Ad Hominem Arguments
consist in bringing alleged facts about Jones to bear in an
attempt to influence hearers’ attitudes toward Jones’s
advocacy-of-P
Alan Brinton, 1995, ‘The ad hominem’, in Hansen & Pinto, Fallacies, p. 214.
But are all instances of ad hominem necessarily fallacious?
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Status of Arguments
Must agent-based appraisal of argumentation commit the ad
hominem fallacy?
Ad Hominem Arguments
consist in bringing alleged facts about Jones to bear in an
attempt to influence hearers’ attitudes toward Jones’s
advocacy-of-P
Alan Brinton, 1995, ‘The ad hominem’, in Hansen & Pinto, Fallacies, p. 214.
But are all instances of ad hominem necessarily fallacious?
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Status of Arguments
Must agent-based appraisal of argumentation commit the ad
hominem fallacy?
Ad Hominem Arguments
consist in bringing alleged facts about Jones to bear in an
attempt to influence hearers’ attitudes toward Jones’s
advocacy-of-P
Alan Brinton, 1995, ‘The ad hominem’, in Hansen & Pinto, Fallacies, p. 214.
But are all instances of ad hominem necessarily fallacious?
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Ad Hominem: An Experiment
Here is an open conjecture:
Conjecture. Somewhere in the decimal expansion of π there
are one million sevens in a row.
Here is a heuristic argument about the claim:
...
After having read this argument please say to what extent you
are persuaded by it:
not persuaded
1
2
3
4
5
totally persuaded
Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos, 2006, ‘Is it ever appropriate to
judge an argument by its author?’, Proceedings of the British Society for
Research into Learning Mathematics 26(2), p. 44.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Ad Hominem: An Experiment
Here is an open conjecture:
Conjecture. Somewhere in the decimal expansion of π there
are one million sevens in a row.
Here is a heuristic argument about the claim (taken from a talk
by Prof. Timothy Gowers, University of Cambridge):
...
After having read this argument please say to what extent you
are persuaded by it:
not persuaded
1
2
3
4
5
totally persuaded
Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos, 2006, ‘Is it ever appropriate to
judge an argument by its author?’, Proceedings of the British Society for
Research into Learning Mathematics 26(2), p. 44.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Zagzebski’s Intellectual Virtues:
the ability to recognize the salient facts;
sensitivity to detail;
open-mindedness in collecting and appraising evidence;
fairness in evaluating the arguments of others;
intellectual humility;
intellectual perseverance, diligence, care and thoroughness;
adaptability of intellect;
the detective’s virtues: thinking of coherent explanations of the facts;
being able to recognize reliable authority;
insight into persons, problems, theories;
the teaching virtues: the social virtues of being communicative,
including intellectual candour and knowing your audience and how they
respond;
intellectual courage, autonomy, boldness, creativity, and inventiveness.
Linda Zagzebski, 1996, Virtues of the Mind, pp. 114, 220, 225.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Daniel Cohen’s Argumentational Virtues
Deaf dogmatist
↑
Willingness to
Listen
↓
Concessionaire
Eager Believer
↑
Willingness to
Question
↓
Unassuring
Assurer
[Quietism]
↑
Willingness to
Engage
↓
Argument
Provocateur
Daniel Cohen, 2005, ‘Arguments that backfire’, in Hitchcock & Farr, The Uses
of Argument.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Virtues vs. Skills
An Aristotelian Distinction . . .
In the matter of arts and skills, they say, voluntary error is
preferable to involuntary error, while in the matter of virtues . . .
it is the reverse.
Philippa Foot, 1978, Virtues and Vices, p. 7.
. . . Applied to Argument
Virtue : Skill :: Sophism : Paralogism
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Virtues vs. Skills
An Aristotelian Distinction . . .
In the matter of arts and skills, they say, voluntary error is
preferable to involuntary error, while in the matter of virtues . . .
it is the reverse.
Philippa Foot, 1978, Virtues and Vices, p. 7.
. . . Applied to Argument
Virtue : Skill :: Sophism : Paralogism
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Summary
Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology for
informal logic;
Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily as
other virtue theories;
Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.
Future work:
Analyses of individual virtues;
Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations in
reasoning.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Summary
Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology for
informal logic;
Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily as
other virtue theories;
Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.
Future work:
Analyses of individual virtues;
Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations in
reasoning.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Summary
Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology for
informal logic;
Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily as
other virtue theories;
Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.
Future work:
Analyses of individual virtues;
Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations in
reasoning.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Summary
Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology for
informal logic;
Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily as
other virtue theories;
Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.
Future work:
Analyses of individual virtues;
Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations in
reasoning.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument
Summary
Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology for
informal logic;
Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily as
other virtue theories;
Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.
Future work:
Analyses of individual virtues;
Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations in
reasoning.
Andrew Aberdein
The Virtues of Argument