, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 277–286

Johnson on the Metaphysics of Argument

  • Leo Groarke

DOI: 10.1023/A:1019993002329

Cite this article as:
Groarke, L. Argumentation (2002) 16: 277. doi:10.1023/A:1019993002329


This paper responds to two aspects of Ralph Johnson's Manifest Rationality (2000). The first is his critique of deductivism. The second is his failure to make room for some species of argument (e.g., visual and kisceral arguments) proposed by recent commentators. In the first case, Johnson holds that argumentation theorists have adopted a notion of argument which is too narrow. In the second, that they have adopted one which is too broad. I discuss the case Johnson makes for both claims, and possible objections to his analysis.

deductivism formal deductive logic kisceral arguments natural language deductivism Ralph Johnson the metaphysics of argument visual arguments 

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leo Groarke
    • 1
  1. 1.Wilfrid Laurier UniversityBrantfordCanada

Personalised recommendations