Argumentation

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 283–303

On the Rationale for Distinguishing Arguments from Explanations

Article

Abstract

Even with the lack of consensus on the nature of an argument, the thesis that explanations and arguments are distinct is near orthodoxy in well-known critical thinking texts and in the more advanced argumentation literature. In this paper, I reconstruct two rationales for distinguishing arguments from explanations. According to one, arguments and explanations are essentially different things because they have different structures. According to the other, while some explanations and arguments may have the same structure, they are different things because explanations are used for different purposes than arguments. I argue that both rationales fail to motivate a distinction between arguments and explanations. Since these are the only rationales for distinguishing arguments from explanations that I am prepared to take seriously, I don’t see why we should exclude explanations from being arguments.

Keywords

Arguments Explanations Reasons 

References

  1. Allen, D. 1990. Critical study: Trudy Govier’s problems in argument analysis and evaluation. Informal Logic XII: 44–62.Google Scholar
  2. Boss, J. 2012. Think: Critical thinking and logic skills for everyday life. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  3. Achinstein, P. 1983. The nature of explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barwise, J., and J. Etchemendy. 1999. Language, proof and logic. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Bassham, G., W. Irwin, H. Nardone, and J. Wallace. 2005. Critical thinking: A student’s introduction, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  6. Copi, I., and C. Cohen. 2005. Introduction to logic, 12th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Doury, M. 2011. Preaching to the converted: Why argue when everyone agrees? Argumentation 26(1): 99–114.Google Scholar
  8. Eemeren, F.H. van., R. Grootendorst, and F.Snoeck Henkemans. 2002. Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Eemeren, F.H. van., and R. Grootendorst. 1992. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erblaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Fumerton, R. 2002. Theories of justification. In The Oxford handbook of epistemology, ed. P. Moser, 204–233. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodwin, J. 2007. Argument has no function. Informal Logic 27(1): 69–90.Google Scholar
  12. Govier, T. 2010. A practical study of argument, 7th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  13. Govier, T. 1987a. Reasons why arguments and explanations are different. In Problems in argument analysis and evaluation, ed. T. Govier, 159–176. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris.Google Scholar
  14. Govier, T. 1987b. A new approach to charity. In Problems in argument analysis and evaluation, ed. T. Govier, 133–158. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris.Google Scholar
  15. Groarke, L., and C. Tindale. 2004. Good reasoning matters!: A constructive approach to critical thinking, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hansen, H. 2002. An exploration of Johnson’s sense of argument. Argumentation 16: 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harman, G. 1999. Rationality. In Reasoning, meaning and mind, ed. G. Harman, 9–45. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harman, G. 1973. Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Houtlosser, P. 2001. Points of view. In Critical concepts in argumentation theory, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, 27–50. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Johnson, R., and J.A. Blair. 2006. Logical self-defense. New York: International Debate Education Association.Google Scholar
  21. Johnson, R. 2002. Manifest rationality reconsidered: Reply to my fellow symposiasts. Argumentation 16: 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, R. 2000. Manifest rationality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. Kasachkoff, T. 1988. Explaining and justifying. Informal Logic X: 21–30.Google Scholar
  24. Layman, C.S. 2005. The power of logic, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  25. Mayes, G. 2010. Argument-explanation complementarity and the structure of informal reasoning. Informal Logic 30: 92–110.Google Scholar
  26. Meiland, J. 1989. Argument as inquiry and argument as persuasion. Argumentation 3: 185–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moore, B.N., and R. Parker. 2012. Critical thinking, 10th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  28. Pinto, R. 2010. The uses of argument in communicative contexts. Argumentation 24: 227–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pinto, R. 2009. Argumentation and the force of reasons. Informal Logic 29: 268–295.Google Scholar
  30. Pinto, R. 1991. Generalizing the notion of argument. In Argument, inference and dialectic, ed. R. Pinto (2010), 10–20. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Originally published in van Eemeren, Grootendorst, Blair, and Willard, eds. Proceedings of the second international conference on argumentation, vol. 1A, 116–124. Amsterdam: SICSAT.Google Scholar
  31. Sinnott-Armstrong, W., and R. Fogelin. 2010. Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic, 8th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  32. Snoeck Henkemans, A.F. 2001. Argumentation, explanation, and causality. In Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects, ed. T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord, and W. Spooren, 231–246. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. Skyrms, B. 2000. Choice and chance, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  34. Thomas, S.N. 1986. Practical reasoning in natural language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  35. Tindale, C. 2002. A concept divided: Ralph Johnson’s definition of argument. Argumentation 16: 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Walton, D. 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Walton, D. 2004. A new dialectical theory of explanation. Philosophical Explorations 7: 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Walton, D. 1996. Argument structure: A pragmatic theory. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  39. Walton, D. 1990. What is reasoning? What is an argument? Journal of Philosophy 87:399–419.Google Scholar
  40. Wright, L. 2002. Reasoning and explaining. Argumentation 16: 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vaughn, L. 2013. The power of critical thinking, 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Zagzebski, L. 1999. What is knowledge? In The Blackwell guide to epistemology, ed. J. Greco, and E. Sosa, 92–116. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations