Narratives and the Concept of Argument

  • Christopher Tindale
Part of the Argumentation Library book series (ARGA, volume 31)


One approach to the question of narrative argument is to explore the nature of narratives and their argumentative potential. This is to understand an established tradition of argument, with set understandings of the key concept, into which narratives must fit if they are to be deemed arguments or argumentative. Another approach is to revisit the nature of argument itself so that traditional conditions are not imposed on any new forms. Doing this is not to decide in advance how ‘argument’ should be understood such that narratives are precluded in advance (or required to meet standards that they have difficulty meeting). It is the second approach that I take in the paper, drawing on a dynamic sense of argument that allows a richer range of discourses to qualify. This approach proved fruitful for those working on visual arguments, the lessons of which promise to be of value here. I will illustrate my argument with several examples that show how narrative arguments engage an audience in a particularly vivid way, inviting them to experience aspects of an issue in a way that enhances the persuasive power of the argument.


Dynamic Sense Technical Logic Informal Argument Informal Logic Visual Argument 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aristotle. 1984a. On the soul. In The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation, ed. Jonathan Barnes, vol. 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. ———. 1984b. Poetics. In The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation, ed. Jonathan Barnes, vol. 2. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 2007. On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse. (Trans: Kennedy G.). Introduction, Notes, and Appendices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. 1981. The dialogic imagination: Four essays, M. Holquist (Ed.), C. Emerson and M. Holquist (Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Blair, J.A. 1996. The possibility and actuality of visual arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy 33 (1): 23–39.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 2004. The rhetoric of visual arguments. In Defining visual rhetorics, ed. C.A. Hill and M. Helmers, 41–61. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2012. Groundwork in the theory of argumentation: Selected papers of J. Anthony Blair. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Copi, I.M. 1972. Introduction to logic. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co..Google Scholar
  9. Copi, I.M., and K. Burgess-Jackson. 1996. Informal logic. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Dennett, D. 1995. Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  11. Finnis, J., A. Grisez, and J. Boyle. 1987. Practical principles, moral truth, and ultimate ends. American Journal of Jurisprudence 32: 99–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fisher, W.R. 1987. Human communication as narration. Toward a philosophy of reason, value, and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  13. Govier, T. 1998. Arguing forever? Or: Two tiers of argument appraisal. In Argumentation & rhetoric, ed. H.V. Hansen et al., 14. St. Catharines: OSSA. CD rom.Google Scholar
  14. Govier, T., and L. Ayers. 2012. Logic and parables: Do these narratives provide arguments? Informal Logic 32 (2): 161–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grice, P. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Halliwell, S. 1986. Aristotle’s poetics. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 1987. The Poetics of Aristotle: Translation and commentary. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hitchcock, D. 2006. Informal logic and the concept of argument. In Philosophy of logic, ed. D. Jacquette. Volume 5 of Handbook of the philosophy of science, eds. D.M. Gabbay, P. Thagard and J. Woods, 101–129. Elsevier.Google Scholar
  19. Johnson, R.H. 2000. Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 2009. Some reflections on the informal logic initiative. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 16 (29): 17–46.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 2014/1996. The rise of informal logic: Essays on argumentation, critical thinking, reasoning and politics. Windsor: Windsor Studies in Argumentation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keefer, M.W. 1996. Distinguishing practical and theoretical reasoning: A critique of Deanna Kuhn’s theory of informal argument. Informal Logic 18 (1): 35–55.Google Scholar
  23. Kvernbekk, T. 2003. Narratives as informal arguments. In IL@25, 1–11. Windsor: OSSA. CD Rom.Google Scholar
  24. Mencius. 1999. Mencius. Trans. Z. Zhentao, Z. Wenting, & Z. Dingzhi. Hunan: Hunan People’s Publishing House.Google Scholar
  25. Obama, B. 2008. Text of Obama’s speech: A more perfect union. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 18 March 2016.Google Scholar
  26. Olmos, P. 2013. Narration as argument. In Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013, ed. D. Mohammed and M. Lewiński, 1–14. Windsor: OSSA.Google Scholar
  27. ———. 2014. Classical fables as arguments: Narration and analogy. In Systematic approaches to argument by analogy, ed. H.J. Ribeiro, 189–208. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Pinto, R.C. 2001. Argument, inference and dialectic: Collected papers on informal logic with an introduction by Hans V. Hansen. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Plumer, G. 2011. Novels as arguments. In Proceedings of the 7th conference of the international society for the study of argumentation, ed. F.H. van Eemeren et al. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar
  30. Roque, G. 2015. Should visual arguments be propositional in order to be arguments? Argumentation 29: 177–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tindale, C.W. 2002. A concept divided: Ralph Johnson’s definition of argument. Argumentation 16: 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ———. 2004. Rhetorical argumentation. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Van den Hoven, P. 2015. Gold mining: The art of rhetorical discourse analysis. Xiamen: Xiamen University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Walton, D. 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WindsorWindsorCanada

Personalised recommendations