Abstract
That the addition of visuals, be they pictures, diagrams, charts or what-have-you, can make an argument more persuasive there can be no doubt. There is still a question as to whether visuals can make a logical difference as opposed to enhancing the rhetorical strength of an argument. Here opinions divide. Some are skeptical that images can do any work other than rhetorical. Others think that images can carry arguments independently. And some think that images can carry at least some parts of some arguments. In this paper I argue for modest position: In assessing argumentation, the truth of some claim is verified, corroborated or refuted by some visual means. Moreover, the manner in which these visuals do their work is evidentiary. This evidentiary role for visuals can be extended to account for the use of visuals in some mathematical argumentation.
The author thanks the Philosophy Department at UNLV for discussing and earlier version of this paper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Birdsell, D., & Groarke, L. (1996). Toward a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33, 1–10.
Birdsell, D., & Groarke, L. (2007). Outlines of a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 43(3–4), 103–114.
Blair, A. (2004). The rhetoric of visual arguments. In M. Helmers & C. Hill (Eds.), Defining visual rhetorics (pp. 41–61). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown, J. R. (1997). Proofs and pictures. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47, 161–181.
Brown, J. R. (1999). Philosophy of mathematics. London/New York: Routledge.
Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2008). You cannot be serious! Public understanding of technology with special reference to “Hawk-Eye”. Public Understanding of Science, 17, 283–308.
Dove, I. (2002). Can pictures prove? Logique et Analyse, 179–180, 309–340.
Fisher, G. (2005). Federal rules of evidence: Statutory and case supplement. New York: Foundation Press.
Fitzpatrick, J. W., et al. (2005). Ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) persists in continental North America. Science, 3(309, 5727), 1460–1462.
Fleming, D. (1996). Can pictures be arguments? Argumentation and Advocacy, 33(1), 11–22.
Franklin, J. (1987). Non-deductive logic in mathematics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 38(1), 1–18.
Groarke, L. (1996). Logic, art and argument. Informal Logic, 18(2–3), 105–131.
Groarke, L. (2002). Towards a pragma-dialectics of visual argument. In F. H. Van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in pragma-dialectics. Amsterdam/Newport News: SicSat/Vale Press.
Johnson, R. H. (2000). Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Johnson, R. H. (2005). Why “visual arguments” aren’t arguments. In: H. V. Hansen, C. Tindale, J. Anthony Blair, & R. H. Johnson (Eds.), Informal logic at 25. Windsor: University of Windsor, CD-ROM.
Manders, K. (2008). The Euclidean diagram. In P. Mancosu (Ed.), Philosophy of mathematical practice. Oxford: Claredon Press.
Mouser, J. E., & Philbin, J. (1957). Photographic evidence: Is there a recognized basis for admissibility? Hastings Law Journal, 8, 310–314.
Nelsen, R. B. (1993). Proofs without words: Exercises in visual thinking. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
Walton, K. (2008). Marvelous images: On values and the arts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dove, I.J. (2012). On Images as Evidence and Arguments. In: van Eemeren, F., Garssen, B. (eds) Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory. Argumentation Library, vol 22. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4041-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4041-9_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4040-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4041-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)