Revisiting Reverse Eikos
Dialectical Evaluation of a Rhetorical Argument
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21371597 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Henrike Jansen (0000-0002-3068-6897, Centre for Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities Leiden University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 56 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 168-189 |
| Publication date | 2023-07-31 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy and Rhetoric (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8213 • E-ISSN: 1527-2079 |
| Publisher | The Pennsylvania State University Press (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.5325/philrhet.56.2.0168 |
| OpenAlex | W4385464192 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 10 |
Reverse eikos (plausibility) arguments are notorious for reversing a reason that supports an accusation into a reason that denies this accusation. This article offers new insights on their analysis and evaluation, by reconstructing a reverse eikos argument’s line of reasoning as an argumentative pattern. The pattern reveals that this type of argument centers not only on the arguer’s claim that by doing the act of which they have been accused, they would risk becoming the likely suspect, but also on the connected reasoning that they would not want to risk this since that would be stupid and they are not stupid. The proposed analysis, which is illustrated with classic and modern examples of reverse eikos arguments, shows that the evaluation of these arguments boils down to estimating the arguer’s calculation of the costs and benefits of taking the risk, while taking into account the arguer’s character, intellect, and circumstances
Argument (complex analysis) · Argumentative · Dialectic · Epistemology · False accusation · Intellect · Linguistics · Political science · Rhetorical question · Sociology · Suspect · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|