Argument on the name

Categorization – Nomination – Definition
Classification – Syllogism

Proper names have their specifc argumentative resources. The following description applies to common names; the best designation here would be “full words”.

By naming concrete or abstract beings, we attach them to a name, the definition of that name, and the category corresponding to this definition.

The category associated with the definition of a name groups beings on the basis of the specific characteristics of their member, and-or their similarities with the other members of the category, and-or their resemblance to an exemplary member of this category.

An Aristotelian classification consists in a combination of more or less general categories and sub-categories, typically under the format of a « Porphyrian tree”.
Jorge Borges famous Chinese classification is fictional..

Syllogistic reasoning (“set theory” reasoning) is the most powerful argument scheme exploiting the cognitive resources of a well-done classification

A, B, C are M; some M are X
=> some X are M
=> M are or A or a B or a C

A syllogism is  evaluated as valid or invalid (“paralogism”) through a specific set of rules (“rules of syllogism”, or, preferably through the Venn diagrams method.

***

The classification method that is, naming – defining -systematically categorizing things, is considered by Claude Levi-Strauss as  « the science of the concrete, » [‘la science du concret”] as « the” fundamental science shared by all human beings (1962], ch. 1).

Following Levi-Strauss, we argue that naming – defining – categorizing – classifying a being is the fundamental, universal, most discreet productive and efficient, argumentative operation.
We will call it the argument of the name.  *
Example will be found in the quoted entries, as well as in the pair a pari argument / argument from the opposite term.

(*) not to be confused with the use of the same expression in computing.

***

The argument of the name necessarily functions in  Chinese language, all languages having « full words », that is a lexicon where speakers find the necessary resources to categorize and designate beings, events, circumstances…
So, the argument of the name must be considered as a linguistic-cognitive universal, an expression of « subjectivity in language” in action (Benveniste, (1963), p. 259-250).

Benveniste, 1963 / [1958], De la subjectivité dans le langage. In Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris, Gallimard. p. 258-266