{"id":9903,"date":"2024-03-19T15:50:00","date_gmt":"2024-03-19T14:50:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/?p=9903"},"modified":"2025-10-21T15:09:14","modified_gmt":"2025-10-21T13:09:14","slug":"atcct-empirical-universals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/atcct-empirical-universals\/","title":{"rendered":"ATC Empirical Universals"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
\n

ATC<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Empirical Universals<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00ab\u00a0Argumentation Schemes\u00a0\u00bb and \u00ab\u00a0Means of Persuasion\u00a0\u00bb<\/span><\/h2>\n

Toulmin, Rieke, Janik distinguish nine forms of argumentation, \u00abmost frequently to be met with in practical situations\u201d (1984, p. 147-155),<\/p>\n

Analogy\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Dilemma\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Generalization<\/strong><\/span>
\nClassification\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Sign \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Opposites<\/strong><\/span>
\nCause\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Degree[*]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Authority<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[*]<\/a> In the argument from degree, \u00ab\u00a0The different properties of a given thing are presumed to vary in step with one another\u00a0\u00bb (id<\/em>., p. 155).<\/p>\n

Levi (1992) considers that the essential rhetorical means of persuasion<\/em> used in Chinese are<\/p>\n

Metaphor (*)\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Analogy<\/span><\/strong>
\nExample \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Quoting an authority (*)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Quoting an authority<\/strong> comes with the argument from authority<\/strong><\/a>. Metaphor<\/strong><\/a> comes with the argument from analogy<\/strong>; Analogy and authority are\u00a0 common to both lists.<\/p>\n

Examples are associated with a number of argumentative operations. They are associated with any law, according to the type \/ occurrence<\/em> principle; they are powerful instruments of refutation<\/strong>. Generalizations<\/em><\/a><\/strong> are based on one or more cases or examples. A paradigmatic example<\/strong><\/em> has the value of a general law. Precedents<\/em><\/strong><\/a> are memorable examples that function as rules. In addition, examples function as crucial cases that, which can disprove<\/a><\/strong> a proposed law or generalization<\/em> (The N are blue \u2013 Yes, but that one is red. <\/em>In everyday language, a counterexample corresponds to an exception<\/strong>:That’s true, but…<\/i>d<\/em>)\u00a0 [2])<\/a>. As anecdotes<\/em>, examples can have the most persuasive power in everyday argumentation; when they involve the speaker\u2019s credibility, they are conversationally untouchable, armored against rebuttal: any tentative refutation becomes a personal attack and ruins the conversation.<\/p>\n

The first list takes a structural approach to arguement, the second a\u00a0 functional approach. We will consider both.<\/a><\/p>\n

Empirical universals<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

My position is that there are universals in argumentation, because arguments develop potentialities of language, and there are linguistic universals. Languages, like Western languages, know the type\/occurrence relationship, categorization and predication, \u00a0scalarity (a fortiori), comparison (analogy), etc.
\n<\/strong>See ATC A Fortiori<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

The degree of universality of an argumentative phenomenon is not determined by a priori considerations, but is an empirical fact that can be inferred by collecting data that 1) that come from a variety of languages and cultures 2) that can be clearly assigned to the same concept.<\/p>\n

For example, since occurrences of the a fortiori argument pattern can be found in Jewish culture, Arab-Muslim culture, Western culture, and Chinese culture, it can be inferred that a fortiori has a high degree of universality.<\/p>\n

In what follows, we suggest some \u00a0passages from classical Chinese texts as instances of some of these argument schemes.<\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ATC\u00a0 Empirical Universals \u00ab\u00a0Argumentation Schemes\u00a0\u00bb and \u00ab\u00a0Means of Persuasion\u00a0\u00bb Toulmin, Rieke, Janik distinguish nine forms of argumentation, \u00abmost frequently to be met with in practical situations\u201d (1984, p. 147-155), Analogy\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Dilemma\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Generalization Classification\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Sign \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9903","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-atc"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9903","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9903"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9903\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15158,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9903\/revisions\/15158"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9903"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9903"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9903"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}