Argumentation, the Visual, and the Possibility of Refutation: An Exploration

&
Argumentation 12 (1):79-93 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Taking the possibility of visual argumentation seriously, this essay explores how refutation might proceed. We posit three ways in which images can refute and be refuted in a mixed-media environment: (1) dissection, in which an image is broken down discursively; (2) substitution, in which one image is replaced within a larger visual frame by a different image; and (3) transformation, in which an image is recontextualized in a new visual frame. These strategies are illustrated in an analysis of three American documentary films on abortion.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1023/a:1007703425353

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,561

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

What Is Visual in Visual Argumentation?Georges Roque - unknown
Verso la morfo-logia.Federico Vercellone - 2010 - Teoria 30 (1):115-127.
Seeing Reasons: Visual Argumentation in Advertisements. [REVIEW]Christina Slade - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (2):145-160.
Image science: iconology, visual culture, and media aesthetics.W. J. T. Mitchell - 2015 - London: University of Chicago Press.
Looking for Image Statistics: Active Vision With Avatars in a Naturalistic Virtual Environment.Dominik Straub & Constantin A. Rothkopf - 2021 - Frontiers in Psychology 12.
Image, Image-Making, and Imagination.Dominic Gregory - 2020 - In Keith A. Moser & Ananta Charana Sukla (eds.), Imagination and Art: Explorations in Contemporary Theory. Brill | Rodopi. pp. 535-558.
Image Events, the Public Sphere, and Argumentative Practice: The Case of Radical Environmental Groups.John W. Delicath & Kevin Michael Deluca - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (3):315-333.
Aspects of visual argument: A study of the March of Progress.Cameron Shelley - 2001 - Informal Logic 21 (2).
The self and self‐reference.P. M. S. Hacker - 1990 - In Wittgenstein, meaning and mind. Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell. pp. 245–265.
Image-dependent interaction of imagery and vision.David Kirsh, Tm Rebotier & L. McDonough - 2003 - American Journal of Psychology:343-366.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-29

Downloads
30 (#727,004)

6 months
5 (#1,002,523)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Two concepts of argument.Daniel J. O'Keefe - 1992 - In William L. Benoit, Dale Hample & Pamela J. Benoit (eds.), Readings in argumentation. New York: Foris Publications. pp. 11--79.
Where is argument.Wayne Brockriede - 1992 - In William L. Benoit, Dale Hample & Pamela J. Benoit (eds.), Readings in argumentation. New York: Foris Publications. pp. 73--78.
Image, music, text.Roland Barthes & Stephen Heath - 1978 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 37 (2):235-236.

Add more references