Appeal to Popular Opinion

Portada
Penn State Press, 1999 - 289 páginas

Arguments from popular opinion have long been regarded with suspicion, and in most logic textbooks the ad populum argument is classified as a fallacy. Douglas Walton now asks whether this negative evaluation is always justified, particularly in a democratic system where decisions are based on majority opinion.

In this insightful book, Walton maintains that there is a genuine type of argumentation based on commonly accepted opinions and presumptions that should represent a standard of rational decision-making on important issues, especially those of a personal and political nature. He shows how to judge arguments based on appeals to popular opinion in a more balanced way, identifying eleven subtypes of the ad populum argument and providing a pragmatic method to evaluate each of these types.

Walton has examined dozens of logic texts and drawn on a wide range of literature to reveal the many uses and misuses of popular opinion. He contrasts the traditional discussion of ad populum in Greek rhetoric with recent textbook treatment, then contrasts these contemporary views with his own dialectical perspective in order to clarify often confused appeals to prejudice and appeals to common knowledge.

Although appeal to popular opinion has long been a powerful argumentative tactic, this is the first book to systematically describe and evaluate it as a well-defined type of argument with its own special characteristics. It enables us to deal with these often deceptive arguments in a critically balanced way and makes an original contribution to an important strand of rhetoric.

 

Contenido

16 19 22 24 26 2 2 2 2 27
10
Chapter One PUBLIC AND POPULAR OPINION
10
Public Opinion Polls
10
Why Do Public Opinion Polls Look Accurate?
10
Push Polling
10
The Tyranny of the Majority in American Democracy
11
Worries of the Logic Textbooks
13
Public Perceptions as Premises
16
Chapter Six THE NEW DIALECTIC
169
Persuasion Dialogue
171
The Inquiry
175
Negotiations and Quarrels
178
InformationSeeking Dialogue
182
Deliberation
184
Dialectical Relevance
186
Relevance of Ad Populum Arguments
188

The Meaning of Public Opinion
19
The Meaning of Popular Opinion
22
The Difference Between Public and Popular Opinion
24
The Problem with Arguments Based on Popular Opinion
27
Chapter Two INFERENCES AND FALLACIES
33
The Gore Vidal Case
34
The Jury Deliberation Case
36
The Golden Rule Case
37
The Falling Objects Case
43
The Inquisition Case
45
The Mark Antony Case
48
Inflammatory Language
51
How the Ad Populum Is Used to Manipulate Opinions
54
Appeal to Expert Opinion
56
Chapter Three THE STANDARD TREATMENT
61
Origins of the Ad Populum
62
Early Modern Textbooks
65
19351959
68
19611968
72
Cracks in the Surface 6 Broadening the Ad Populum
77
The Dual Approach
85
33
88
The Unifying Form
91
Summary of Developments
94
Chapter Four PRESUMPTIONS COMMON STARTING POINTS AND PUBLIC JUDGMENT
97
Bandwagon and MobAppeal Arguments
98
Are Ad Populum Arguments Fallacious?
100
Premise Adequacy of Dialectical Arguments
103
Conflicts with Expert Opinion
106
Common Starting Points
109
The Status of Presumptions
112
Presumptive Reasoning in Dialectical Arguments
116
Popular Opinion and Common Knowledge
119
Chapter Five THE OLD DIALECTIC
129
Platonic Dialectic
130
Aristotelian Dialectic
133
Endoxic Premises
138
Seneca on Ad Populum Arguments
144
Eikotic Arguments
148
The Medieval Period
152
The Shift Away from Dialectic
155
Consensus Gentium Arguments
158
The Antiskeptical Dilemma and Pascals Wager
161
Toward a New Dialectic
166
Persuasion Dialogue and Public Policy
191
The New Perspective on Evaluation
193
Chapter Seven AD POPULUM SUBTYPES
195
The MobAppeal Subtype
196
The Pop Scheme
199
Position to Know
201
Informed Deliberation
205
Moral Justification
207
Popular Sentiments
209
Mass Opinion and Public Judgment 10 The Two Faces of the Ad Populum 54 56
212
The Rhetoric of Belonging
217
Structure of the MobAppeal Subtype
220
Summary of Subtypes
223
Chapter Eight A NEW BASIS FOR EVALUATION
229
Evaluation as Contextual
230
to
231
Evaluation as Dependent on Identification
232
Bolstering and Critical Questions
234
Seeking a Basis for Acceptance in Persuasion Dialogue
236
The Maxim of Nondisputativeness
238
Dialectical Bias in Argumentation
241
Mob Rhetoric and Mass Enthusiasm
243
Appeal to Snobbery and Vanity
247
Identification and Analysis
249
The Four Steps of an Evaluation
250
Chapter Nine WHEN IS IT A FALLACY?
253
Public Opinion Polls and Fallacies
257
Ad Populum Appeals in Commercial Ads
261
34
263
Two Explanations of the Fallacy
265
Hastily Jumping to a Conclusion
267
Evaluating the Golden Rule Case
269
Divisive Rhetoric in MobAppeal Arguments
271
Three Types of Ad Populum Fallacy
273
Evaluation for Fallaciousness
274
61
277
36
278
65
283
68
284
72
285
112
286
ཎྜཎྜཎྜ ཋ ཋ ཋ ྂ ཎྜ 97 98 100
287
Derechos de autor

Otras ediciones - Ver todas

Términos y frases comunes

Acerca del autor (1999)

Douglas Walton is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Winnipeg. Among his other books are The Place of Emotion in Argument (1992), Arguments from Ignorance (1995), and Appeal to Expert Opinion (1997), all from Penn State Press.

Información bibliográfica