Novels as Arguments

In Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, David Godden & Gordon Mitchell (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation [CD-ROM]. Amsterdam: Rozenberg / Sic Sat. pp. 1547-1558 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The common view is that no novel IS an argument, though it might be reconstructed as one. This is curious, for we almost always feel the need to reconstruct arguments even when they are uncontroversially given as arguments, as in a philosophical text. We make the points as explicit, orderly, and (often) brief as possible, which is what we do in reconstructing a novel’s argument. The reverse is also true. Given a text that is uncontroversially an explicit, orderly, and brief argument, in order to enhance plausibility, our first instinct is to flesh it out with illustrations and relationships to everyday life. If this process is fictive (e.g., with “thought experiments”) and orderly, it is story-telling. This paper investigates whether there is a principled way of determining a novel’s argument, which should contribute as much to understanding arguments as to understanding novels.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
PLUNAA
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View other versions
Added to PP index
2012-10-29

Total views
2,582 ( #1,150 of 2,448,174 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #24,629 of 2,448,174 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.