8 research outputs found
Visual arguments in film
Nuestro objetivo es señalar algunas diferencias entre los argumentos verbales y visuales, y promover la perspectiva retórica de la argumentación, yendo más allá de la relevancia de la lógica y de la pragmática. En nuestra opinión, si ha de ser racional y aceptable como argumentación (visual), un film debe dirigirse a espectadores que tienen creencias informadas sobre el tema visto en la pantalla y sobre las limitaciones y las convenciones del medio. En nuestras reflexiones, aplicamos el análisis retórico al cine como un acto simbólico, humano y comunicativo que a veces puede entenderse como un argumento trazado visualmente. Como mezcla de estímulos visuales, auditivos y verbales, el film exige una interpretación y una (re)construcción activas y complejas. Nuestra sugerencia es concentrarse en cinco elementos diferentes, pero relacionados entre sí. La reconstrucción y la evaluación del argumento visual se basarán en esos elementos, y todo el proceso constituirá una argumentación visual.Our aim is to point out some differences between verbal and visual
arguments, promoting the rhetorical perspective of argumentation beyond the relevance
of logic and pragmatics. In our view, if it is to be rational and successful,
film as (visual) argumentation must be addressed to spectators who hold informed
beliefs about the theme watched on the screen and the medium’s constraints and
conventions. In our reflections to follow, we apply rhetorical analysis to film as a
symbolic, human, and communicative act that may sometimes be understood as a
visually laid out argument. As a mixture of visual, auditory, and verbal stimuli, film
demands active and complex interpretation and (re)construction. Our suggestion is
to focus on five different but interrelated elements. The reconstruction and evaluation
of the visual argument will be based on those elements, and the whole process
will be one of visual argumentation
Anti-Corporate Argument and the Spectacle of the Grotesque Rhetorical Body in Super Size Me
Modelling mathematical argumentation: the importance of qualification
In recent years several mathematics education researchers have attempted to analyse students’ arguments using a restricted form of Toulmin’s [The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, UK, 1958] argumentation scheme. In this paper we report data from task-based interviews conducted with highly talented postgraduate mathematics students, and argue that a superior categorisation of genuine mathematical argumentation is provided by the use of Toulmin’s full scheme. In particular, we suggest that modal qualifiers play an important and previously unrecognised role in mathematical argumentation, and that one of the goals of instruction should be to develop students’ abilities to appropriately match up warrant-types with modal qualifiers