Rhetoric and Visual Argument: proposition of methodological models based on the analysis of infographics

This study proposes analytic models for multimodal genres, specifically for the infographic, based on a finished master’s research and in light of a brief literature review regarding multimodal argumentation. This study is justified by the fact that visual rhetoric is a relatively new field of investigation which still needs analytic proposals that promote the increase of studies in the area. This work, of a descriptive and qualitative nature, is grounded in theories and methodologies of the visual field (BLAIR, 2008; KJELDSEN, 2012; 2015; MATEUS, 2016; 2018; ROQUE, 2012; 2016; TSERONIS; FORCEVILLE, 2017; GONÇALVES-SEGUNDO, 2021; LEAL, 2021), and the gathering of data was based on Google Scholar through software Harzing’s Publish or Perish. The results show that, even though the procedures have been developed for the analysis of infographics, the analytic method may collaborate with the growing studies in multimodal argumentation and may be applied to other genres circulating in society

Visual Argument Structure Tool (VAST)

We present the first version of the Visual Argument Structure Tool (VAST) which may be used for jointly visualizing the conceptual, logical and empirical relationships that structurally constitute arguments. The system incorporates some basic principles of structural equation modelling (SEM), but goes beyond SEM in important ways: It distinguishes between the features of objects and the names that may be used for those features. It also distinguishes several ways in which features may be related to one another (causation, conceptual implication, prediction, transformation, conclusion), and all of these from beliefs as to whether something IS the case and/or OUGHT to be the case. The system also accounts for multi-dimensionality, for different perspectives on the same issues, and allows for any degree of vagueness vs. precision deemed possible and/or necessary. The latter feature may make it particularly useful for visualizing narrative (“verbal”) components of argument structures, which are very common in the humanities but also in psychology. VAST may be used to increase the level of argument specification in these fields, which has been repeatedly called for. As for application, the system may be used to capture the structure of arguments in (e.g.) criminal investigations and media reports, but also of general worldviews and of debates. Visualizing argument structures this way is useful because it helps ensure comprehensiveness (i.e. any element and any combination of elements may be evaluated against all other elements), which facilitates the identification of contradictions, circularity, redundancy, and gaps that may otherwise be overlooked. It may also help improve on the accessibility of arguments to a wider audience.

Picturing a Thousand Unspoken Words

I explore how empathetic visual argument may be the mode best suited for eliciting appropriate force to the reasons given by arguers who face systematic identity prejudices. In the verbal mode, this force is often skewed through epistemic injustice (Fricker 2007), argumentative injustice (Bondy 2010), and discursive injustice (Kukla 2010). Highlighting their reliance on the Aristotelian sense of enthymeme, I show how visual arguments are highly context specific. Using Ian Dove’s Visual Scheming (2016) and the theory of the Retort collective (2004) via case study, I demonstrate how the visual mode can leave the appropriate force in the arguer’s control.

Analisis Semiotik Kebun Binatang Dalam Photobook Berjudul Wildtopia

This research conducts an attempt to extend the meaning of zoo in society by Sander Pierce's semiotica analysis on Photobook titled Wildtopia. By qualitative method, this research finds that the zoo have a dualism function in a very contrast way. In one hand, the zoo gives a representational experience as objectivate the animal for human knowledge. On the other hand, zoo it self destruct the wildness of each animal as they are taking care by human. Another interesting finding shows photography is able to criticized phenomenon in society as a visual argument.

Multimodal argumentation: Beyond the verbal/visual divide

What would the consequences be for the interpretation and analysis of arguments if we were to accept that communication, within which arguments are produced and interpreted, involves the intricate use of more than just the verbal mode? In this paper, I discuss the shortcomings of the conception of argument as a purely verbal phenomenon and of the mere juxtaposition of the visual argument to the verbal, as suggested in the discourses of the sceptics and the advocates and of “visual” argument, respectively. Instead I propose a multimodal perspective on the analysis of argumentative discourse, according to which there is no a priori division of labor between the verbal and the visual mode, and attention is paid both to the (verbal and visual) content and to the (verbal and visual) style. In this view, argument is neither verbal nor visual, since argument is not to be defined on the basis of the verbal, visual or other semiotic means by which it is realized in communication. As a case in point, I analyze an ad campaign for the promotion of the British newspaper The Guardian in the United States.

Visual Argumentation in Commercials: the Tulip Test1

Argumentation theory used to be concerned exclusively with verbal arguments, but in recent years visual argumentation has become a new field of study. After explaining why the notion of visual argument makes sense, we will explore how visual arguments can be reconstructed and compare this with the reconstruction of verbal arguments. We will argue that the reconstruction of visual argumentation follows broadly the same method as that of verbal argumentation. Finally we are going to show how the steps of reconstruction look like in practice by analyzing the visual arguments presented in a commercial for a Dove cosmetic product.