Skip to main content
Log in

Effing the Ineffable: The Logocentric Fallacy in Argumentation

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Words, just because they are words, are not inherently clear. The message they contain becomes clear to those who speak the language and are familiar with the issues and contexts. If the message lacks linguistic clarity the recipient of the message will typically make a query that will bring forth further information intended to clarify. The result might be more words, but it might also involve pointing or drawing, or words that utilize other modes such as references to context, history, and so on. If the ambiguity derives from an inconsistency between, say, words and behaviour, one may look to either mode for clarity. Communication, we must accept, actually occurs in messages, and our ability to transmit information may be limited by any number of factors. When we focus entirely on discursive aspects of communication we limit both the ways in which we receive and ways in which we transmit information. The logocentric fallacy is committed when language, especially in it's most logical guise, is seen to be the only form of rational communication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Gilbert, Michael A.: 1994, ‘Multi-Modal Argumentation’, Philosophy ofthe Social Sciences 24(2) (June), 159–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Michael A.: 1997, Coalescent Argumentation,Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Michael A.: 2000 [Forthcoming], ‘EmotionalMessages’, Argumentation.

  • Mortenson, G. David and Ray L. Anderson: 1970, ‘TheLimits of Logic’, Argumentation & Advocacy 7(2), 71–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naess, Arne: 1953,Interpretation and Preciseness, Skrifter utgitt ar der norske videnskaps academie, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, Barbara J.:1988, ‘The Logic of Message Design: Differences in Reasoning About Communication’, Communication Monographs 55, 80–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'keefe, Barbara: 1995, ‘Influence and IdentityIn Social Interaction’, Argumentation 9(5), 785–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willard, C. A.: 1983,Argumentation & the Social Grounds of Knowledge, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willard, C. A.:1989, A Theory Of Argumentation, University Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gilbert, M.A. Effing the Ineffable: The Logocentric Fallacy in Argumentation. Argumentation 16, 21–32 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014991300192

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014991300192

Navigation