The Philosophy Site

The Artful Arguer's Page

---

For those who ask, "What’s the use of philosophy for everyday life?", here’s something to ponder: how important are arguments for day-to-day life? Argumentation is the dominant mode of presentation in just about any academic discipline one cares to mention, but philosophers, more than anyone else, dedicate their efforts to analysing the structure and content of arguments, and producing (or attempting to produce) watertight arguments for positions they hold. Again, it is not that philosophy has a monopoly on the art of argumentation! Rather, the structure, strengths and weaknesses of arguments receive proportionately more attention in philosophical discourse (in general) than in historical, scientific (in the narrow, empirical sense), sociological, literary, or a whole range of other forms of rational discourse.

To put it another way, while most academic presentations, essays, and books consist of an argument or series of arguments of one form or another, these arguments are often either implied, glossed over quickly, or suggested. Philosophers are nearly always (or should be) conscious that they are arguing for a particular position, based on a particular set of assumptions or premises., i.e. adducing reasons for holding that ‘X’ is the case. Not only are they conscious of it in their own mind, but they are at pains to draw the listener’s attention to the key assumptions, rules of evidence, and types of inference at work in their argument. I am not arguing (there’s that word again) that philosophers make better arguers than literary critics, historians or scientists. I am simply arguing that the nature of philosophy as a discipline forces the practitioner, like no other discipline does, to interrogate the structure and underlying assumptions of arguments, whether they are arguments he himself is making, or arguments he is examining.

The point of this explanation is to show that philosophy, more than any other discipline, is constituted by the art and study of argumentation. So, if arguments play an important role in one’s everyday personal, social and professional life, philosophy, which sharpens one’s awareness and understanding of arguments, will have a significant impact on everyday life. Again, another argument.

But what does this mean to the punter on the street? Well, the study of philosophy does not of itself create genius, or virtue, or an astute mind. However, it does develop and expand certain latent abilities or potentialities of the mind. It ‘sharpens’ and puts order on one’s natural, untamed analytical skills, if you like. It helps one recognise the difference between an argument and a raw appeal or command. It helps one pick out more clearly the logical structure of an argument, so that by eliminating ‘window dressing’ – unnecessary distractions, irrelevant preambles, and various rhetorical devices – one gets to the nub of the matter, the core argument that a person is making, and one assesses that argument on its own merits.

Philosophy is a training ground where one’s natural intelligence can develop in a free yet disciplined environment. It teaches a person to anticipate and confront objections to and problems with his own argument, before they are pointed out to him. This means that, even if he has no ‘magic answer’ to a problem, he is not totally phased if his opponent points it out. Having a deeper grasp of the logical structure of arguments, in a paradoxical way, makes it more difficult to peddle disingenuous or dishonest arguments. Equally, however, one may become very adept at building a logically coherent case around a set of false or partially false assumptions. One may even make such an argument in good faith, not realising the falsity of its assumptions. However, one can rest assured that the assumptions of the argument, if controversial, are likely to be challenged by one’s opponents.

And I am not talking only about arguments that happen in obscure philosophical journals. I am talking about arguments that go on in mainstream culture, day in, day out, week in, week out. Whether in the print and electronic media, among friends, at home with one’s spouse or siblings, at work with one’s colleagues, in parliament, or in the courts, arguments are being churned out by the dozen. Some are dry, some are adorned; some are delivered succinctly, others are poured over, repeated, reinforced – some are even chanted! – in one form or another, arguments are a permanent feature of life as we know it, across all social, religious, gender and racial divides.

The argument I want to make can be summarised as follows:

If, as I have argued, philosophy equips one better to understand in a critical manner the arguments one is exposed to (premise 1),

and if, as I have suggested, argumentation, in its various modes, is a pervasive and highly influential part of Western culture (premise 2)

then philosophy is advantageous (even if not sufficient) both in understanding and in successfully influencing Western societies and in adapting effectively to them. (conclusion)

I’ve already explained how philosophy, more than most disciplines, inclines one to critically probe the structure and merit of the arguments we encounter. I have suggested briefly that argumentation is a basic part of the diet of any Western citizen (I restrict myself to the West, because that is what I know best). Now, I would like to expand on this point, to show that arguments are not only to be found at every level and in every sphere of society, but that they play a decisive role in shaping our lives, both at a personal and at a public level.

The best way to support this claim is to cite typical instances where argumentation plays a decisive or important role in determining people’s behaviour and habits. I will deliberately diversify in my examples, drawing on situations which occur in different spheres of human activity, which affect different types of people, and which predominantly affect (a) the personal or (b) the political, legal or social arena. By casting my net wide, so to speak, I hope to convince you that the utility (no, that’s not a dirty word, once it’s understood in its correct context) of philosophy is not restricted to isolated spheres of human activity, such as political, legal or academic discourse. Rather, the wide array of examples will show that philosophy has a much wider relevance and application than one might imagine at first glance.

The areas of human culture (in its broadest sense – the collection of habits, mores, beliefs, practises and attitudes that humans engage in) that I have in mind are the following (I will briefly discuss the first two):

1. Marriage and family life
2. Friendship
3. Work and professional life
4. Civil Law
5. Government
6. Religious beliefs and practises
7. Personal development (belief systems, lifestyle choices, personal morality, etc.)
8. The economy
9. Social behaviour and mores
10. Education
11. Art

 

Note: This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but it is meant to be broadly representative of the ‘vast canvas of human endeavour’ and activity. The order is of no particular significance, though family life, as the primary ‘training ground’ of citizens, is deliberately placed first in the list. Finally, it should be noted that these categories are in no way meant to be ‘exclusive’ of one another, and it would be an interesting exercise to examine how practises and beliefs in one sphere of culture impact upon, or overlap with, another, e.g. how does government influence social behaviour and mores (and vice versa), or how does the economy impact upon art (or indeed, vice versa!)?

 

1. Marriage and Family Life

Arguments, whether calm or heated, are a commonplace feature in any family. Whether it be an argument between spouses about each other’s multifarious faults and failings, or an argument among siblings about which television station to watch, argument is the staple diet of family life. Sometimes, a third party (typically a parent) attempts (invited or uninvited) to settle a dispute, hearing both sides of the argument and making a decision – something like a judge who makes a ruling in a public hearing. Other times (rarely enough!), one of the parties gives in quickly and gracefully, seeing the irresistible force of the opponent’s arguments, or indeed, just deciding that persisting is not worth the trouble.

Arguments in a family are often little more than a means of securing one’s objectives. They may be a channel for anger, hatred, or greed. At other times, they may represent a genuine interest in ‘doing the right thing’ or in acting fairly towards all concerned. Arguments may be excessively personalised or given a false veneer of objectivity. Principles may be assumed or dropped, tailored to one’s desired outcome. It would appear that family life is a good microcosm for the spectrum of uses to which arguments can be put. It proves the point that argumentation, however persuasive or adept, is not necessarily the summit of rationality. Arguments, in the right hands, can be used to improve one’s grasp of the truth, or to persuade someone to adopt a good course of action. In the wrong hands (or with the wrong motives), arguments can be used to enhance one’s own ego, or to hurt or manipulate one’s interlocutor. Sophistic or disingenuous arguments can be used to turn truth and rationality on their heads. Argumentation, no less than speech itself, is a double-edged sword.

2. Friendship

Friends have a very real influence on one another. Although this influence is, in many cases, first and foremost by example, friends also give each other advice and practical guidance. If a friend comes to me and asks me, "Should I take this job?", I will find out what the conditions and nature of the work is, and provide my friend with arguments in favour and against taking the job. The final decision will rest with him, but my advice (even if it only consists of underlining important factors) will be a determining factor in that decision. It may be more or less ‘neutral’. It may indeed be a strongly worded recommendation to do ‘X’ for reasons A, B and C. Assuming that the friendship is genuine, the words of a friend will carry special weight as they are assumed to be arise out of an honest and well-meaning disposition. The arguments of a friend are persuasive because one assumes that such arguments are not motivated by any ‘hidden agenda’ or ‘ulterior motive’. Where one trusts a person, one trusts that that person’s arguments have nothing but the best intentions behind them. Arguments among friends about serious (as opposed to trivial) subjects are a good example of the centrality of inter-personal relationships to the dynamics of argumentation.