MULTIMODAL ARGUMENTATION

The main stream of formal and informal logic as well as more recent wo rk in discourse analysis provides a way of understanding certain argum ents that particularly lend themselves to rational analysis. I argue, however, that these, and allied modes of analysis, be seen as heuristi c models and not as the only proper mode of argument. This article int roduces three other modes of argumentation that emphasize distinct asp ects of human communication, but that, at the same time, must be consi dered for the full understanding of argumentation. These modes are (1) the emotional, which relates to the realm of feelings, (2) the viscer al, which stems from the area of the physical, and (3) the kisceral, w hich covers the intuitive and non-sensory arenas. At its most extreme the view holds that arguments may be given (almost) wholly within one mode and not be at all susceptible to those methods of argument analys is previously used. A more cautious statement allows that any interact ive argument will (possibly) contain elements from various modes, and that to attempt to reduce these all to the rational is prejudiced redu ctionism.