Between Confusion and Boredom in the Study of Visual Argument

Argumentation 29 (2):239-242 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

After reading the careful, thoughtful, carefully circumscribed scholarship that characterizes the study of argumentation, I can’t help but think that the study of visual argument might be, at least some of the time, a MacGuffin. That label comes from Alfred Hitchcock and now is enshrined in the lore of cinematic composition: the MacGuffin is a device whose presence motivates dramatic action yet proves to be “nothing” , whether trivial or unknowable or nonexistent. In like manner, the visual image has provided the occasion for renewed exploration of what had been thought to be familiar terrain, and often to resolve the mystery on behalf of the assurance of a known world regained.If one were to protest that many disciplines have their MacGuffins, I would agree. Hans Blumenberg has had the audacity to suggest that in the philosophy of being, Being itself is the MacGuffin . He then pushes the point: it is crucial to the enterprise that the object of inqu ..

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,101

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-14

Downloads
47 (#512,519)

6 months
11 (#314,950)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Hariman
Northwestern University

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

What Do Pictures Want?: The Lives and Loves of Images.W. J. T. Mitchell - 2006 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 64 (2):291-293.

Add more references