Philip Selznick[1] provides
a useful list of qualities upon which reasoned arguments are based. He calls them the five pillars of
reason. The qualities are order,
principle, experience, prudence, and dialogue.
I will explain each, but first I want to share how I see these
qualities. They are the disciplines of
reason. When confronted with an
argument, one can use these qualities to judge the viability of the
argument. I also see reasoned arguments
as being the product of implemented skills.
For these, I look to a model developed by Stephen Toulmin[2] in which
he divides a reasoned argument into the following elements: evidence, warrant, support for warrant,
qualifiers, reservations, and conclusion.
Each element presupposes a person be able to perform a task – to activate
a skill – to accomplish it. More on this
later but for now, I want to zero-in on Selznick’s qualities.
In this posting, I am defining each quality.
Order: This discipline
calls on a person to be able to functionally objectify the information relevant
to the essence of an argument. In turn,
this discipline calls on the person to keep in check any emotions, rhetoric, or
prejudices or inclinations that hamper an objective seeking, analysis, and
determination as to the value of the information.
Principle: This
discipline calls on a person to keep in focus ultimate goals of the argument
formation process. “Reason is
end-centered: the fate of comprehensive
or long-term objectives is always to be kept in mind, always open to
intelligent assessment.”[3] This discipline needs further elucidation as
hinted at below under the definition for prudence.
Experience: This
discipline is the willingness to subject formed hypothesis to experience –
empirical information. This experience comes
in varies forms but is most explicit when derived from experimentation.
Prudence: This discipline
calls on a person to demand a critical review of any derived theories or models
against ongoing experience. It is what
Selznick calls “practical wisdom” and while reason is end-centered, it favors
the continuum of means and ends as when one looks beyond rules to the reasons
for those rules.
Dialogue: This
discipline calls for a person to honor diversity of ends in terms of both goals
and understandings held by others. This
honor is acted upon by engaging with others in mutual efforts by honest agents
toward seeking truth and/or prudent policy.
I will, over the following postings, delve into each of these
disciplines and then meld them with the skills – ala Toulmin – of reasoned argumentation.
No comments:
Post a Comment