High Costs and Low Benefits: Analysis and Evaluation of the “I’m Not Stupid” Argument

Henrike Jansen

doi:10.1007/s10503-022-09592-4

Argumentation Dec 2023 Open Access

High Costs and Low Benefits: Analysis and Evaluation of the “I’m Not Stupid” Argument

Henrike Jansen Leiden University

Abstract

AbstractThis article presents an analysis and evaluation of what I call the “I’m not stupid” argument. This argument has ancient roots, which lie in Aristotle’s famous description of the weak man’s and strong man’s arguments. An “I’m not stupid” argument is typically used in a context of accusation and defense, by a defendant who argues that they did not commit the act of which they have been accused. The analysis of this type of argument takes the shape of an argumentative pattern, which displays a full-fledged representation of its argumentation structure. It is based on a collection of ten contemporary instances of the “I’m not stupid” argument. Although ten instances constitute a small collection, the wide variation in the argumentative elements that they express explicitly or leave implicit made it possible to identify five new key premises in comparison with previous analyses of the weak man’s and strong man’s arguments (Walton, Tindale and Gordon 2014 in Argumentation 28:85–119, 2014; Walton 2019 in Argumentation 33:45–74, 2019). These new premises show that the crucial point of an evaluation of this argument is the arguer's supposedly rational character in making a gain-loss calculation. They also show that we need empirical data to strengthen our analyses of argument schemes and argumentation structures.

Journal: Argumentation
Published: 2023-12-01
DOI: 10.1007/s10503-022-09592-4
CompPile: Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access: OA PDF Hybrid
Topics: classical rhetoric argument assessment
Export: BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (4)

Walton (2019)

Plausible Argumentation in Eikotic Arguments: The Ancient Weak Versus Strong Ma…

Argumentation
Walton et al. (2014)

Applying Recent Argumentation Methods to Some Ancient Examples of Plausible Reasoning

Argumentation
Hoffman (2008)

Concerning Eikos: Social Expectation and Verisimilitude in Early Attic Rhetoric

Rhetorica
Braet (2004)

The Oldest Typology of Argumentation Schemes

Argumentation

Also cites 9 works outside this index ↓

Cicero. 2006; 1st ed. 1949. On Invention. English translation by H.M. Hubbell. The Loeb Classical Library 386…

↗
Michael Gagarin (1990)

Gagarin, Michael. 1990. The nature of proofs in Antiphon. Classical Philology 85: 22–32.

Classical Philology ↗
Michael Gagarin (2001)

Gagarin, Michael. 2001. Did the Sophists aim to persuade? Rhetorica 19: 275–291.

Rhetorica ↗
Michael Gagarin (2002)

Antiphon the Athenian: Oratory, law, and justice in the age of the sophists

↗
Henrike Jansen (2015)

Scrutinizing Argumentation in Practice

↗
Thomas A Schmitz (2000)

Schmitz, Thomas A. 2000. Plausibility in the Greek orators. American Journal of Philology 121: 47–77.

American Journal of Philology ↗
Frans H van Eemeren (2017)

Prototypical argumentative patterns

↗
Frans H van Eemeren (2016)

Argumentation: Analysis and evaluation

↗
Douglas van Walton (2008)

Argumentation schemes

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 2 View in citation network → Build reading path →

High Costs and Low Benefits: Analysis and Evaluation of the “I’m Not Stupid” Argument

Abstract

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

Cites in this index (4)

Related Articles