AbstractBeing able to discriminate poorly justified from well justified arguments is necessary for informed citizenship. However, it is not known whether the ability to recognize argument strength generalizes across different types of arguments, and what cognitive factors predict this ability or these abilities. Drawing on the theory of argument schemes, we examined arguments from consequence, analogy, symptoms, and authority in order to cover all major types of arguments. A study (N = 278) on the general population in Finland indicated that the ability to discriminate between strong and weak arguments did not differ between these schemes. Argument strength discrimination ability correlated positively with analytic thinking dispositions promoting both quality and quantity of thinking, slightly positively with education, and negatively with overconfidence. It was unrelated to an intuitive thinking style, and to self-rated mental effort.

Amidst the European migrant crisis, a provocative advertisement campaign by the far-right party the Sweden Democrats was destroyed by a mob. No other campaign in Sweden had attracted a similar amount of attention and resentment. This qualitative case study analyses the activism rhetoric that caused the ‘Twitterstorm’ of the decade. Through a fantasy theme analysis, it determines how the protesters defended their anti-racist rhetorical vision. Action themes connected to fantasy types and symbolic cues provoked the Twittersphere, leading activists to destroy the campaign, transcending the virtual for the physical. This event is a paradigm case for rhetorical-political social media activism and gives insight into how the SD’s provocative rhetoric functions.

Through an argumentation analysis can one show how it is feasible to view a narrative religious text such as the Gospel of Matthew as a literary argument. The Gospel is not just “good news” but an elaborate argument for the standpoint that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah. It is shown why an argumentation analysis needs to be supplemented with a pragmatic literary analysis in order to describe how the evangelist presents his story so as to reach his argumentative objective. The analysis also shows why in the case of historical religious literary texts, certain demands are put on the analyst that are not normally present.