Limitations of the logico-rhetorical module: Inconsistency in argument, online discussion forums and Electronic Deconstruction

Abstract

My focus is the ‘logico-rhetorical module’ (Sperber, 2000). This mental module, Sperber hypothesizes, is an evolved ability of human beings to examine critically what someone is saying, for example, to detect inconsistency or inadequate evidence in an argument. On the assumption that we have this natural ability, Chilton (2005) questions the need for Critical Discourse Analysis; in contrast, on his reading of Sperber’s work, Hart (this issue) argues the opposite. In this article, I agree with Chilton’s (2005) stance to the extent that the competence of the logico-rhetorical module is, generally speaking, adequate for enabling critical engagement with verbal input. That said, I highlight two (non-competence related) limitations of the logico-rhetorical module for detecting inconsistency in arguments. To address these limitations, I hold a new approach is needed in Critical Discourse Analysis. This is one which draws on the corpus linguistic method; I refer to it as Electronic Deconstruction.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.