This essay explores whether Aristotle's enthymeme applies to visual arguments. Often the enthymeme is defined as “a syllogism with one of its parts missing,” and much debate surrounds whether enthymemes so defined apply to visual arguments. After arguing that popular interpretations of the enthymeme differ remarkably from Aristotle's original conception, this essay reviews visual argumentation studies in order to demonstrate how elements of Aristotle's classical enthymeme are implicit in current theories of visual argumentation. When the enthymeme is understood more broadly, visual communication can be classified as argumentation, thus enhancing the credibility of studies of visual persuasion.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 69 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.