So far, our only way of examining arguments has been to use the tools of logic, rhetoric, and philosophy. However, these tools, while powerful, are often limited by the complexity, subtlety, and abstract nature of language. Meanwhile, much of our perspective on life, has been dominated by a “machine paradigm”. Machines supposedly tell us what is “true” or what exists. Along that line of thought: What if we could strip arguments to their bare bones, using technology?

Example)

In the (1996) movie Phenomenon, starring John Travolta, Kyra Sedgwick, Forest Whitaker, and Robert Duvall — Travolta portrays “George”, an auto mechanic who exhibits remarkable abilities. George tries to use his abilities for the good of his community: He develops a powerful fertilizer, improves solar panel designs, and predicts an earthquake without any equipment. When a sick Portuguese man needs help, George learns the language in minutes and helps translate to the doctor. He then uses telekinesis to rescue the man’s young relative. 

The federal government gets wind of George’s “supernatural” powers, and he is taken into FBI custody. Scientists, doctors, agents, all depend on equipment, operating from the belief system that if a machine registers or confirms or signals something, then that thing is real. Conversely, human abilities are consistently trivialized, ridiculed, and rejected.

An introduction by Garth Kemerling (Philosophy Pages, 1997, 2011), citing a study on fallacies, brings the movie Phenomenon — as an example of society’s dependence on machines — to mind.

Kemerlings’ passage reads:
“Assessing the legitimacy of arguments embedded in ordinary language is rather like diagnosing whether a living human being has any broken bones. Only the internal structure matters, but it is difficult to see through the layers of flesh that cover it. Soon we’ll begin to develop methods, like the tools of radiology, that enable us to see the skeletal form of an argument beneath the language that expresses it”.

This introduction invites contemplation on the nature of knowledge and truth. It employs a vivid metaphor to convey a complex idea. The comparison between arguments and human bodies is striking and memorable.

But what if this literary device was more than a metaphor? What if, with the right technological tools, we could truly see the ‘skeletal form’ of an argument?

Is this the next frontier of AGI/AI?

Reference:

Kemerling, G. (n.d.). Fallacies of relevance. https://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e06a.htm

Libretexts. (2021, January 15). 4.5: Fallacies of relevance. Humanities LibreTexts. https://human.libretexts.org/Courses/Lumen_Learning/Book%3A_Introduction_to_Philosophy-2_%28Lumen%29/04%3A_Module_2%3A_Logic/04.5%3A_Fallacies_of_Relevance

Wikipedia contributors. (2024, October 17). Phenomenon (film). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenon_(film)