4 pages - Lamika

Introduction to Visual Arguments

Arguments are not only composed with words in speeches, dialogues, and written works. Many people try to convince us of things via visual imagery. Advertisement on television, on billboards, images in art galleries, screen layouts on the internet, and other forms of graphic imagery can be used to cause us to think without words and may implicitly lead us to believe certain ideas.

Photographs are found in magazines, newspapers, advertisements, and art galleries. A photographer never simply holds up a mirror to the world. Photographers deliberately publish certain images to communicate specific ideas, thoughts, and feelings. While photographic images may make us think we are simply looking through a window on the world, the look of the picture itself is actually carefully constructed. We only see what the photographer allows us to see.

We need special tools to analyze what a photograph is attempting to get us to think or feel. Analyzing imagery is somewhat different than analyzing written or spoken arguments. True to the old adage, "A picture is worth a thousand words," when we look at images we take in just as much or more information as we do when we read a sentence. The initial task in receiving that information is to try to express in words what we see the picture ‘saying.’ This allows us to become aware of what the specific image is communicating to us. We naturally grasp meaning intuitively. But, we need to consciously articulate that meaning. Not that you need to talk to yourself out loud whenever looking at an image, but you need to engage in a mental process of interpreting visual meaning into words. For instance, some of the things we might articulate would be a description of what we see. Since our critical thinking is attuned to word play, the mere transposition of the mute experience into words allows us to better apply critical thinking skills.

The following steps will help you organize your thoughts when describing a photograph:

1. Search for the central focus of the photograph. The focus will often equate to the goal of the communication and indicate what might be the main theme or message or thesis of the photograph? What does the picture highlight and draw attention to?

2. Next, observe what is going on in the picture. What are the people doing in the photograph? Where was the picture taken? From what angle was the picture shot?

3. Given the purpose you ascribe to the image, ask yourself if the image succeeds in communicating what you claim it does. Does the picture successfully make you feel the emotion you believe it is trying to arouse?

Of course, visual imagery does not consist exclusively of photographs. We are also confronted with paintings in art galleries and on the walls of homes and business. We can use the same techniques to look at paintings.

Most commonly, we encounter imagery used by the advertising industry aimed at persuading consumers to buy products, persuading voters to support a specific candidate or cause, or providing awareness of a special interest issue. Advertisers and marketing teams skilfully choose the best images and slogans to get the attention of the audience and convince them that a product, a cause, or a candidate is worth the commitment of time or money.

If we critically analyze visual advertisements, we can discover the arguments they are communicating. Critical questions to be considered include:

• Who is the intended audience of the advertisement? Is the advertisement directed to people who are sick with heart disease? Is the advertisement directed at children?

• What does the advertisement claim is desirable? Success? Beauty? Health? Speed? Do we agree that what is being claimed as desirable is actually something we desire?

• What is the goal of the advertisement? Is it trying to convince you to buy a hamburger or vote for a particular candidate?

• How does the ad try to persuade you to act or adopt a belief? Does it appeal to fear of what might happen if you don't act or accept the belief? Does is appeal to pity? Does it present reasonable, relevant and sufficient evidence?

• Based on the above answers, should the ad convince a rational person? Does it employ deceptive or misleading approaches that may be effective on non-critical thinkers?

Example: A commercial uses a handsome actor, who plays a doctor on a soap opera, to suggest that a specific medicine should be used to remedy colds. The actor does disclose that he is not a real doctor. He holds up a package of the medicine and lists several benefits such as how the medicine helps you to sleep when you are stuffed up and how good it tastes. And of course, he recommends that you buy it.

The advertisement is clearly aimed at anyone who has or will have a cold. It makes it seem desirable to be able to get sleep and to have good tasting medicine. The purpose seems clear: to convince you to buy and use the medicine the next time you have a cold. The ad tries to convince you by the beauty of the actor (people tend to want to be like the beautiful), the fact that people think of the actor as a doctor (appeal to authority), and by listing the desirable aspects of a medicine (tastes good and helps you sleep). But does the ad succeed? Would a reasonable person buy the medicine based on this ad? Is there a fallacious appeal to authority? Are good taste and being able to rest enough evidence to support such a conclusion to buy this particular medicine? You can also write the argument out in words to better analyze the content. Example: A handsome actor claims this medicine tastes good.

A soap opera doctor says this medicine will help you rest. You should buy and use this particular medicine if you have a cold.

Now, we can analyze the argument found in the advertisement just as we have all other arguments up to this point. Is the evidence offered relevant, reasonable and sufficient to support the conclusion?