Blog #3 Blair

Blair’s main point is that visual arguments do exist,(Blair 349) but that they are very similar to verbal arguments, and consequently not the huge deal that people are making them out to be. (Blair 362) Blair states that verbal and visual arguments are similar because they involve proposing a point, then making a case for that point.

I agree with Blair that visual and verbal arguments are similar. First off, I agree with his definition of argument, which is rather rigid, but works. An argument must propose a point, offer a reason to believe that point, and be able to express that point linguistically. (Blair 346) It can not simply offer a point of view, but must include a reason to believe that point of view.

However, I think the reason for the similarity between verbal and visual arguments has less to do with their actual similarities, and more to do with the restrictions placed on the definition of argument. Within this definition, verbal and visual arguments must be similar, because without those similarities, they can not be defined as arguments. So, I suppose that I only partially agree with him, because if you use a more open definition of argument, then visual and verbal arguments are extremely different.


Blair, J. Anthony. " The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments." Visual Rhetoric in a Digital World 344-363