Search Results (43)

This article examines a recurring rhetorical strategy in biblical prayer in which the supplicant argues against death by presenting it as a loss not only for the self, but also for God. In several texts, the plea for deliverance is grounded in the claim that the dead in Sheol can no longer praise, thank, remember, or call upon God. Death thus becomes rhetorically unacceptable not merely because it ends life, but because it silences worship. The study distinguishes between two biblical conceptions of the dead: one in which the dead retain awareness and communicative capacity, and another in which they are silent, cognitively diminished, and cut off from divine worship. It argues that the latter conception underlies a specific persuasive logic in prayers uttered under mortal threat. Through close readings of Isaiah 38, Psalms 6, 30, 88, and 115, the article shows that this argument functions as a recurring theological and rhetorical strategy within biblical prayer. Full article

The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (AI) as an autonomous recommendation agent fundamentally challenges traditional paradigms of marketing communication. As AI systems increasingly mediate consumer–brand relationships, understanding how artificial agents construct persuasive discourse—distinct from human communicators—becomes critical for developing effective dual-channel marketing strategies. Grounded in Source Credibility Theory and the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm, this study investigates the semantic and structural divergence between AI-generated product recommendations and human influencer marketing messages in social commerce contexts. Employing a mixed-methods computational approach integrating term frequency analysis, TF-IDF weighting, Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling, and BERT-based contextualized semantic embedding analysis (KR-SBERT), we examined 330 Instagram influencer posts and 541 AI-generated responses concerning inner beauty enzyme products—a hybrid category combining functional health claims with hedonic beauty appeals—in the Korean social commerce market. AI-generated responses were collected through a systematically designed query protocol with empirically grounded prompts derived from actual consumer search behaviors, and analytical robustness was verified through sensitivity analyses across multiple parameter thresholds. Our findings reveal a fundamental divergence in persuasive architecture: human influencers construct experiential narratives exhibiting message characteristics typically associated with peripheral-route cues (sensory descriptions, emotional testimonials, social context), while AI recommendations employ systematic, evidence-based discourse exhibiting message characteristics typically associated with central-route argumentation (functional mechanisms, ingredient specifications, objective criteria). Topic modeling identified four distinct thematic clusters for each source type: human discourse centers on embodied experience and relational consumption, whereas AI discourse organizes around informational utility and rational decision support. Jensen–Shannon Divergence analysis (JSD = 0.213 bits) confirmed moderate distributional divergence, while chi-square testing (χ² = 847.23, p < 0.001) and Cramér’s V (0.312, indicating a medium-to-large effect) demonstrated statistically significant and substantively meaningful differences. These findings extend CASA theory by demonstrating that AI recommendation agents develop a characteristic “AI communication signature” distinguishable from human persuasion patterns. We propose an integrated Dual-Agent Persuasion Proposition—synthesizing CASA, ELM, and Source Credibility perspectives—suggesting that AI and human recommenders serve complementary functions across different stages of the consumer decision journey—a proposition whose predictions regarding sequential persuasive effectiveness and consumer processing routes await experimental validation. These findings carry implications for AI content strategy optimization, platform design, and emerging regulatory frameworks for AI-generated content labeling. Full article

English argumentative writing is a cornerstone of academic and professional communication, yet it remains a significant challenge for second-language (L2) learners. While Large Language Models (LLMs) show promise as components in automated feedback systems, their responses are often generic and lack the structural insight necessary for meaningful improvement. Existing Automated Essay Scoring (AES) systems, conversely, typically provide holistic scores without the kind of actionable, fine-grained advice that can guide concrete revisions. To bridge this systemic gap, we introduce ARGUS (Argument Understanding and Structured-feedback), a novel neuro-symbolic system that synergizes the semantic understanding of LLMs with the structured reasoning of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). The ARGUS system architecture comprises three integrated modules: (1) an LLM-based parser transforms an essay into a structured argument graph; (2) a Relational Graph Convolutional Network (R-GCN) analyzes this symbolic structure to identify specific logical and structural flaws; and (3) this flaw analysis directly guides a conditional LLM to generate feedback that is not only contextually relevant but also pinpoints precise weaknesses in the student’s reasoning. We evaluate ARGUS on the Argument Annotated Essays corpus and on an additional set of 150 L2 persuasive essays collected from the same population to augment training of both the parser and the structural flaw detector. Our argument parsing module achieves a component identification F1-score of 90.4% and a relation identification F1-score of 86.1%. The R-GCN-based structural flaw detector attains a macro-averaged F1-score of 0.83 across the seven flaw categories, indicating that the enriched training data substantially improves its generalization. Most importantly, in a human evaluation study, feedback generated by the ARGUS system was rated as consistently and significantly more specific, accurate, actionable, and helpful than that from strong baselines, including a fine-tuned LLM and a zero-shot GPT-4. Our work demonstrates a robust systems engineering approach, grounding LLM-based feedback in GNN-driven structural analysis to create an intelligent teaching system that provides targeted, pedagogically valuable guidance for L2 student writers engaging with persuasive essays. Full article

This study examines whether sexual appeals, specifically nudity (body coverage) and model gender, shape consumer responses to advertising. Guided by the Elaboration Likelihood Model, we test whether these factors operate as peripheral cues when argument strength is minimal (fragrance advertising). In a 3 (model gender: male, female, both) × 2 (clothing: swimwear vs. outdoor wear) between-subjects experiment (n = 195), participants viewed one of six real advertisements from the same luxury fragrance brand featuring the same professional models. Nudity level did not affect attitudes toward the ad, brand attitude, or purchase intention. By contrast, ads depicting both a male and a female model produced small but reliable omnibus improvements in brand attitude and purchase intention relative to single-model ads; attitudes toward the ad were unaffected. Mediation tests indicated that these differences were not explained by attitude toward the ad or brand attitude, consistent with peripheral-cue processes rather than the classic ad → brand attitude sequence. Practically, the results challenge the assumption that “more nudity” is persuasive and suggest that, in low-argument contexts, gender-balanced model composition can be a modest, context-dependent cue. Advertisers should prioritize brand/category fit, pretest in the intended media environment (and locale), and expect incremental rather than large effects. Full article

In the recent K-12 educational literature, arts-based data visualization has been positioned as a compelling means of rendering data science and statistical learning accessible, motivating, and empowering for youth, as data users and producers. However, the only research to attend carefully to youth’s data-based, artistic storytelling practices has been limited in scope to specific storytelling mechanisms, like youth’s metaphor usage. Engaging in design-based research, we sought to understand the art and design decisions that youth make and the data-based arguments and stories that youth tell through their arts-based data visualizations. We drew upon embodied theory to acknowledge the holistic, synergistic, and situated nature of student learning and making. Corresponding with emerging accounts of youth arts-based data visualization practices, we saw regular evidence of art, storytelling, and personal subjectivities intertwining. Contributing to this literature, we found that these intersections surfaced in a number of domains, including youth’s pictorial symbolism, visual encoding strategies, and data decisions like manifold pictorial symbols arranged to support complex, multilayered, ambiguous narratives; qualitative data melding community and personal lived experience; and singular statements making persuasive appeals. This integration of art, story, agency, and embodiment often manifested in ways that seemed to jostle against traditional notions of and norms surrounding data science. Full article

In Plato’s Republic, Socrates praises reason and vilifies force. This preference for reason continued its role in philosophy and only a few political thinkers considered the use of force. Plato also dismissed persuasion as the Sophists’ art of making the weaker argument appear stronger and the stronger argument appear weaker. It was Machiavelli who focused on force and persuasion, but he was criticized for his advice to the Prince. Vilfredo Pareto did not offer counsel but rather provided one of the first realistic accounts of social behavior. For Pareto, that meant exploring the range of means which humans use to achieve what they want. For Pareto, that meant less attention on reason and more on persuasion and cunning. Thomas Hobbes wrote that force and fraud are two means, but Pareto insisted that humans use force, persuasion, and cunning. It is to Pareto’s credit as a social behaviorist that he provided one of the first scholarly analyses of cunning and deceit. Full article

This article contributes to philosophical discussions on religious diversity by applying a Wittgensteinian lens, specifically drawing on insights from On Certainty. It examines interreligious disagreement as a form of “deep disagreement” and posits that Wittgenstein contends that argumentation has limitations in resolving such conflicts. Instead, the article suggests that persuasion—a distinct process of making differences visible—facilitates a gradual reassessment of one’s world-picture. A key contribution of Wittgenstein’s thought to discussions on religious diversity lies in his emphasis on recognizing differences and understanding their transformative impact on our world-pictures. The article begins by differentiating between various types of disagreement, proposing that On Certainty addresses conflicts between world-pictures which can be characterized as deep disagreements. It then delves into Wittgenstein’s insights into the functioning of world-pictures and the crucial importance of grasping their dynamics for a better understanding of such disagreements. Building on this foundation, this article argues that persuasion, as a non-argumentative mode of engagement, is uniquely positioned to effectively make these differences visible in cases of deep disagreement. Finally, this article demonstrates how these ideas can help to address and resolve key misunderstandings within the philosophy of religious diversity. Full article

In this article, I argue that Newman’s emphasis on a gestaltic model of reasoning and the role played by the imagination in informal reasoning is a fruitful starting point for an exploration of convergence between the Grammar of Assent and Wittgenstein’s On Certainty. I claim that Wittgenstein, like Newman, challenges both the claim that justification must be neutral and the prejudice according to which any form of persuasion that is not demonstrative is irrational or arational. Arguments are mainly focused on the picture of Newman’s epistemology provided lately by Duncan Pritchard. I argue that Pritchard misrepresents Newman’s conception of the illative sense so as to ascribe to him the thesis that religious belief is evidentially grounded in a broad sense of evidence. This creates a false dichotomy between the arational view of religious principles and the account of religious certainties as epistemically grounded. I suggest that Newman’s reference to both living persuasion and the role played by the will in religious conviction is part of his attempt to expose this false dichotomy. Full article

To diagnose someone’s reasoning today as “sophistry” is to say that this reasoning is at once persuasive (at least to a significant degree) and logically invalid. We begin by explaining that, despite some recent scholarly arguments to the contrary, the understanding of ‘sophistry’ and ‘sophistic’ underlying such a lay diagnosis is in fact firmly in line with the hallmarks of reasoning proffered by the ancient sophists themselves. Next, we supply a rigorous but readable definition of what constitutes sophistic reasoning (=sophistry). We then discuss “artificial” sophistry: the articulation of sophistic reasoning facilitated by artificial intelligence (AI) and promulgated in our increasingly digital world. Next, we present, economically, a particular kind of artificial sophistry, one embodied by an artificial agent: the lying machine. Afterward, we respond to some anticipated objections. We end with a few speculative thoughts about the limits (or lack thereof) of artificial sophistry, and what may be a rather dark future. Full article

Is it correct to think of God as a perfectly good personal agent? Not so, argue John Bishop and Ken Perszyk. Bishop and Perszyk, in their most recent work, God, Purpose, and Reality: A Euteleological Understanding of Theism (2023), outline a series of challenges that bring into question this concept of God—i.e., as a perfectly good personal agent, who is unique, unsurpassably great, all-powerful, and all-knowing. I aim to critically evaluate one of these challenges, namely the Normatively Relativised Logical Argument from Evil (NRLAFE). The NRLAFE has God’s perfect goodness as its target. Bishop and Perszyk argue that people who are committed to certain values about what constitutes right relationship amongst persons, might reasonably judge God as lacking perfect goodness. They also contend that the relevant values will likely be endorsed by theists. My aim in this paper is twofold: first, I aim to assess the Bishop-Perszyk argument from evil, in light of the tradition of Islamic Theism. The tradition of Islamic Theism is as broad as it is deep, and within the tradition there are a variety of ways in which God has been conceptualised. This includes debates as to whether we can view God as a personal agent. Second, I contend that we have available to us, from within and beyond the tradition of Islamic Theism, a set of resources that: (a) permit us to understand God as being a personal agent; and (b) allow us to resist the NRLAFE while endorsing the value commitments that Bishop and Perszyk have in mind. The perspective I bring to this paper is that of a reflective Muslim—i.e., a person of the Islamic faith who acknowledges that people of other religious and non-religious persuasions are as educated and concerned with seeking truth and avoiding error as they themselves are. Full article

This essay examines pantheism within the framework of the ‘faith and reason’ field in the philosophy of religion, with an emphasis on the question of the relationship between pantheism and empirical–scientific rationality. I address this question from what I call the Wittgensteinian Nonoverlapping Magisteria (WNOMA) approach to religion and science. WNOMA affirms a categorial difference between religious and scientific language and attitudes. This difference is interpreted with the help of Wittgenstein’s distinction between religious and scientific beliefs and van Fraassen’s distinction between religious and empiricist stances. This means that WNOMA is antievidentialist regarding religious beliefs and sees the experiential and instinctive aspects of religion as more fundamental than the systematic–intellectual aspect. Part of the variety in contemporary pantheism relates to the question of whether the emphasis is on the experiential–spiritual side of pantheism or its intellectual side, i.e., whether pantheism is ‘hot’ or ‘cold’. I examine a few telling examples: Spinoza, Einstein, the World Pantheism Movement and a recent awe-some argument for pantheism by Ryan Byerly. The main contribution of this paper is a critical reading of these versions of pantheism from a WNOMA perspective, through which I hope to establish the plausibility and show some of the persuasive force of the WNOMA approach to pantheism, focusing on the relation of pantheism to scientific rationality on the one hand and felt experience on the other. I argue that hotter kinds of pantheism can be intellectually virtuous if they find a way to combine the empiricist stance and pantheist religious stance, even without a developed philosophical or theological system. I also argue that colder and philosophically rigorous pantheism can be problematic if it assumes religious evidentialism, neglects the experiential part of pantheism in favor of intellectualism or/and confuses the spheres of science and religion. Full article

Persuasive content in online news contains elements that aim to persuade its readers and may not necessarily include factual information. Since a news article only has some sentences that indicate persuasiveness, it would be quite challenging to differentiate news with or without the persuasive content. Recognizing persuasive sentences with a text summarization and classification approach is important to understand persuasive messages effectively. Text summarization identifies arguments and key points, while classification separates persuasive sentences based on the linguistic and semantic features used. Our proposed architecture includes text summarization approaches to shorten sentences without persuasive content and then using classifiers model to detect those with persuasive indication. In this paper, we compare the performance of latent semantic analysis (LSA) and TextRank in text summarization methods, the latter of which has outperformed in all trials, and also two classifiers of convolutional neural network (CNN) and bidirectional long short-term memory (BiLSTM). We have prepared a dataset (±1700 data and manually persuasiveness-labeled) consisting of news articles written in the Indonesian language collected from a nationwide electronic news portal. Comparative studies in our experimental results show that the TextRank–BERT–BiLSTM model achieved the highest accuracy of 95% in detecting persuasive news. The text summarization methods were able to generate detailed and precise summaries of the news articles and the deep learning models were able to effectively differentiate between persuasive news and real news. Full article

Vaccination-related information is important for the public to increase vaccine acceptance intention, while the guidance and persuasion effects of information are influenced by approaches to information presentation. Thus, this study has focused on news media, an important source of vaccination-related dissemination, and aimed to investigate how different presentations of news influence an individual’s COVID-19 vaccine intention. Moreover, whether the cultural values individuals possess would influence the persuasive effects of news information was also considered in our study. A web-based experiment among 310 participants employing 2 (news framing: rights frame vs. obligation frame) × 2 (argument quality: high argument quality vs. low argument quality) × 2 (individual–collective orientation: individualism vs. collectivism) design was conducted in this study. Data were analyzed through a series of analyses of variance (ANOVAs) in SPSS 26. The results show that argument quality had a significant positive impact on individuals’ psychological acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine. The results also show that the rights framework was significantly more persuasive than the obligation framework. Furthermore, for individualistic individuals, news information with high argument quality and a rights frame was the most persuasive. These findings may help guide the writing of news, thereby improving vaccine uptake, enhancing the public’s health literacy, and facilitating the implementation of vaccination policies during and after a pandemic. Full article

Antilogies, or pairs of symmetrically opposed speeches or arguments, were generally ignored by Plato, Isocrates, Aristotle, Cicero, and Diogenes Laertius, and, later, by Eduard Norden, Hermann Diels, and most modern scholars of antiquity. As a consequence, until the end of the twentieth century CE, antilogies have been ignored or, at best, treated as a minor literary device to be mentioned only with reference to individual writings. Nevertheless, during the second half of the fifth century, antilogies were a crucially important form of argument and persuasion in ‘sophistic’ thought, philosophy, historiography, comedy and tragedy, and other fields. In order to redress the historical neglect of the art of antilogy, this essay provides an inventory (doubtless incomplete) of some 30 antilogies composed by playwrights such as Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes, historians such as Herodotus and Thucydides, and, most importantly, ‘sophists’ such as Protagoras, Gorgias, Prodicus and Antiphon (in addition to a few other writers of the same period). Building on this inventory, the second part of the essay seeks to establish identifying features of antilogy and assess its cultural significance in the Athenian context (in the second half of the fifth century BCE). Full article

It can be argued that linguistic aspects of argumentation have attracted scholarly attention ever since the foundation of rhetoric, which originally developed as the study of means of persuasion, and thus, to a fair extent, that linguistics plays an important role in the study of argumentation at large [...] Full article