The Visual Enthymeme: Power, Premise, and Proposition

In The Rhetoric of Visual Arguments by J. Anthony Blair, he theorizes a connection between visual persuasion and arguments; specifically to see how visual arguments can exist within rhetoric (p. 42). His explanation and examples of the visual enthymeme really piqued my interest with regard to this theory. An enthymeme, according to Blair, is, “an argument in which the arguer deliberately leaves unstated a premise that is essential to it’s reasoning” (p. 41). Additionally, “the connecting of the audience to the argument is what makes the enthymeme a rhetorical form of argument” (p. 41).

In traditional written or speech rhetoric, arguments function by supplying reasons for a point of view (p. 45). The reasons are propositions which are standardly expressed by language. Therefore, propositions have a truth value. By asserting a truth, the propositions must be backed up by evidence (p. 45). According to Blair, the visual concept of argument then, should not stretch too far from the traditional concept of “argument” (p. 45).

Since the visual can be ambiguous and not always contain propositional content, visual arguments can exist, but the images must be true or false. To have truth value, it must also be propositional (p. 47). In addition, premise & conclusion propositions in visual argument are also needed (p. 48). The most powerful visual arguments are both visual and verbal, and must, “constitute some factor that can be considered a reason: 1) for accepting or believing some proposition, 2) for taking some other attitude, or, 3) for performing some action” (p. 49).

Take this visual/verbal enthymeme for example:

This visual argument provides what Blair calls, “evocative power - bringing strong images, memories, or feelings to mind” (p. 51). Here, the narrative capacity is very powerful. It provides a sense of realism as the symbolism registers immediately (attack dogs induce fear), it resonates with and relates to the beliefs of the appropriate/intended audience (here, perhaps a solicitor or criminal -- the solicitor doesn’t want to get hurt and the criminal doesn’t want to get caught), and it predicts the nature of the audience’s participation (most likely leaving the premises immediately to avoid bodily harm) (p. 53). The unstated premise here? If you can’t run faster than a vicious guard dog, you’re going to get hurt. Run!