| Revision as of 18:07, 19 March 2013 editVanishedUserABC (talk | contribs)78,528 edits Please do not remove content sourced to WP:RS sources (professors in the field), per WP:Preserve Do no revert, discus on talk← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:14, 19 March 2013 edit undoHumanpublic (talk | contribs)343 edits Undid revision 545480070 by History2007 (talk)undue weight, stop reinsertingNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ]'' compilation of ] monk biographies is surprisingly silent on the "rules of purity" codes of 1103, yet the document of the 1103 codes exists.<ref name=Yifa32/>]] | ]'' compilation of ] monk biographies is surprisingly silent on the "rules of purity" codes of 1103, yet the document of the 1103 codes exists.<ref name=Yifa32/>]] | ||
| ⚫ | |||
| An '''argument from silence''' (also called '''''argumentum a silentio''''' in ]) is generally a conclusion drawn based on the absence of statements in historical documents.<ref>"argumentum e silentio ''noun phrase''" ''The Oxford Essential Dictionary of Foreign Terms in English''. Ed. Jennifer Speake. Berkley Books, 1999.</ref><ref>John Lange, ''The Argument from Silence'', History and Theory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (1966), pp. 288-301 </ref> In the field of ], it often refers to the ] from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it.<ref>"silence, the argument from". ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church''. Ed. E. A. Livingstone. Oxford University Press, 2006.</ref> | An '''argument from silence''' (also called '''''argumentum a silentio''''' in ]) is generally a conclusion drawn based on the absence of statements in historical documents.<ref>"argumentum e silentio ''noun phrase''" ''The Oxford Essential Dictionary of Foreign Terms in English''. Ed. Jennifer Speake. Berkley Books, 1999.</ref><ref>John Lange, ''The Argument from Silence'', History and Theory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (1966), pp. 288-301 </ref> In the field of ], it often refers to the ] from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it.<ref>"silence, the argument from". ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church''. Ed. E. A. Livingstone. Oxford University Press, 2006.</ref> | ||
| Thus in ] with an argument from silence, the absence of a reference to an event or a document is used to cast doubt on the event not mentioned.<ref name=RHall55 /> While most historical approaches rely on what an author's works contain, an argument from silence relies on what the book or document does not contain.<ref name=RHall55 /> This approach thus uses what an author "should have said" rather than what is available in the author's extant writings.<ref name=Henige >''Historical evidence and argument'' by David P. Henige 2005 ISBN 978-0-299-21410-4 page 176.</ref><ref name=RHall55 >''Seven Pillories of Wisdom'' by David R. Hall 1991 ISBN 0-86554-369-0 pages 55-56.</ref> | Thus in ] with an argument from silence, the absence of a reference to an event or a document is used to cast doubt on the event not mentioned.<ref name=RHall55 /> While most historical approaches rely on what an author's works contain, an argument from silence relies on what the book or document does not contain.<ref name=RHall55 /> This approach thus uses what an author "should have said" rather than what is available in the author's extant writings.<ref name=Henige >''Historical evidence and argument'' by David P. Henige 2005 ISBN 978-0-299-21410-4 page 176.</ref><ref name=RHall55 >''Seven Pillories of Wisdom'' by David R. Hall 1991 ISBN 0-86554-369-0 pages 55-56.</ref> | ||
| Arguments from silence, based on a writer's failure to mention an event, are distinct from '']'' which rely on a total "absence of evidence" and are widely considered unreliable; however arguments from silence themselves are also generally viewed as rather weak in many cases.<ref name=Sven>''The Routledge Companion to Epistemology'' by Sven Bernecker and Duncan Pritchard (Dec 2, 2010) ISBN 0415962196 ] pages 64-65 "arguments from silence are, as a rule, quiet weak; there are many examples where reasoning from silence would lead us astray."</ref> | |||
| ==Historical analysis== | ==Historical analysis== | ||
| ⚫ | An argument from silence can be convincing when mentioning a fact can be seen as so natural that its omission is a good reason to assume ignorance. For example, while the editors of ] and ] mention the other community, most scholars believe these documents were written independently. ] writes, "If the editors of either had had access to an actual text of the other, it is inconceivable that they would not have mentioned this. Here the argument from silence is very convincing."<ref>"Talmud". ''A Concise Companion to the Jewish Religion''. Louis Jacobs. Oxford University Press, 1999.</ref> | ||
| An argument from silence can act as presumptive evidence only if the person failing | |||
| to mention the information was in a position to have the information, and was purporting | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ], professor of Classics at ] flatly state that arguments from silence are not valid.<ref>''Governmental intervention in foreign trade in archaïc and classical Greece'' by Errietta M. A. Bissa ISBN 90-04-17504-0 page 21: "This is a fundamental methodological issue on the validity of arguments from silence, where I wish to make my position clear: arguments from silence are not valid."</ref> ] states that, although risky, such arguments can at times shed light on historical events.<ref name=Henige /> ] has pointed out the perils of arguments from silence, in that although no references appear to the "Rules of purity" codes of monastic conduct of 1103 in the ], or any of the ] documents, a copy of the code in which the author identifies himself exists.<ref name=Yifa32>''The origins of Buddhist monastic codes in China'' by Yifa, Zongze 2002 ISBN 0-8248-2494-6 page 32: "an argumentum ex silencio is hardly conclusive"</ref> | |||
| ]'s notes are silent on the ].<ref name=Henige />]] | |||
| Professors of history ] and ] state that arguments from silence face the difficulty that a historian can not just assume that an author would have recorded the fact in question; for if the fact did not seem important enough to an author it would have been excluded.<ref>''From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods'' by Martha C. Howell and Walter Prevenier (Apr 26, 2001) ISBN 0801485606 Cornell University Press page 73-74 "Another difficulty with argument from silence is that historians cannot assume that an observer of a particular fact would have automatically recorded that fact. Authors observe all kinds of events but only record those that seem important to them."</ref> ], professor of Classics at ] flatly state that arguments from silence are not valid.<ref>''Governmental intervention in foreign trade in archaïc and classical Greece'' by Errietta M. A. Bissa ISBN 90-04-17504-0 page 21: "This is a fundamental methodological issue on the validity of arguments from silence, where I wish to make my position clear: arguments from silence are not valid."</ref> ] states that, although risky, such arguments can at times shed light on historical events.<ref name=Henige /> | |||
| ] has pointed out the perils of arguments from silence, in that the lack of references to a compilation of a set of monastic codes by contemporaries or even by disciples does not mean that it never existed.<ref name=Yifa32/> This is well as illustrated by the case of ]'s "Rules of purity" which he wrote for the Chan monastery in 1103. One of his contemporaries wrote a preface to a collection of his writings neglected to mention his code. And none of his biographies nor the documents of the ], nor the ] documents (which exalt him) refer to Zongze's collection of a monastic code.<ref name=Yifa32/> However a copy of the code in which the author identifies himself | |||
| exists.<ref name=Yifa32>''The origins of Buddhist monastic codes in China'' by Yifa, Zongze 2002 ISBN 0-8248-2494-6 page 32.</ref> | |||
| ] based her controversial book ] on arguments from silence.<ref name=Henige /> Woods argued that ] never went to China and fabricated his accounts because he failed to mention elements from the visual landscape such as tea, did not record the Great Wall and neglected to record practices such as foot-binding. She argued that no outsider could spend 15 years in China and not observe and record these elements. Most historians disagree with Wood's reasoning.<ref name=Henige >''Historical evidence and argument'' by David P. Henige 2005 ISBN 978-0-299-21410-4 page 176.</ref> | ] based her controversial book ] on arguments from silence.<ref name=Henige /> Woods argued that ] never went to China and fabricated his accounts because he failed to mention elements from the visual landscape such as tea, did not record the Great Wall and neglected to record practices such as foot-binding. She argued that no outsider could spend 15 years in China and not observe and record these elements. Most historians disagree with Wood's reasoning.<ref name=Henige >''Historical evidence and argument'' by David P. Henige 2005 ISBN 978-0-299-21410-4 page 176.</ref> | ||
| Professors of philosophy Sven Bernecker and Duncan Pritchard state that arguments from silence are generally weak and can go astray in many cases, and point to examples such as Marco Polo's neglect of the Wall of China, and ]'s silence on the destruction of ] and ] when he discusses the 79 AD eruption of ] in detail in his letters.<ref name=Sven/> | |||
| ==Legal aspects== | ==Legal aspects== | ||
| Line 30: | Line 19: | ||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| {{portal|Philosophy}} | {{portal|Philosophy}} | ||
| ⚫ | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 18:14, 19 March 2013
An argument from silence (also called argumentum a silentio in Latin) is generally a conclusion drawn based on the absence of statements in historical documents. In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the deduction from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it.
Thus in historical analysis with an argument from silence, the absence of a reference to an event or a document is used to cast doubt on the event not mentioned. While most historical approaches rely on what an author's works contain, an argument from silence relies on what the book or document does not contain. This approach thus uses what an author "should have said" rather than what is available in the author's extant writings.
Historical analysis
An argument from silence can be convincing when mentioning a fact can be seen as so natural that its omission is a good reason to assume ignorance. For example, while the editors of Yerushalmi and Bavli mention the other community, most scholars believe these documents were written independently. Louis Jacobs writes, "If the editors of either had had access to an actual text of the other, it is inconceivable that they would not have mentioned this. Here the argument from silence is very convincing."
Errietta Bissa, professor of Classics at University of Wales flatly state that arguments from silence are not valid. David Henige states that, although risky, such arguments can at times shed light on historical events. Yifa has pointed out the perils of arguments from silence, in that although no references appear to the "Rules of purity" codes of monastic conduct of 1103 in the Transmission of the Lamp, or any of the Pure Land documents, a copy of the code in which the author identifies himself exists.
Frances Wood based her controversial book Did Marco Polo go to China? on arguments from silence. Woods argued that Marco Polo never went to China and fabricated his accounts because he failed to mention elements from the visual landscape such as tea, did not record the Great Wall and neglected to record practices such as foot-binding. She argued that no outsider could spend 15 years in China and not observe and record these elements. Most historians disagree with Wood's reasoning.
Legal aspects
Jed Rubenfeld, professor of Law at Yale Law School, has shown an example of the difficulty in applying arguments from silence in constitutional law, stating that although arguments from silence can be used to draw conclusions about the intent of the Framers of the US Constitution, their application can lead to two different conclusions and hence they can not be used to settle the issues.
In the context of Morocco's Truth Commission of 1999 regarding torture and secret detentions, Wu and Livescu state that the fact that someone remained silent is no proof of their ignorance about a specific piece of information. They point out that the absence of records about the torture of prisoners under the secret detention program is no proof that such detentions did not involve torture, or that some detentions did not take place.
See also
References
- ^ The origins of Buddhist monastic codes in China by Yifa, Zongze 2002 ISBN 0-8248-2494-6 page 32: "an argumentum ex silencio is hardly conclusive"
- "argumentum e silentio noun phrase" The Oxford Essential Dictionary of Foreign Terms in English. Ed. Jennifer Speake. Berkley Books, 1999.
- John Lange, The Argument from Silence, History and Theory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (1966), pp. 288-301
- "silence, the argument from". The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Ed. E. A. Livingstone. Oxford University Press, 2006.
- ^ Seven Pillories of Wisdom by David R. Hall 1991 ISBN 0-86554-369-0 pages 55-56.
- ^ Historical evidence and argument by David P. Henige 2005 ISBN 978-0-299-21410-4 page 176.
- "Talmud". A Concise Companion to the Jewish Religion. Louis Jacobs. Oxford University Press, 1999.
- Governmental intervention in foreign trade in archaïc and classical Greece by Errietta M. A. Bissa ISBN 90-04-17504-0 page 21: "This is a fundamental methodological issue on the validity of arguments from silence, where I wish to make my position clear: arguments from silence are not valid."
- Jed Rubenfeld Rights of Passage: Majority Rule in Congress Duke Law Journal, 1996 Section B: Arguments from silence, "From this silence one can draw clear plausible inferences about the Framers' intent. The only difficulty is that one can draw two different inferences.... The truth is that the argument from silence is not dispositive".
- Human Rights, Suffering, and Aesthetics in Political Prison Literature by Yenna Wu, Simona Livescu 2011 ISBN 0-7391-6741-3 pages 86-90.
| Common fallacies (list) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Informal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
