Meta-argumentation: Prolegomena to a Dutch Project

The goal of this essay is two-fold: to make a plea for the theoretical and methodological importance and fruitfulness of meta-argumentation in general, and for approaching from the viewpoint of meta-argumentation a particular topic that is especially relevant for reasons other than methodology and theory. The general aim is pursued by summarizing some past work which follows what I call the historical-textual approach to the study of argumentation, and describing an ongoing project which extends that approach into the new subject matter of meta-argumentation. The historical-textual approach studies actual texts that contain explicit argumentation about historically or perennially significant issues, and reaches or tests theoretical claims based thereupon. The meta-argumentation project proposes to follow the same approach with regard to meta-arguments. These are arguments about arguments, and are distinguished from ground-level arguments. Although they have been studied implicitly in many scholarly works and explicitly in some, they have not been studied systematically. Such a study would be fruitful partly because it would offer an understanding of a special class of arguments. Moreover, it would be a distinctive way of doing argumentation theory in general, since theorizing about arguments is essentially arguing about arguments. Such points are elaborated in the context of summarizing past work that provides analyses, interpretations, and evaluations of the meta-arguments advanced by various argumentation theorists on such topics as: definitions of the concept of argument, methods for the formal criticism of arguments, deep disagreements or intractable quarrels, and conductive arguments or pro-and-con arguments. The particular aim is pursued by motivating the project of a meta-argumentative analysis of a book entitled Apologia (1581), by William of Orange (“the Silent”). William was a leader of the sixteenth-century revolt of the Low Countries against Spain, which resulted in the establishment of the Netherlands as an independent country. In 1580, Philip II, King of Spain, had issued a proclamation calling for the William’s banishment and/or assassination. The Apologia attempts to justify William personally and the Dutch revolt generally against Philip’s arguments. It is significant because it is a classic document in the struggle for freedom of religion, national liberation, and the democratic ideal, and because it anticipates by two centuries the American declaration of independence. This particular “Dutch” project is motivated by conceiving it as a case study of the historical-textual approach, applied to famous meta-arguments; these are classic arguments by famous figures in history which deal with significant issues and which happen to be meta-arguments. In fact, my past studies of famous meta-arguments are encouraging. These have examined: John Stuart Mill’s plea for freedom of thought in On Liberty, chapter 2; Mill’s preliminary argument against the subjection of women and in favor of women’s liberation and equality in The Subjection of Women, chapter 1; and David Hume’s critique of the design argument for the existence of God as the intelligent designer of the universe, in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.