Gilbert as Disrupter

Michael Gilbert’s multi-modal theory of argument challenges earlier accounts arguing assumed in formal and informal logic. His account emotional, visceral, kisceral modes rejects the assumption that all arguments must be treated as instances one “logical mode.” This paper compares his alternative to other proposed by those who have argued for visual, auditory, “multimodal” arguing. I conclude multimodal (without hyphen) are complementary. Collectively, they represent an important attempt radically expand scope logic argumentation it studies.