Emotional Backing and the Feeling of Deep Disagreement

This paper discusses Toulmin’s (1964) concept of backing with respect to the emotional mode of arguing. Specifically, I examine an example from Fogelin (1985) where emotional backing justifies a warrant concerning when we should judge that a person is being pig-headed. While his treatment of this kind of argument can be supported by contemporary emotion science, it needs to be supplemented by therapeutic techniques whether or not our goal is to rationally resolve such arguments. This is shown through a comparison with an analysis of an emotional argument from Gilbert (1997). The introduction of psychotherapy into argumentation theory raises the question of the extent to which ordinary arguers can use such techniques. This is an issue I have explored before (Friemann, 2002) in terms of intractable quarrels. Seeing how psychotherapeutic techniques can be used in an intractable quarrel, I ask whether or not this is fruitful in the context of Fogelin’s idea of a deep disagreement.