Abstract

In the following text we will consider the question whether pictures can be regarded as arguments or not. Obviously, classical philosophical approaches lead to a different opinion about this topic than our common sense intuitions, which are fostered by our usage of ordinary language. On the one hand, logicians defend the thesis that arguments are of a linguistic kind. On the other hand, there are everyday contexts where, nevertheless, it seems appropriate to ascribe pictures the status of arguments. It is this apparent tension between the philosophical approach and the one resulting from our linguistic practices that we will analyze in the following text. Examples – both from the everyday as the scientific context – will help us to settle the apparent dissent between the philosophical and the linguistic point of view. In the end, the thesis will be defended that pictorial representations make an essential contribution to communicative acts of argumentation without being regarded as (integral parts of ) arguments themselves.