ABSTRACT
In chapter 3, I argued that none of the extant theories of argument is viable. In chapter 4, I suggested that one possible explanation for this situation is that none of these theories begins with an adequate conception of argument. If we lack an adequate conception of argument, it will be impossible to answer the basic question, “What makes an argument a good argument?” Or (perhaps better), “What qualities are we looking for in a good argument?” Conversely, when we see clearly what an argument is, we will be in a better position to understand what is necessary for an argument to be a good one. In short, the theory of appraisal should be based on the theory of analysis.
