Answers in Argumentation
From bib. source
A direct answer[sic] to a question supplies exactly the information requested by the question. An indirect answer[sic] supplies only part of that information. A reply[sic] to a question is a response to the question that may not be a direct or indirect answer.
It had been mentioned for questions in argumentation that they may produce an obligation on another for a direct answer. Herein, what a direct answer is has been defined: the provision of exact information sufficient to fulfill all considerations contained in a question (Walton 2008, 38-39). This can be demonstrated in a table:
| answer type | definition |
|---|---|
| direct answer | an answer that provides sufficient information that is an exact fit for all the considerations contained in the question |
| indirect answer | an answer that provides only partial information, or that is otherwise inexact in its fitness with the concerns of the question |
| reply | a reaction to the question that is neither a direct nor indirect answer |
How can a reaction or response to a question be neither a direct nor indirect answer? It can circumvent the question entirely, by not providing the information requested (Ibid).
Dialogue goals and answer obligations
Circumventing the question would seem to violate or subvert our obligation entirely. However, this need not be the case–as noted earlier, the question itself might sabotage or subvert dialogue goals (refer to 20241208131749-Question_in_Argumentation & 20241028171128-Types_of_Argumentative_Dialogue). So long, then, as a violation or subversion of the expectation of supplying a direct or even at least indirect answer is nonetheless a fulfillment of those larger dialogue goals, it is perfectly acceptable and falls within obligations.
A reply to a question, as defined here, being considered acceptable despite being a non-answer can be due to (Walton 2008, 39):
From “Questions and Answers in Dialogue¨ in Informal Logic
Some questions [not being] sincere requests for information. They [may be] aggressively posed questions with harmful presuppositions that may discredit an answerer if he attempts to give a direct answer. […] to give a direct answer in such a case would be to fall into the questioner’s trap.
In sum (Ibid):
From “Questions and Answers in Dialogue¨ in Informal Logic
It requires good judgment to know whether a question is reasonable in a specific context, or whether a failure to give a direct answer should justifiably be criticized as an evasion or irrelevance.
direct_answer indirect_answer critical_discussion persuasion_dialogue persuasive_dialogue argumentation_theory logical_pragmatics informal_logic logical_theory
bibliography
- “Questions and Answers in Dialogue.” In Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach, 2nd ed., 38–77. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.