PERIODIC TABLE OF ARGUMENTS

By Jean Wagemans — Last updated on August 26, 2026

Argument from concession

You argue that the person you are addressing should accept a claim because they have already granted it themselves. The argument works by holding people to their own record: having asserted something earlier, the addressee is taken to be committed to it, and that commitment, not any evidence, is what is offered for the claim. It can be attacked by showing that the earlier statement was withdrawn, was made in a different sense, or was never made at all.

Tile for the argument from concession (Cce)

Example

You cannot deny that the deficit matters, because you said so yourself last week.

Standardised form

“The deficit matters” (q) is acceptable (A) because “the deficit matters” (q) was said by you yourself last week (Z).

Transformations applied: “you cannot deny that” rendered as the claim’s acceptability, made explicit as the conclusion-predicate; anaphora resolved — “so” replaced by “the deficit matters”.

Triadic structure of the argument from concession example: conclusion, premise and lever

Classification

The conclusion is referred to as a whole in the premise, so the argument form is delta (q is A because q is Z).

The premise attributes the conclusion to the addressee, so the argument substance is II.

The keyword COMMITS describes the relationship between predicates Z and A. The argument lever can thus be formulated as “Having been said by you yourself last week (Z) COMMITS you to its being acceptable (A)”.

Not to be confused with

  • Argumentum ad hominem — Also addressed to the second person, but it attacks a claim through the addressee’s character rather than defending one through their record. CHARACTERALLY AUTHORITATIVE, U
  • Argumentum ad baculum — The addressee is given a motive to agree, not held to something they already agreed. NEGATIVE MOTIVATION
  • Ethotic argument — The premise points at the arguer’s own standing, not the addressee’s prior statement. I
  • Argument from expert opinion — The premise names a third party’s knowledge. III

Source

Invented example.

Notes

This is a proposed type that is not part of the current table of forty-two. It is the argumentum ex concessis of the dialectical tradition and the basis of Locke’s argumentum ad hominem in its original, non-abusive sense: arguing from what the other party has granted. In the Delta quadrant it is the only type in which the addressee is invoked as a source of support rather than as a target.