46 found

Year:

Forthcoming articles
  1.  28
    Andrew Aberdein (forthcoming). Leonard Nelson: A Theory of Philosophical Fallacies. Argumentation:1-7.
  2. F. H. Van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser (forthcoming). Argumentation, Interpretation, Rhetoric. Argumentation.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Moti Mizrahi (forthcoming). Why Simpler Arguments Are Better. Argumentation:1-15.
    In this paper, I argue that, other things being equal, simpler arguments are better. In other words, I argue that, other things being equal, it is rational to prefer simpler arguments over less simple ones. I sketch three arguments in support of this claim: an argument from mathematical proofs, an argument from scientific theories, and an argument from the conjunction rule.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  6
    Christian Dahlman (forthcoming). Unacceptable Generalizations in Arguments on Legal Evidence. Argumentation:1-17.
    Arguments on legal evidence rely on generalizations, that link a certain circumstance to a certain hypothesis and warrants the claim that the circumstance makes the hypothesis more probable. Some generalizations are acceptable and others are unacceptable. A generalization can be unacceptable on at least four different grounds. A false generalization is unacceptable because membership in the reference class does not increase the probability of the hypothesis. A non-robust generalization is unacceptable because it uses a reference class that is too heterogeneous. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  16
    Michael H. G. Hoffmann (forthcoming). Reflective Argumentation: A Cognitive Function of Arguing. Argumentation:1-33.
    Why do we formulate arguments? Usually, things such as persuading opponents, finding consensus, and justifying knowledge are listed as functions of arguments. But arguments can also be used to stimulate reflection on one’s own reasoning. Since this cognitive function of arguments should be important to improve the quality of people’s arguments and reasoning, for learning processes, for coping with “wicked problems,” and for the resolution of conflicts, it deserves to be studied in its own right. This contribution develops first steps (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  2
    Mark Aakhus & Marcin Lewiński (forthcoming). Advancing Polylogical Analysis of Large-Scale Argumentation: Disagreement Management in the Fracking Controversy. Argumentation:1-29.
    This paper offers a new way to make sense of disagreement expansion from a polylogical perspective by incorporating various places in addition to players and positions into the analysis. The concepts build on prior implicit ideas about disagreement space by suggesting how to more fully account for argumentative context, and its construction, in large-scale complex controversies. As a basis for our polylogical analysis, we use a New York Times news story reporting on an oil train explosion—a significant point in the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  11
    Vahram Atayan (forthcoming). Generi testuali argomentativi e traduzione in prospettiva storica: qualche osservazione sulla base delle informazioni fornite dalla Saarbrucker Ûbersetzungsbibliographie a proposito delle traduzioni dal francese, dall'italiano e dallo spagnolo in tedesco. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  8
    Christina Becker (forthcoming). Dinamizar, impulsar-élargissement, approfondissement: Zum Zusammenhang zwischen konzeptuellen Metaphern und Argumentation am Beispiel politischer Sprachverwendung in Spanien und Frankreich. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  6
    Daniel Beresheim (forthcoming). Christopher W. Tindale: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception. Argumentation:1-4.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  11
    David Botting (forthcoming). Johnson and the Soundness Doctrine. Argumentation:1-25.
    Why informal logic? Informal logic is a group of proposals meant to contrast with, replace, and reject formal logic, at least for the analysis and evaluation of everyday arguments. Why reject formal logic? Formal logic is criticized and claimed to be inadequate because of its commitment to the soundness doctrine. In this paper I will examine and try to respond to some of these criticisms. It is not my aim to examine every argument ever given against formal logic; I am (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  10
    Ana Lûcia Tinoco Cabrai (forthcoming). L'emploi de Portante (Donc) Dans des Textes Écrits En Portugais du Brésil Ana Lûcia Tinoco Cabrai (Sâo Paulo). Argumentation.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  10
    Marion Carel (forthcoming). L'ambivalence argumentative: sous-détermination des énoncés par les phrases. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  7
    Ioana A. Cionea, Adam S. Richards & Sara K. Straub (forthcoming). Factors Predicting the Intent to Engage in Arguments in Close Relationships: A Revised Model. Argumentation:1-43.
    This manuscript examines argument engagement in close relationships. Two pilot studies were conducted to identify what factors naïve actors report matter to them when considering whether to engage in an interpersonal argument, and to develop and pre-test measurement scales for these factors. The main study examined which of these factors predicted participants’ behavioral intent to engage in an argument about different topics and with different partners. Results indicated intent to engage was predicted by five factors: one’s orientation to the topic, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  8
    Sivan Cohen-Wiesenfeld (forthcoming). Argumentation logique et subjectivité masquée: le cas de la note diplomatique. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  9
    Stephen M. Croucher, Alfred DeMaris, Audra R. Diers-Lawson & Shannon Roper (forthcoming). Self-Reporting and the Argumentativeness Scale: An Empirical Examination. Argumentation:1-21.
    This study has two purposes. First, the study evaluates the reliability of self-reports of argumentativeness by comparing self-reported argumentativeness with two other reports of the same target: evaluations by friends and evaluations by intimates. Second, the study examines whether particular characteristics presage a larger or smaller disparity in different reporters’ reports. We found the reliability of both the approach and avoidance subscales to be acceptable for the intimate partner’s responses, but only marginally acceptable when the scale was answered by a (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  17
    Giovanni Damele (forthcoming). Rhetoric and Persuasive Strategies in High Courts' Decisions: Some Remarks on the Recent Decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitutional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on Same-Sex Marriage. Argumentation.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  13
    Xavier de Donato Rodríguez & Jesús Zamora Bonilla (forthcoming). Scientific Controversies and the Ethics of Arguing and Belief in the Face of Rational Disagreement. Argumentation.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  12
    Benjamin De Mesel (forthcoming). How Morality Can Be Absent From Moral Arguments. Argumentation:1-21.
    What is a moral argument? A straightforward answer is that a moral argument is an argument dealing with moral issues, such as the permissibility of killing in certain circumstances. I call this the thin sense of ‘moral argument’. Arguments that we find in normative and applied ethics are almost invariably moral in this sense. However, they often fail to be moral in other respects. In this article, I discuss four ways in which morality can be absent from moral arguments in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Emily Friedrich (forthcoming). The Toulmin Brief. Argumentation.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  6
    Anca Gâjà (forthcoming). La dissociation argumentative: composantes, mise en discours et ajustement stratégique. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  7
    Sara Greco (forthcoming). F. H. Van Eemeren, B. Garssen : Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory. Argumentation:1-8.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  3
    Sara Greco (forthcoming). Using Argumentative Tools to Understand Inner Dialogue. Argumentation:1-28.
    The starting point of this paper is the acknowledgement that individual reasoning, understood as inner dialogue, and social argumentation, albeit they are two different phenomena, share some similarities. On this basis, this paper sets out to apply instruments from argumentation theory to inner dialogue in order to better explain it. Within this framework, some limitations to the study of inner dialogue are also discussed; and methodological suggestions are provided in order to grasp what could be considered data on “inner dialogue” (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  12
    Lukáš Hlouch (forthcoming). Models of Legal Reasoning: An Attempt of a Practical View. Argumentation.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  10
    Xingming Hu (forthcoming). Must a Successful Argument Convert an Ideal Audience? Argumentation:1-13.
    Peter van Inwagen defines a successful argument in philosophy as one that can be used to convert an audience of ideal agnostics in an ideal debate. Sarah McGrath and Thomas Kelly recently argue that van Inwagen’s definition cannot be correct since the idea of ideal agnostics is incoherent with regard to an absolute paradigm of a successful philosophical argument. This paper defends van Inwagen’s definition against McGrath and Kelly’s objection.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  6
    Mathilde Janier & Chris Reed (forthcoming). Towards a Theory of Close Analysis for Dispute Mediation Discourse. Argumentation:1-38.
    Mediation is an alternative dispute resolution process that is becoming more and more popular particularly in English-speaking countries. In contrast to traditional litigation it has not benefited from technological advances and little research has been carried out to make this increasingly widespread practice more efficient. The study of argumentation in dispute mediation hitherto has largely been concerned with theoretical insights. The development of argumentation theories linked to computational applications opens promising new horizons since computational tools could support mediators, making sessions (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  5
    Erik C. W. Krabbe (forthcoming). The Formalization of Critical Discussion. Argumentation:1-19.
    This paper makes an independent start with formalizing the rules for the argumentation stage of critical discussions. It does not deal with the well-known code of conduct consisting of ten rules but with the system consisting of fifteen rules on which the code of conduct is based. The rules of this system are scrutinized and problems they raise are discussed. Then a formal dialectical system is defined that reflects most of the contents of these rules. The aim is to elucidate (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  11
    Thorn-R. Kray (forthcoming). On Name-Dropping: The Mechanisms Behind a Notorious Practice in Social Science and the Humanities. Argumentation:1-19.
    The present essay discusses a notorious rhetoric means familiar to all scholars in the social sciences and humanities including philosophy: name-dropping. Defined as the excessive over-use of authoritative names, I argue that it is a pernicious practice leading to collective disorientation in spoken discourse. First, I discuss name-dropping in terms of informal logic as an ad verecundiam-type fallacy. Insofar this perspective proves to lack contextual sensitivity, name-dropping is portrayed in Goffman’s terms as a more general social practice. By narrowing down (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Martin Kusch & H. Schroder (forthcoming). Text, Interpretation. Argumentation.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  6
    Fernando Leal (forthcoming). Review Of: Frans H. Van Eemeren : Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics, Cham , Springer , 880 Pp. [REVIEW] Argumentation:1-6.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  19
    Fabrizio Macagno & Alessandro Capone (forthcoming). Interpretative Disputes, Explicatures, and Argumentative Reasoning. Argumentation:1-24.
    The problem of establishing the best interpretation of a speech act is of fundamental importance in argumentation and communication in general. A party in a dialogue can interpret another’s or his own speech acts in the most convenient ways to achieve his dialogical goals. In defamation law this phenomenon becomes particularly important, as the dialogical effects of a communicative move may result in legal consequences. The purpose of this paper is to combine the instruments provided by argumentation theory with the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31.  2
    Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton & Christopher Tindale (forthcoming). Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions. Argumentation:1-23.
    The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure and the defeasibility conditions of argument from analogy, addressing the issues of determining the nature of the comparison underlying the analogy and the types of inferences justifying the conclusion. In the dialectical tradition, different forms of similarity were distinguished and related to the possible inferences that can be drawn from them. The kinds of similarity can be divided into four categories, depending on whether they represent fundamental semantic features of the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  2
    Thanh Nyan (forthcoming). Re-Contextualising Argumentative Meanings: An Adaptive Perspective. Argumentation:1-33.
    The study of context can benefit greatly from re-examining some of the concepts arising from Anscombre and Ducrot’s argumentation theory from an adaptive perspective. By focusing on discourse dynamism, AT provides fresh angles from which to view key issues, such as the nature of context triggers; whether context construction is necessarily a background activity; in what way utterances set themselves up as contexts for the upcoming discourse; and the nature of the inferences whereby background knowledge and information are accessed. The (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  4
    Rudi Palmieri & Sabrina Mazzali-Lurati (forthcoming). Multiple Audiences as Text Stakeholders: A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Complex Rhetorical Situations. Argumentation:1-33.
    In public communication contexts, such as when a company announces the proposal for an important organizational change, argumentation typically involves multiple audiences, rather than a single and homogenous group, let alone an individual interlocutor. In such cases, an exhaustive and precise characterization of the audience structure is crucial both for the arguer, who needs to design an effective argumentative strategy, and for the external analyst, who aims at reconstructing such a strategic discourse. While the peculiar relevance of multiple audience is (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  6
    Christian Plantin (forthcoming). Laissez dire: La norme du discours de l'un est dans le discours de l'autre Christian Plantin (Lyon). Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  1
    Claire Polo, Christian Plantin, Kristine Lund & Gerald Niccolai (forthcoming). Group Emotions in Collective Reasoning: A Model. Argumentation:1-29.
    Education and cognition research today generally recognize the tri-dimensional nature of reasoning processes as involving cognitive, social and emotional phenomena. However, there is so far no theoretical framework articulating these three dimensions from a descriptive perspective. This paper aims at presenting a first model of how group emotions work in collective reasoning, and specifies their social and cognitive functions. This model is inspired both from a multidisciplinary literature review and our extensive previous empirical work on an international corpus of videotaped (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  6
    Anika Schiemann (forthcoming). Adverbial indizierte Implikationen: eine argumentationsbasierte Analyse von persinolperfino. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  8
    Laura Sergo (forthcoming). La funzione argomentativa del connettore infatti in testi scientifici e divulgativi. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  5
    Michael Shenefelt & Heidi White (forthcoming). Comment on Roderic A. Girle’s “Proof and Dialogue in Aristotle”. Argumentation:1-2.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  5
    Justine Simon (forthcoming). Stratégies de Négociation Politique Et de Représentation du Discours d'Autrui Dans la Presse Adressée aux Jeunes. Argumentation.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  9
    Takeshi Suzuki (forthcoming). The 3rd Tokyo Conference on Argumentation. Argumentation.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  5
    Mark Andrew Thompson (forthcoming). Institutional Argumentation and Institutional Rules: Effects of Interactive Asymmetry on Argumentation in Institutional Contexts. Argumentation:1-21.
    Recent approaches to studying argumentation in institutions have pointed out the role of institutional rules in constraining argumentation that takes place in institutional contexts. However, few studies explain how these rules concretely affect actual argumentation. In particular, little work has been done as to the consequences of interactional asymmetry which often exists between participants in institutional contexts. While previous studies have suggested that this asymmetry exists as an aberration in the deliberative process, this paper argues that asymmetry is built into (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  4
    Jacky Visser (forthcoming). Speech Acts in a Dialogue Game Formalisation of Critical Discussion. Argumentation:1-22.
    In this paper a dialogue game for critical discussion is developed. The dialogue game is a formalisation of the ideal discussion model that is central to the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. The formalisation is intended as a preparatory step to facilitate the development of computational tools to support the pragma-dialectical study of argumentation. An important dimension of the pragma-dialectical discussion model is the role played by speech acts. The central issue addressed in this paper is how the speech act perspective (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  7
    Judith Visser (forthcoming). Formation de mots et persuasion: Le discours de l'extrême droite française. Argumentation.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  7
    Harry Weger (forthcoming). Scrutinizing Argumentation in Practice. Argumentation:1-3.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. John Woods (forthcoming). John Locke. Argumentation.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  8
    A. D. Wright & C. P. Butterfield (forthcoming). The NREL Teetering Hub Rotor Code: Final Results and Conclusions. Argumentation.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues