Public Debate â An Act of Hostility?
Argumentation 12 (4):431-443 (1998)
| Abstract | This paper focuses on eristic in political debate of the forensic, or confrontational, type. First, some findings on the enactment and persuasiveness of hostility in a series of Danish TV-debates 1975â85 are presented, including a list of the clearly hostile debater's characteristics and a subdivision of conspiracy arguments. This presentation serves to illustrate that hostility is less persuasive than argumentation practitioners and theorists tend to assume. Next, the widespread notion of debate as a genre half-way between the quarrel and the critical discussion is challenged in a discussion of Douglas N. Walton's distinction between types of dialogue. It is maintained that the normative model of confrontational debate excludes the quarrel and that debate should not be perceived as second-rate critical discussion | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesFabienne Pironet & Christine Tappolet (2003). Faiblesse de la Raison Ou Faiblesse de Volonté: Peut-on Choisir? Dialogue 42 (04):627-.
Michael J. Flower (1981). Taking DNA to Market and Regulatory Default. Bioethics Quarterly 3 (2):112-127.
Lonneke M. Poort (2008). The Role of Ethics Committees in Public Debate. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):19-35.
Susan Dodds & Rachel A. Ankeny (2006). Regulation of hESC Research in Australia: Promises and Pitfalls for Deliberative Democratic Approaches. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (1-2).
Miltos Ladikas & Doris Schroeder (2005). Argumentation Theory and GM Foods. Poiesis and Praxis 3 (3):216-225.
Richard M. Buck (2001). Sincerity and Reconciliation in Public Reason. Social Philosophy Today 17:21-35.
Tamra Lysaght, John Little & Ian Kerridge (2011). Marginalizing Experience: A Critical Analysis of Public Discourse Surrounding Stem Cell Research in Australia (2005–6). Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (2):191-202.
Helga Kuhse (1994). Bioethics and the Limits of Tolerance. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (2).
James M. Jacobs (2004). The Relevance of Aristotle's Notion of Equity for the Contemporary Abortion Debate. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 78:119-132.
David Roochnik (1991). Stanley Fish and the Old Quarrel Between Rhetoric and Philosophy. Critical Review 5 (2):225-246.
Thomas Baldwin (2001). Contemporary Philosophy: Philosophy in English Since 1945. Oxford University Press.
James P. Sterba (1999). Reconciling Public Reason and Religious Values. Social Theory and Practice 25 (1):1-28.
David Estlund (2008). Introduction: Epistemic Approaches to Democracy. Episteme 5 (1):pp. 1-4.
David Sobel (2001). Explanation, Internalism, and Reasons for Action. Social Philosophy and Policy 18 (02):218-.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-09-11Total downloads2 ( #232,211 of 548,969 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
