Argumentation 25 (4):415-426 (2011)
|Abstract||In recent times, there have been different attempts to make an interesting use of the concept of script (as inherited from the fields of psychology and cognitive sciences) within argumentation theory. Although, in many cases, what we find under this label are computerized routines mainly used in e-learning collaborative proceses involving argumentation, either as an educational means or an educational goal, there are also other studies in which the concept of script plays a more theoretical role as the kind of commonly human cognitive structure that could account for the way in which argumentation might develop in ordinary language and ordinary settings. We aim at exploring these latter possibilities, differentiating between the global ascription of the script concept to argumentation practices as procedural and regulated actions from the somewhat more suggestive association between socially shared scripts (expected narratives, plausible sequences, customary experiences, etc.) and the way some enthymemes work from an interactive, rhetorical perspective. The concept of script could help us understand some more procedural than propositional aspects of the cognitive sets shared by arguer and audience and account for the communicative success of apparently defective argumentation|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Professor Henry Laycock (2005). Variables, Generality and Existence: Considerations on the Notion of a Concept-Script. .
Maeve Cooke (2002). Argumentation and Transformation. Argumentation 16 (1):81-110.
Eric Funkhouser & Shannon Spaulding (2009). Imagination and Other Scripts. Philosophical Studies 143 (3):291-314.
Margareth Sandvik (1997). Reconstructing Interactive Argumentative Discourse. Argumentation 11 (4):419-434.
Lilian Bermejo-Luque (2010). Intrinsic Versus Instrumental Values of Argumentation: The Rhetorical Dimension of Argumentation. Argumentation 24 (4):453-474.
Sebastian McEvoy (1999). The Construction of Issues: Pleading Theory and Practice, Relevance in Pragmatics, and the Confrontation Stage in the Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation. Argumentation 13 (1):43-52.
Ana Nettel & Georges Roque (2012). Persuasive Argumentation Versus Manipulation. Argumentation 26 (1):55-69.
Dennis A. Gioia (1992). Pinto Fires and Personal Ethics: A Script Analysis of Missed Opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics 11 (5-6):379 - 389.
Bart Verheij (2003). Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Luis Vega Renon (1998). Aristotle's Endoxa and Plausible Argumentation. Argumentation 12 (1):95-113.
Jos Hornikx & Ulrike Hahn (2012). Reasoning and Argumentation: Towards an Integrated Psychology of Argumentation. Thinking and Reasoning 18 (3):225 - 243.
Nancy Green (2010). Representation of Argumentation in Text with Rhetorical Structure Theory. Argumentation 24 (2):181-196.
I. I. I. Mootz (2010). Perelman's Theory of Argumentation and Natural Law. Philosophy and Rhetoric 43 (4).
D. Macbeth (2012). Seeing How It Goes: Paper-and-Pencil Reasoning in Mathematical Practice. Philosophia Mathematica 20 (1):58-85.
Added to index2011-05-18
Total downloads11 ( #99,458 of 549,017 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,017 )
How can I increase my downloads?