Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Elusive Notion of “Argument Quality”.Michael H. G. Hoffmann - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):213-240.
    We all seem to have a sense of what good and bad arguments are, and there is a long history—focusing on fallacies—of trying to provide objective standards that would allow a clear separation of good and bad arguments. This contribution discusses the limits of attempts to determine the quality of arguments. It begins with defining bad arguments as those that deviate from an established standard of good arguments. Since there are different conceptualizations of “argument”—as controversy, as debate, and as justification—and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Strategic Maneuvering in Extended Polylogues.Dorottya Egres - 2021 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 10 (2):145-170.
    This paper presents the analysis of the Hungarian nuclear expansion controversy using a conceptual framework that links strategic maneuvering with an extended polylogical controversy and evaluates the strategic maneuvering of political, environmentalist and expert actors. The paper aims to show that the three aspects of strategic maneuvering are flexible enough that they can be analyzed when the object of study is not a spatially and temporally localized argumentative situation, but a decade-long debate with multiple actors. In 2014, Hungary signed a (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Standing Standpoints and Argumentative Associates: What is at Stake in a Public Political Argument?Dima Mohammed - 2019 - Argumentation 33 (3):307-322.
    In today’s ‘networked’ public sphere, arguers are faced with countless controversies roaming out there. Knowing what is at stake at any point in time, and keeping under control the contribution one’s arguments make to the different interrelated issues requires careful craft Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics. In honor of Frans H. van Eemeren. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2011). In this paper, I explore the difficulty of determining what is at stake at any moment of the argumentative situation and explore the challenge (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Discovering Argumentative Patterns in Energy Polylogues: A Macroscope for Argument Mining.Elena Musi & Mark Aakhus - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):397-430.
    A macroscope is proposed and tested here for the discovery of the unique argumentative footprint that characterizes how a collective manages differences and pursues disagreement through argument in a polylogue. The macroscope addresses broader analytic problems posed by various conceptualizations of large-scale argument, such as fields, spheres, communities, and institutions. The design incorporates a two-tier methodology for detecting argument patterns of the arguments performed in arguing by an interactive collective that produces views, or topographies, of the ways that issues are (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • An Argumentative Approach to “Framing”. Framing, Deliberation and Action in an Environmental Conflict.Isabela Fairclough & Irina Diana Madroane - 2020 - Co-herencia 17 (32):119-158.
    This article proposes a new theorization of the concept of framing or framework, in which the argumentation plays a fundamental role. When we talk about making decisions, framing a matter involves offering the audience a prominent and therefore possibly paramount premise in a deliberative process that allows to substantiate as much of the decision as the action. The analysis focuses on the case of The Public Policy Controversy, which, over the years, became a socio-environmental movement and which, in September 2013, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Recognizing Argument Types and Adding Missing Reasons.Christoph Lumer - 2019 - In Bart J. Garssen, David Godden, Gordon Mitchell & Jean Wagemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). [Amsterdam, July 3-6, 2018.]. Amsterdam (Netherlands): pp. 769-777.
    The article develops and justifies, on the basis of the epistemological argumentation theory, two central pieces of the theory of evaluative argumentation interpretation: 1. criteria for recognizing argument types and 2. rules for adding reasons to create ideal arguments. Ad 1: The criteria for identifying argument types are a selection of essential elements from the definitions of the respective argument types. Ad 2: After presenting the general principles for adding reasons (benevolence, authenticity, immanence, optimization), heuristics are proposed for finding missing (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Shale Gas Debate in Europe: Pro-and-Con Dialectics and Argumentative Polylogues.Marcin Lewiński - 2016 - Discourse and Communication 10 (6):553-575.
    In this article I scrutinise a crucial tension in understanding the debate over shale gas production in Europe. On the one hand, analyses predominantly grasp the debate in terms of pro-and-con dialectics, as if the pro-shale gas camp faced the anti-shale gas camp in a dyadic clash of opposing voices. On the other hand, it is commonly recognised that this debate is driven by multi-party and multi-position argumentative dynamics. In this broader context, I focus on one pivotal contribution to the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Environmental Argumentation.Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):1-11.
    In this paper, we analyze the argumentative strategies deployed in the Ecomodernist Manifesto, published in 2015 by a group of leading environmental thinkers. We draw on pragma-dialectics and Perelman’s rhetoric to characterize manifesto as a genre of practical argumentation. Our goal is to explore the relation of manifesto as a discursive genre to the argumentative structures and techniques used in the Ecomodernist Manifesto. We therefore take into scrutiny the elements of practical argumentation employed in the manifesto and describe the polylogical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The 2015 Paris Climate Conference.Marcin Lewiński & Dima Mohammed - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):65-90.
    The paper applies argumentative discourse analysis to a corpus of official statements made by key players at the opening of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. The chief goal is to reveal the underlying structure of practical arguments and values legitimising the global climate change policy-making. The paper investigates which of the elements of practical arguments were common and which were contested by various players. One important conclusion is that a complex, multilateral deal such as the 2015 Paris Agreement is based (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Environmental Manifestoes.Soledade Rodrigues, Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):12-39.
    In this paper, we analyze the argumentative strategies deployed in the Ecomodernist Manifesto, published in 2015 by a group of leading environmental thinkers. We draw on pragma-dialectics and Perelman’s rhetoric to characterize manifesto as a genre of practical argumentation. Our goal is to explore the relation of manifesto as a discursive genre to the argumentative structures and techniques used in the Ecomodernist Manifesto. We therefore take into scrutiny the elements of practical argumentation employed in the manifesto and describe the polylogical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Framing Fracking.Elena Musi & Mark Aakhus - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):112-135.
    This article offers a first large scale analysis of argumentative polylogues in the fracking controversy. It provides an empirical methodology that identifies, from large quantities of text data through semantic frame analysis, the many players, positions and places presumed relevant to argumentation in a controversy. It goes beyond the usual study of framing in communication research because it considers that a controversy’s communicative context is shaped, and in turn conditions, the making and defending of standpoints. To achieve these novels aims, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Engaging Publics Through Climate Math.Tiara R. Na’Puti, Phaedra C. Pezzullo, Leah Sprain & Lydia Reinig - 2018 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 7 (3):316-346.
    Energy democracy hopes to foster community engagement and participation in shaping our transition from fossil fuels to a renewable energy-based economy. These considerations result from critiques by environmental justice, climate justice, and just transition advocates. Although many are sympathetic to energy democracy ideals, climate goals often are articulated in math terms. This essay defines the aforementioned key terms and asks: what are the limitations and possibilities of engaging publics when climate action solely is articulated in numbers? A compelling case study (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On Philosophical Argumentation.Fernando Leal - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (2):173-194.
    Philosophical argumentation presents a puzzle for pragma-dialectics: both from the perspective of 2500 years of history and from what we can ourselves witness in the present, philosophers seem to be exclusively intent on strengthening and elaborating their differences of opinion. Nothing like that happens in other academic endeavors. This is an anomaly in pragma-dialectical terms because, if philosophical discussants do not want to resolve their differences of opinion, then they would seem to be unreasonable by definition. In other words, no (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation in Large, Complex Practices.Aakhus Mark, Ziek Paul & Dadlani Punit - unknown
    Differences arise in macro-activities, such as the production of energy, food, and healthcare, where the management of these differences happens in polylogues as many actors pursue scores of positions on a variety of issues in numerous venues. Polylogues are essential to the large-scale practices that organize macro-activities but present significant challenges for argumentation theory and research. Key to the challenge is conceptualizing the variety of argumentative roles that go beyond the classic normative definition of protagonist and antagonist. A macroscope is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation