Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Socratic Irony and Argumentation.Timo Airaksinen - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (1):85-100.
    Socratic irony can be understood independently of the immortal heroics of Plato’s Socrates. We need a systematic account and criticism of it both as a debate-winning strategy of argumentation and teaching method. The Speaker introduces an issue pretending to be at a lower intellectual level than her co-debaters, or Participants. An Audience looks over and evaluates the results. How is it possible that the Speaker like Socrates is, consistently, in the winning position? The situation is ironic because the Participants fight (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Evaluating Reasoning in Natural Arguments: A Procedural Approach.Martin Hinton & Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (1):61-84.
    In this paper, we formulate a procedure for assessing reasoning as it is expressed in natural arguments. The procedure is a specification of one of the three aspects of argumentation assessment distinguished in the Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumentation that makes use of the argument categorisation framework of the Periodic Table of Arguments. The theoretical framework and practical application of both the CAPNA and the PTA are described, as well as the evaluation procedure that combines the two. The procedure (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation and the Problem of Agreement.John Casey & Scott F. Aikin - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-23.
    A broad assumption in argumentation theory is that argumentation primarily regards resolving, confronting, or managing disagreement. This assumption is so fundamental that even when there does not appear to be any real disagreement, the disagreement is suggested to be present at some other level. Some have questioned this assumption, but most are reluctant to give up on the key idea that persuasion, the core of argumentation theory, can only regard disagreements. We argue here that this assumption is false. Argument may (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • An Epistemological Appraisal of Walton’s Argument Schemes.Christoph Lumer - 2022 - Informal Logic 42 (1):203-290.
    Abstract: The article presents and critically discusses Walton's (and Reed's and Macagno's) argument scheme approach to a theory of good argumentation. In particular, four characteristics of Walton's approach are presented: 1. It presents normative requirements for argumentation in the form of argument schemes, i.e. relatively concrete type descriptions. 2. These schemata are enthymematic, i.e. they omit some of the premises required by other approaches. 3. The actual argument schemes are usually supplemented by critical questions. 4. The method is inductive, bottom-up, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Argument of Mathematics. [REVIEW]David Hitchcock - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):245-258.
    Post-war argumentation theorists have tended to regard argumentation as one thing and mathematical proof as another. Perelman (1958, 1969), for example, defined the word ‘argumentation’ stipulatively as a contrast term to ‘demonstration’: whereas mathematical reasoning as theorized by modern formal logic, he writes, is a matter of deducing theorems from axioms in accordance with stipulated rules of transformation, argumentation aims at gaining the adherence of minds (Perelman 1969, pp. 1–2). Toulmin (1958) contrasted his “jurisprudential model” of argument, according to which (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Rhetoric of Evolutionary Theory.David J. Depew - 2013 - Biological Theory 7 (4):380-389.
    I argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory has a rhetorical dimension and that rhetorical criticism plays a role in how evolutionary science acquires knowledge. I define what I mean by rhetoric by considering Darwin’s Origin. I use the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis to show how rhetoric conceived as situated and addressed argumentation enters into evolutionary theorizing. Finally, I argue that rhetorical criticism helps judge the success, limits, and failures of these theories.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory.James B. Freeman - 2011 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    An approach to argument macrostructure -- The dialectical nature of argument -- Toulmin's problematic notion of warrant -- The linked-convergent distinction, a first approximation -- Argument structure and disciplinary perspective : the linked-convergent versus multiple-co-ordinatively compound distinctions -- The linked-convergent distinction, refining the criterion -- Argument structure and enthymemes -- From analysis to evaluation.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Perelmanian Universal Audience and the Epistemic Aspirations of Argument.Scott F. Aikin - 2008 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 41 (3):pp. 238-259.
  • On Law and Legal Reasoning.Fernando Atria Lemaître - 2001 - Hart.
  • Handbook of Argumentation Theory.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren, Erik Bart Garssen, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans C. W. Krabbe, Jean Bart Verheij & H. M. Wagemans - 2014 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Argument, Inference and Dialectic: Collected Papers on Informal Logic.Robert Pinto - 2001 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    This volume contains 12 papers addressed to researchers and advanced students in informal logic and related fields, such as argumentation, formal logic, and communications. Among the issues discussed are attempts to rethink the nature of argument and of inference, the role of dialectical context, and the standards for evaluating inferences, and to shed light on the interfaces between informal logic and argumentation theory, rhetoric, formal logic and cognitive psychology.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   73 citations  
  • Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.) - 2012 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory brings together twenty exploratory studies on important subjects of research in contemporary argumentation theory. The essays are based on papers that were presented at the 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation in Amsterdam in June 2010. They give an impression of the nature and the variety of the kind of research that has recently been carried out in the study of argumentation. The volume starts with three essays that provide stimulating (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The New Rhetoric’s Inheritance. Argumentation and Discourse Analysis.Ruth Amossy - 2009 - Argumentation 23 (3):313-324.
    This paper aims at showing how the New Rhetoric’s insights allow for an integration of argumentation studies in linguistic investigation, and more specifically in discourse analysis. Claiming that argumentativity is a constitutive feature of discourse, it endeavors to explore logos as both reason and language by analyzing patterns of reasoning in their discursive actualization. In this approach, the attempt at influencing the audience’s representations is analyzed in the complexity of a discourse explored in its formal and socio-institutional dimensions.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Dialogues in Argumentation.Von Burg Ron - 2016 - Windsor: University of Windsor.
    This volume focuses on dialogue and argumentation in contexts which are marked by truculence and discord. The contributors include well known argumentation scholars who discuss the issues this raises from the point of view of a variety of disciplines and points of view. The authors seek to address theoretically challenging issues in a way that is relevant to both the theory and the practice of argument. The collection brings together selected essays from the 2006 11th Wake Forest University Biennial Argumentation (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.) - 2015 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
    This volume presents a selection of papers reflecting key theoretical issues in argumentation theory. Its six sections are devoted to specific themes, including the analysis and evaluation of argumentation, argument schemes and the contextual embedding of argumentation. The section on general perspectives on argumentation discusses the trends of empiricalization, contextualization and formalization, offers descriptions of the analytical and evaluative tools of informal logic, and highlights selected principles that argumentation theorists do and do not agree upon. In turn, the section on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics.Bart Garssen, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.) - 2015 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    How do Dutch people let each other know that they disagree? What do they say when they want to resolve their difference of opinion by way of an argumentative discussion? In what way do they convey that they are convinced by each other’s argumentation? How do they criticize each other’s argumentative moves? Which words and expressions do they use in these endeavors? By answering these questions this short essay provides a brief inventory of the language of argumentation in Dutch.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • A Bibliography of the New Rhetoric Project.David A. Frank & William Driscoll - 2010 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 43 (4):449-466.
  • Psychology, Rhetoric, and Cognition.Michael Billig - 1989 - History of the Human Sciences 2 (3):289-307.
  • On Logic in the Law: "Something, but Not All".Susan Haack - 2007 - Ratio Juris 20 (1):1-31.
    In 1880, when Oliver Wendell Holmes (later to be a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court) criticized the logical theology of law articulated by Christopher Columbus Langdell (the first Dean of Harvard Law School), neither Holmes nor Langdell was aware of the revolution in logic that had begun, the year before, with Frege's Begriffsschrift. But there is an important element of truth in Holmes's insistence that a legal system cannot be adequately understood as a system of axioms and corollaries; and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Exploiting the Room for Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Dealing with Audience Demand in the European Parliament.Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garrsen & Robert Thomas Craig - unknown
  • Revelation and Rhetoric: A Critical Model of Forensic Discourse. [REVIEW]Chris Heffer - 2013 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 26 (2):459-485.
    Over the past thirty years or so, theoretical work in such fields as legal semiotics and law and literature has argued that the legal process is profoundly rhetorical. At the same time, a number of communication-based disciplines such as semiotics, sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology have provided, particularly in interdisciplinary combination with law, a wealth of empirical evidence on, and insight into, the micro-contexts of language and communication in the legal process. However, while these invaluable nitty-gritty analyses provide empirical support for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Virtues of Ingenuity: Reasoning and Arguing Without Bias.Olivier Morin - 2014 - Topoi 33 (2):499-512.
    This paper describes and defends the “virtues of ingenuity”: detachment, lucidity, thoroughness. Philosophers traditionally praise these virtues for their role in the practice of using reasoning to solve problems and gather information. Yet, reasoning has other, no less important uses. Conviction is one of them. A recent revival of rhetoric and argumentative approaches to reasoning (in psychology, philosophy and science studies) has highlighted the virtues of persuasiveness and cast a new light on some of its apparent vices—bad faith, deluded confidence, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Values and Valuations in Judicial Discourse. A Corpus-Assisted Study of (Dis)Respect in US Supreme Court Decisions on Same-Sex Marriage.Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski - 2018 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 53 (1):61-79.
    This paper investigates the role of RESPECT a value premise in two landmark civil rights cases given by the United States Supreme Court. It adopts a corpus-assisted approach whereby a keyword analysis and the analysis of key semantic domains are used to identify potential values relied upon by judges in their justifications. The two categories of NO RESPECT and RESPECTED have been selected and examined as one domain of RESPECT. RESPECT turns out to be the only value marked by strong (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Against the Philosophers: Writing and Identity in Medieval Mediterranean Rhetoric.Brandon Katzir - 2019 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 52 (4):366-383.
    ABSTRACT This article explores antiphilosophical polemics written by Muslim and Jewish thinkers in the medieval Mediterranean world. These writings demonstrate, in both traditions, a struggle with the incorporation of nontraditional texts and interpretations of theology and textuality. My examination of these writings “against the philosophers” suggests that, far from constituting the reflexive, antiphilosophical fundamentalism that typically characterizes assessments of these texts, authors like al-Ghazali, Halevi, and Ibn Arabi were concerned with what they believed to be the subordination of Jewish and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Rhetoric Renouncing Rhetoric.Timothy M. Asay - 2015 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 48 (2):139-161.
    ABSTRACT The problem St. Augustine confronts in the Confessions is fundamentally one of rhetoric: God should be singularly desirable, yet rhetoric seems necessary to motivate our pursuit of him. Religion participates in the relative marketplace of rhetoric, where ideals need to be authorized because they lack a self-sufficient rationale. In his early encounters with Cicero and the Platonists, Augustine struggles to renounce all such partial ideals in order to pursue philosophical truth unequivocally. Yet the refusal of rhetoric is, paradoxically, another (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Talking (About) the Elite and Mass.Chris Ingraham - 2013 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 46 (1):1-21.
    ABSTRACT The rhetorical tradition has long been concerned with how to negotiate the discursive juncture between mass and elite audiences. Such a concern has contributed to what might be characterized as the rhetorical tradition's anxiety with regard to its own status. In this article I suggest that this anxiety parallels an ontological conception of the elite as second-order in relation to the first-order mass. I use the standoff between novelist Jonathan Franzen and Oprah Winfrey in 2001 as a running example (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Suddener World: Photography and Ineffable Rhetoric.Chris Ingraham - 2017 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 50 (2):129-152.
    Before photography went digital and camera phones accompanied people most everywhere, Pierre Bourdieu observed in 1965 that photography had become a "middle-brow art". "How and why," he asked, "is the practice of photography predisposed to a diffusion so wide that there are few households, at least in towns, which do not possess a camera?". Novel at the time, the question has been superseded today. Estimates indicate that 1.27 trillion new photographs will be taken in 2017. That amounts to an ambient (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A Modern Theory of Stasis.Michael J. Hoppmann - 2014 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 47 (3):273-296.
    Stasis theory has been the backbone of rhetorical theory ever since its full development by Hermagoras of Temnos in the second century BCE.1 Although Hermagoras’s original work was lost, the main parts of his theory were reconstructed in the twentieth century,2 thanks mainly to the major role stasis theory played in nearly all the important works of rhetorical theory until as late as the nineteenth century.3 Stasis theory aims at providing a toolset for the identification of vital issues in cases (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Logos Paradox: Heraclitus, Material Language, and Rhetoric.Robin Reames - 2013 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 46 (3):328-350.
    In her 1996 and 2006 essays “Being and Becoming: Rhetorical Ontology in Early Greek Thought” and “The Task of the Bow: Heraclitus’ Rhetorical Critique of Epic Language,” Carol Poster was the first to argue for the historical and theoretical relevance of Heraclitus in the discipline of rhetoric. Despite the admonitions of Edward Schiappa (1999) and Thomas Cole (1991) against applying rhetorical theories that only emerged after the fourth century BCE to pre- or proto-rhetorical texts, Poster argues that Heraclitus merits the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Toward the Satyric.Christopher J. Gilbert - 2013 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 46 (3):280-305.
    Theorists have long sought to repress or domesticate the shaggy, obscene, and transgressive satyr that ranges through satire’s long history, lurking in dark corners, and to make it into a model of a moral citizen.Unruly, wayward, frolicsome, critical, parasitic, at times perverse, malicious, cynical, scornful, unstable—it is at once pervasive yet recalcitrant, basic yet impenetrable. Satire is the stranger that lives in the basement.Instead of trying to resolve all the problems that arise from the particular of a given tragic dignification, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Putnam, Truth and Informal Logic.Jeffrey L. Kasser & Daniel Cohen - 2002 - Philosophica 70:85-108.
  • The Normative Structure of Case Study Argumentation.Douglas N. Walton - 1993 - Metaphilosophy 24 (3):207-226.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rescuing ?Begging the Question?J. I. Biro - 1977 - Metaphilosophy 8 (4):257-271.
  • On a Consequence in a Broad Sense.Danilo Šuster - 2018 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 18 (3):433-453.
    Cogency is the central normative concept of informal logic. But it is a loose evaluative concept and I argue that a generic notion covering all of the qualities of a well-reasoned argument is the most plausible conception. It is best captured by the standard RSA criterion: in a good argument acceptable and relevant premises provide sufficient grounds for the conclusion. Logical qualities in a broad sense are affected by the epistemic qualities of the premises and “consequence” in a broad sense (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Thesis of the Effectiveness of Quasi-Logical Arguments.Iva Svačinová - 2019 - Argumentation 33 (1):75-106.
    The article focuses on the new rhetoric category of quasi-logical arguments, defined as arguments similar to logical or mathematical demonstrations, and therefore having an effect on the audience. Connecting the similarity of arguments to formal demonstrations with the claim of effect on audience is conceived in this article as the thesis of effectiveness of quasi-logical arguments. The components of the thesis are reconstructed and analyzed, and their precise definitions are proposed. The analysis shows that the category of quasi-logical arguments is (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Progress, but Slow Going: Public Argument in the Forging of Collective Norms.Lisa S. Villadsen - 2020 - Argumentation 34 (3):325-337.
    Rhetorical argumentation is a craft: collective, processual, and circulating, and it partakes in the indeterminate evolution of public norms. Official apologies can illustrate how rhetorical modalities over time can reflect change in civic sensibilities and effect collective moral reflection and evolution. Rhetorical citizenship, understood as encompassing both critical production and reception of publicly circulating arguments, is a way of conceptualizing the interaction between the individual and the collective in the ongoing discursive formation of the community and the norms that inform (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Presumptions, and How They Relate to Arguments from Ignorance.Petar Bodlović - 2019 - Argumentation 33 (4):579-604.
    By explaining the argument from ignorance in terms of the presumption of innocence, many textbooks in argumentation theory suggest that some arguments from ignorance might share essential features with some types of presumptive reasoning. The stronger version of this view, suggesting that arguments from ignorance and presumptive reasoning are almost indistinguishable, is occasionally proposed by Douglas Walton. This paper explores the nature and limits of the stronger proposal and argues that initial presumptions and arguments from ignorance are not closely connected. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Case-to-Case Arguments.Katharina Stevens - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):431-455.
    Arguers sometimes cite a decision made in an earlier situation as a reason for making the equivalent decision in a later situation. I argue that there are two kinds of “case-to-case arguments”. First, there are arguments by precedent, which cite the mere existence of the past decision as a reason to decide in the same way again now, independent of the past decision’s merits. Second, there are case-to-case arguments from parralel reasoning which presuppose that the past decision was justified and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Peirce Knew Why Abduction Isn’T IBE—A Scheme and Critical Questions for Abductive Argument.Shiyang Yu & Frank Zenker - 2017 - Argumentation 32 (4):569-587.
    Whether abduction is treated as an argument or as an inference, the mainstream view presupposes a tight connection between abduction and inference to the best explanation. This paper critically evaluates this link and supports a narrower view on abduction. Our main thesis is that merely the hypothesis-generative aspect, but not the evaluative aspect, is properly abductive in the sense introduced by C. S. Peirce. We show why equating abduction with IBE unnecessarily complicates argument evaluation by levelling the status of abduction (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • What Virtue Argumentation Theory Misses: The Case of Compathetic Argumentation.Daniel H. Cohen & George Miller - 2016 - Topoi 35 (2):451-460.
    While deductive validity provides the limiting upper bound for evaluating the strength and quality of inferences, by itself it is an inadequate tool for evaluating arguments, arguing, and argumentation. Similar remarks can be made about rhetorical success and dialectical closure. Then what would count as ideal argumentation? In this paper we introduce the concept of cognitive compathy to point in the direction of one way to answer that question. It is a feature of our argumentation rather than my argument or (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Mill's Fallacies: Theory and Examples.Marie Secor - 1998 - Argumentation 12 (2):295-314.
    In noting contemporary neglect of Mill's work on fallacy, Hansen and Pinto say that his account is tied more closely to scientific methodology than to problems of public discourse and everyday argumentation. This paper re-examines Mill's fallacies from a rhetorical perspective, assessing the extent to which his examples – drawn from the domains of popular superstition, science, philosophy, and public discussion – fit his theoretical structure. In articulating the relationship between Mill's philosophical assumptions and the discursive practices of the fields (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Cardinal Principles of the National Entity of Japan: A Rhetoric of Ideological Pronouncement.Takeshi Suzuki - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (3):251-266.
    One manifestation of argumentation is in critical discussions where people genuinely strive cooperatively to achieve critical decisions. Hence, argumentation can be recognized as the process of advancing, supporting, modifying, and criticizing claims so that appropriate decision makers may grant or deny adherence. This audience-centered definition holds the assumption that the participants must willingly engage in public debate and discussion, and their arguments must function to open a critical space and keep it open. This essay investigates `ideological pronouncement,' a kind of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Logical Argument Structures in Decision-Making.Jane Macoubrie - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (3):291-313.
    Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca's practical reasoning theory has attracted a great deal of interest since its publication in 1969. Their most important assertion, however, that argument is the logical basis for practical decision-making, has been under-utilized, primarily because it was not sufficiently operationalized for research purposes. This essay presents an operationalization of practical reasoning for use in analyzing argument logics that emerge through group interaction. Particular elements of discourse and argument are identified as responding to principles put forward by Perelman and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Sunk Costs Fallacy or Argument From Waste.Douglas Walton - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (4):473-503.
    This project tackles the problem of analyzing a specific form of reasoning called ‘sunk costs’ in economics and ‘argument from waste’ in argumentation theory. The project is to build a normative structure representing the form of the argument, and then to apply this normative structure to actual cases in which the sunk costs argument has been used. The method is partly structural and partly empirical. The empirical part is carried out through the analysis of case studies of the sunk costs (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • A Pragma-Dialectical Approach of the Analysis and Evaluation of Pragmatic Argumentation in a Legal Context.Eveline T. Feteris - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):349-367.
    This paper answers the question how pragmatic argumentation which occurs in a legal context, can be analyzed and evaluated adequately. First, the author surveys various ideas taken from argumentation theory and legal theory on the analysis and evaluation of pragmatic argumentation. Then, on the basis of these ideas, she develops a pragma-dialectical instrument for analyzing and evaluating pragmatic argumentation in a legal context. Finally she demonstrates how this instrument can be used by giving an exemplary analysis and evaluation of pragmatic (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Preconditions for Normative Argumentation in a Pluralist World.Keith Graham - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):471-487.
    A problem arises, both for philosophy and for argumentation theory, in a pluralist world where people hold widely different beliefs about what to do. Some responses to this problem, including relativism, might settle but do not provide any criteria for resolving such differences. Alternative responses seek a means of resolution in universalist, culture-neutral criteria which must be invoked in assessing all human action. A philosophically adequate account of universalism would contribute to an ideal of critical rationality, as well as to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (3):293-305.
    The paper reacts against the strict separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentation and argues that argumentative discourse can be analyzed and evaluated more adequately if the two are systematically combined. Such an integrated approach makes it possible to show how the opportunities available in each of the dialectical stages of a critical discussion have been used strategically to further the rhetorical aims of the speaker or writer. The approach is illustrated with the help of an analysis of an (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • What Types of Statements Are There?James B. Freeman - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (2):135-157.
    Building on the work of Sproule, Fahnestock and Secor, and Kruger, we present a specific typology of statements. In particular, we distinguish broadly logically determinate statements, descriptions, interpretations, and evaluations. We generate this typology through a series of dichotomous divisions of statements. We divide statements first into the broadly logically determinate versus contingent, the contingent into the evaluational versus natural, and the natural into the extensional versus intensional. We show that the rationales for these distinctions are well motivated and philosophically (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Comments on 'Strategic Maneuvering with Dissociation'.Sara Rubinelli - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (4):489-493.
  • Refining Deliberation in Bioethics.Miguel Kottow - 2009 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 12 (4):393-397.
    The multidisciplinary provenance of bioethics leads to a variety of discursive styles and ways of reasoning, making the discipline vulnerable to criticism and unwieldy to the setting of solid theoretical foundations. Applied ethics belongs to a group of disciplines that resort to deliberation rather than formal argumentation, therefore employing both factual and value propositions, as well as emotions, intuitions and other non logical elements. Deliberation is thus enriched to the point where ethical discourse becomes substantial rather than purely analytical. Caution (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation