Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Modal Qualification and the Speech-Act of Arguing in LNMA: Practical Aspects and a Theoretical Issue.Alejandro Secades Gómez - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (1):1-15.
    This work analyses the speech-act of arguing as proposed by Linguistic Normative Model of Argumentation with the help of diagrams, examples and basic formalization techniques. The focus is set on one of the most novel issues of LNMA, modal qualification, and the distinction between epistemic and ontological modals. The first conclusion is that employing LNMA in order to analyse and evaluate actual argumentation as it is proposed is too complex to be applied as is. The second conclusion, at a theoretical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    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  
  • Language and Reality.Menno Lievers - 2021 - In Second Thoughts. Tilburg, Netherlands: pp. 261-277.
    An introduction to philosophy of language since Frege, focusing on the 20th century.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Who’s Afraid of Adversariality? Conflict and Cooperation in Argumentation.Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2020 - Topoi 40 (5):873-886.
    Since at least the 1980s, the role of adversariality in argumentation has been extensively discussed within different domains. Prima facie, there seem to be two extreme positions on this issue: argumentation should never be adversarial, as we should always aim for cooperative argumentative engagement; argumentation should be and in fact is always adversarial, given that adversariality is an intrinsic property of argumentation. I here defend the view that specific instances of argumentation are adversarial or cooperative to different degrees. What determines (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Argumentative Writing Behavior of Graduate EFL Learners.Esmaeel Abdollahzadeh, Mohammad Amini Farsani & Maryam Beikmohammadi - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (4):641-661.
    This study analyzed the argumentative writing behavior of Iranian graduate learners of English as Foreign Language in their English essays. Further, the correlations between the use of argument elements and overall writing quality as well as soundness of produced arguments were investigated. To this end, 150 essays were analyzed. The sample essays were found to be predominantly deductive in terms of rhetorical pattern. Moreover, they mainly utilized ‘data’ and ‘claim’ most frequently with secondary elements of argument as the least produced (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Proof and Dialogue in Aristotle.Roderic A. Girle - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (3):289-316.
    Jan Łukasiewicz’s analysis of Aristotle’s syllogism drew attention to the nature of syllogisms as conditionals rather than premise-conclusion arguments. His further idea that syllogisms should be understood as theorems of an axiom system seems a step too far for many logicians. But there is evidence to suggest that Aristotle’s syllogism was to regularise some of the steps made in ‘dialogue games.’ This way of seeing the syllogism is explored in the framework of modern formal dialogue systems. A modern formal syllogistic (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Frans H. Van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Erik C.W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij and Jean H.M. Wagemans: Handbook of Argumentation Theory: Springer, Dordrecht, 2014, ISBN: 978-90-481-9472-8 , ISBN: 978-90-481-9473-5 , ISBN: 978-90-481-9474-2. [REVIEW]Ton van Haaften - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (3):345-351.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Proofs, Mathematical Practice and Argumentation.Begoña Carrascal - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (3):305-324.
    In argumentation studies, almost all theoretical proposals are applied, in general, to the analysis and evaluation of argumentative products, but little attention has been paid to the creative process of arguing. Mathematics can be used as a clear example to illustrate some significant theoretical differences between mathematical practice and the products of it, to differentiate the distinct components of the arguments, and to emphasize the need to address the different types of argumentative discourse and argumentative situation in the practice. I (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse.Peter Houtlosser & Frans H. van Eemeren - 1999 - Discourse Studies 1 (4):479-497.
    This article reacts against the undesirable ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentative discourse. It argues that a sound evaluation of argumentation requires an analysis that reveals all aspects of the discourse pertinent to critical testing. To explain the rationale of the various moves made in the discourse and the strategic patterns behind them, not only the interlocutors' dialectical goals must be taken into account, but also their rhetorical goals. After explaining how rhetorical insight can be instrumental in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   110 citations  
  • How Did You Change My View? A Corpus-Based Study of Concessions’ Argumentative Role.Elena Musi - 2018 - Discourse Studies 20 (2):270-288.
    In everyday communicative arenas, we engage in critical discussions to persuade others to change their views about issues of personal as well as public interest. Discourse analysts have deemed concessions as privileged strategies to manage disagreement and reach consensus. However, a coherent and comprehensive account of the argumentative functions played by different concessive relations is lacking: do concessions always bear an argumentative role? By which semantic and pragmatic properties? What type of argumentative moves do they instantiate? To answer these questions, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Confucian Philosophical Argumentation Skills.Minghui Xiong - unknown
    Becker argued Confucianism lacked of argumentation, dialogue and debate. However, Becker is wrong. First, the purpose of philosophical argumentation is to justify an arguer’s philosophical standpoints. Second, both Confucius’ Analects and Mencius’ Mencius were written in forms of dialogues. Third, the content of each book is the recorded utterance and the purpose of dialogue is to persuade its audience. Finally, after Confucius, Confucians’ works have either argued for those unjustified standpoints or re-argued about some justified viewpoints in the Analects.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Modality and its Conversational Backgrounds in the Reconstruction of Argumentation.Andrea Rocci - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (2):165-189.
    The paper considers the role of modality in the rational reconstruction of standpoints and arguments. The paper examines in what conditions modal markers can act as argumentative indicators and what kind of cues they provide for the reconstruction of argument. The paper critically re-examines Toulmin’s hypothesis that the meaning of the modals can be analyzed in terms of a field-invariant argumentative force and field-dependent criteria in the light of the Theory of Relative Modality developed within linguistic semantics, showing how this (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Commentary on Blair.Maurice Finocchiaro - unknown
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Hermeneutics, Rhetoric and Informal Logic.Elizabeth Skakoon - unknown
    In this paper, I re-examine the connection Hans-Georg Gadamer made between hermeneutics and the rhetorical tradition in light of recent developments in informal logic. Originally, Gadamer made this connection between hermeneutics and rhetoric because both use the theoretical tools of persuasion and acceptance in contrast to scientific objective methodology. Since this association, another possibility has arisen; informal logic. Using the writings of Ralph Johnson, I outline the difference between in formal logic and rhetoric, and suggest that after an analyses of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Book Review: Frans H van Eemeren and Bart Garssen (Eds), From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory. [REVIEW]Youzhi Sun - 2020 - Discourse Studies 22 (4):533-535.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Logic And Cognition.Mariusz Urbański - 2011 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (1-2):175-185.
    In this paper two concepts of psychologism in logic are outlined: the one which Frege and Husserl fought against and the new psychologism, or cognitivism, which underlies a cognitive turn in contemporary logic. Four issues such cognitively oriented logic should be interested in are indicated. They concern: new fields opened for logical analysis, new methods and tools needed to address these fields, neural basis of logical reasoning, and an educational problem: how to teach such logic? Several challenging questions, which arise (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Relevance of Intention in Argument Evaluation.Charlotte Jørgensen - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (2):165-174.
    The paper discusses intention as a rhetorical key term and argues that a consideration of rhetor’s intent should be maintained as relevant to both the production and critique of rhetorical discourse. It is argued that the fact that the critic usually has little or no access to the rhetor’s mind does not render intention an irrelevant factor. Rather than allowing methodological difficulties to constrain critical inquiry, I suggest some ways in which the critic can incorporate the rhetor’s intention in evaluating (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations