Skip to main content
Log in

Pragma-dialectics and Beyond

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pragma-dialectics is dynamic, context-sensitive, and multi-agent; it promises theories of fallacy and argumentative structure. But pragma-dialectic theory and practice are not yet fully in harmony. Key definitions of the theory fall short of explicating the analyses that pragma-dialecticians actually do. Many discussions involve more than two participants with different and mutually incompatible standpoints. Success in such a discussion may be more than success against each opponent. Pragma-dialectics does well at analyzing arguments advanced by one party, directed at another party; it does much less well at analyzing arguments directed at several opponents at once or at convincing an audience. I suggest a strategy of construing fallacies as defeasible arguments relying on reasonable default principles but applying them in circumstances in which they are undercut or overridden.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Fischer, D. H.: 1970, Historians' Fallacies, Harper and Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkemans, A. F. S.: 1994, ‘Complex Argumentation in a Critical Discussion’, in van F. H. Eemeren and R. Grootendorst (ed.), Studies in Pragma-dialectics, Vale Press, Newport News.

  • Heyting, A.: 1951, ‘Disputation’, in Intuitionism, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eemeren, F. H. and R. Grootendorst: 1990, ‘Analyzing Argumentative Discourse’, in R. Trapp and J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eemeren, F. H. and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eemeren, F. H., R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs: 1993, Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Ala., and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rees, M. A.: 2001, ‘The Diagnostic Power of the Stages of Critical Discussion in the Analysis and Evaluation of Problem-Solving Discussions’, Argumentation 15, 457–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bonevac, D. Pragma-dialectics and Beyond. Argumentation 17, 451–459 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026311002268

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026311002268

Navigation