A Reaction to Critique from the Epistemological Sidelines
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v43i4.8415Keywords:
conventional validity, critical discussion, epistemology, pragma-dialectics, problem validityAbstract
In this paper, a reaction is presented to Siegel’s claim that the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation ignores or neglects epistemological viewpoints that he finds vital to any normative theory of argumentation. The focus is on the most important problems in Siegel’s argument: 1) the ambiguity of the term ‘argument’ and the alleged negligence of this ambiguity in pragma-dialectics; 2) the critical rational perspective of the pragma-dialectical account; and 3) the alleged negligence of the “abstract propositional sense” of argument in pragma-dialectics.
References
Biro, J. and H. Siegel. 1992. Normativity, argumentation and an epis-temic theory of fallacies. In Argumentation illuminated, eds. F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, C.A. Willard, 85-103. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
Eemeren, F. H. van. 2015. Reasonableness and effectiveness in argu-mentative discourse. Fifty contributions to the development of prag-ma-dialectics. Cham etc.: Springer.
Eemeren, F. H. van. 2018. Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Dordrecht etc.: Springer
Eemeren, F. H. van, B. Garssen, T. van Haaften, E. C. W. Krabbe, A. F. Snoeck Henkemans and J. H. M. Wagemans. 2014. Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht etc.: Springer.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst. 1988. Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective. Argumentation 2(2): 271-291.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst. 2003. A pragma-dialectical procedure for a critical discussion. Argumentation 17(4): 365-385.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press.
Garssen, B. and J. A. van Laar. 2010. A pragma-dialectical response to objectivist epistemic challenges. Informal logic 30(2): 122-141.
Siegel, Harvey. 2023. Arguing with arguments: argument quality, argumentative norms, and the strengths of the epistemic theory. In-formal Logic 43(4): 465-526.
