Abstract
In this paper, it is explained that a dialogical approach to complex argumentation can be fruitful for solving two important problems concerning the analysis of the argumentation structure. First, such an approach makes it possible to clarify the distinction between coordinative and multiple argumentation structures, and to identify clues in the presentation for each of these structures. Second, a dialogical approach can provide a basis for dealing more adequately with refutations of counterarguments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Conway, D. A.: 1991, ‘On the Distinction between Convergent and Linked Arguments’, Informal Logic XIII(3), 145–158.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions; A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion, Foris Publications, Dordrecht, Holland.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. A Pragma-dialectical Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (NJ).
Freeman, J. B.: 1992, Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments; A Theory of Argument Structure, Foris, Berlin, New York.
Govier, T.: 1988, A Practical Study of Argument, Wadsworth, Belmont, Cal.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.: 1992, Analysing Complex Argumentation; The Reconstruction of Multiple and Coordinatively Compound Argumentation in a Critical Discussion, Sic Sat, Amsterdam.
Thomas, S. N.: 1986, Practical Reasoning in Natural Language, Prentice Hall, Englewoods Cliffs (NJ).
Yanal, R. J.: 1991, ‘Dependent and Independent Reasons’. Informal Logic XIII(3), 137–144.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Henkemans, A.F.S. Complex Argumentation in a Critical Discussion. Argumentation 17, 405–419 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026390419589
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026390419589