Abstract
An adequate evaluation of argumentation requires identification of the object to which the argumentation pertains: the point of view. What are the distinguishing features of this object? In the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, the object of argumentation is referred to by means of the notion ‘standpoint’. In other theories concerned with argumentation, reasoning, convincing or persuading, notions are used such as ‘thesis’, ‘conclusion’, ‘opinion’ and ‘attitude’. This paper is a survey of the characterisations of the object of argumentation given in the various theories. It discusses the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, socio-psychological research on persuasion, cognitive research on reasoning, argumentative discourse analysis, two variants of informal logic, advocacy and debate, and the theory of communicative action. Next, it explores some relations between the notions used in these theories. Finally, it outlines some starting points for further research into the problems of identification.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anscombre, J.-C. and O, Ducrot: 1989, 'Argumentativity and Informativity', in M. Meyer (ed.), From Metaphysics to Rhetoric, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 71-87.
Aristotle (1928). Prior Analytics, W. D. Ross (ed.), Clarendon, Oxford.
Atelsek, J.: 1981, 'An Anatomy of Opinions', Language in Society 10(2), 217-225.
Barth, E. M. and E. C. W. Krabbe: 1982, From Axiom to Dialogue. A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.
Cohen, L. J.: 1989, 'Belief and Acceptance', Mind 48(391), 367-389.
Crawshay-Williams, R.: 1957, Methods and Criteria of Reasoning. An Inquiry into the Structure of Controversy, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
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, PDA 1, Dordrecht/Cinnaminson.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1991, 'The Study of Argumentation from a Speech Act Perspective', in J. Verschueren (ed.), Pragmatics at Issue. Selected Papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, August 17-22, 1987. Vol. I, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 151-170.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs: 1993, Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse, The University of Alabama Press, London/Tuscaloosa.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, A. F. Snoeck Henkemans, J. A. Blair, R. H. Johnson, E. C. W. Krabbe, Chr. Plantin, D. N. Walton, C. A. Willard, J. Woods and D. Zarefsky: 1996, Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Fisher, A.: 1988, The Logic of Real Arguments, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Freeley, A. J.: 1993, Argumentation and Debate. Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making, 8th ed., Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.
Govier, T.: 1992, A Practical Study of Argument. 3rd revised edition, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.
Grice, H. P.: 1975, 'Logic and Conversation', in P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, London, pp. 41-58.
Harman, G.: 1973, Thought, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Harman, G.: 1986, Change in View, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Houtlosser, P.: 1995, Standpunten in een kritische discusie. Een pragma-dialectisch perspectief op de identificatie en reconstructie van standpunten[Standpoints in a Critical Discussion. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective on the Identification and Reconstruction of Standpoints], IFOTT, Amsterdam.
Johnson, R. H. and J. A. Blair: 1994, Logical Self-Defense. United States Edition, McGraw Hill Ryerson, Toronto.
Kopperschmidt, J.: 1987, 'The Function of Argumentation: A Pragmatic Approach', in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986, Foris Publications, 3A, Dordrecht/Providence, pp. 179-188.
Kopperschmidt, J.: 1989, Methodik der Argumentationsanalyse, Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt.
Krech, D. and R. S. Crutchfield: 1969, Elements of Psychology, Knopf, New York.
Naess, A.: 1966, Communication and Argument. Elements of Applied Semantics[Translation of En del elementaere logiske emner. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1947], Allen and Unwin, London.
O'Keefe, D.: 1990, Persuasion. Theory and Research, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1969, The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation(Vert. van La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l' argumentation, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1958). University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame/Londen.
Schellens, P. J.: 1985, Redelijke argumenten. Een onderzoek naar normen voor kritische lezers[Reasonable Arguments. An Examination of the Norms of Critical Reading]. Foris, Dordrecht.
Schiffer, S.: 1987, Remnants of Meaning, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Schiffrin, D.: 1985, 'Everyday Argument: The Organization of Diversity in Talk', in T. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis 3, Academic Press, London, pp. 35-46.
Schiffrin, D.: 1987, Discourse Markers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Schiffrin, D.: 1990, 'The Management of a Co-operative Self During Argument: The Role of Opinions and Stories', in A. D. Grimshaw (ed.), Conflict Talk, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York, pp. 241-259.
Thomas, S. N.: 1986, Practical Reasoning in Natural Language, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Toulmin, S. E.: 1958/1988, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Toulmin, S. E., R. Rieke and A. Janik: 1979, An Introduction to Reasoning, Macmillan, New York.
Weddle, P.: 1988, 'Distinguishing Fact from Opinion', in T. Govier (ed.), Selected Issues in Logic and Communication, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, pp. 55-64.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Houtlosser, P. Points of View. Argumentation 12, 387–405 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007770813424
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007770813424