Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (Eds.) (2002). Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

REFERENCES

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.

  • Johnson, Ralph H.: 2002, ‘Manifest Rationality Reconsidered: Reply to My Fellow Symposiasts’, Argumentation 16, 311–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, Nicholas: 1977, Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, J.: 1990, ‘Three Perspectives on Argumentation’, in R. Trapp and J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in honour of Wayne Brockreide, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights IL, 9–26.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Philosophy, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, N9B 3P4, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

    R. H. Johnson

Authors
  1. R. H. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, R.H. Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (Eds.) (2002). Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis . Argumentation 18, 483–488 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-004-1076-0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-004-1076-0

Search

Navigation