The Structure and Evaluation of Planning Arguments

Authors

  • Thorbjoern Mann

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v30i4.2927

Keywords:

Argument, evaluation, planning discourse, plausibility, procedure, truth

Abstract

Arguments commonly used in discussions about design, planning, policy-making issues have not been adequately analyzed in the literature. The structure of such ‘planning arguments’ is discussed. Based on the conceptual framework of the ‘argumentative model of planning’ proposed by H. Rittel, an approach for their systematic and transparent evaluation by discourse participants is presented. Procedural implications for its application in the planning process are discussed, and the potential for information technology support for such processes explored.

Author Biography

Thorbjoern Mann

Professor Emeritus, School of Architecture, Florida A&M University, Tallahassee, FL.

Downloads

Published

2010-12-15

Issue

Vol. 30 No. 4 (2010)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .