Skip to main content
Log in

Dialogue theory for critical thinking

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A general outline of a theory of reasoned dialogue is presented as an underlying basis of critical analysis of a text of argument discourse. This theory is applied to the analysis of informal fallacies by showing how textual evidence can be brought to bear in argument reconstruction. Several basic types of dialogue are identified and described, but the persuasive type of dialogue is emphasized as being of key importance to critical thinking theory.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

  • Barth, E. M. and Krabbe, E. C. W.: 1982, From Axiom to Dialogue, de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • D'Angelo, Edward.: 1971, The Teaching of Critical Thinking, Grüner, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delisle, Ronald J.: 1984, Evidence: Principles and Problems, Carswell, Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, Frans H. van: 1986, ‘Dialectical Analysis as a Normative Reconstruction of Argumentative Discourse, Text, 6, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, Frans H. van and Grootendorst, Rob.: 1983, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris Publications, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehninger, Douglas.: 1970, ‘Argument as Method,’ Speech Monographs, 37, 101–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, Charles.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, Charles.: 1971, ‘Mathematical Models of Dialogue,’ Theoria, 37, 130–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, Jaakko.: 1979, ‘Information-Seeking Dialogues: A Model,’ Erkenntnis, 38, 355–368. Reprinted in Becker, Werner, and Wilhelm K. Essler (eds.),: 1981, Konzepte der Dialektik, Vittorio Klostermann: Frankfurt am Main 212–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, Jaakko and Saarinen, Esa.: 1979, ‘Information-Seeking Dialogues: Some of Their Logical Properties,’ Studia Logica, 38, 355–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krabbe, E. C. W.: 1985, ‘Noncumulative Dialectical Models and Formal Dialectics,’ Journal of Philosophical Logic, 14, 129–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, J. D.: 1981, ‘The Dialectics of Logic,’ Logique et Analyse, 94, 159–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, William C.: 1988, ‘Dialogue Games,’ Argumentation, 2, 511–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, Nicholas.: 1977, Dialectics, State University of New York Press, Albany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas N.: 1982, Topical Relevance in Argumentation, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas N.: 1985, Arguer's Position, Connecticut, Greenwood Press, Westport.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas N. and Batten, Lynn M.: 1984, ‘Games, Graphs and Circular Arguments,’ Logique et Analyse, 106, 133–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterman, Donald A.: 1986, A Guide to Expert Systems, Mass., Addison-Wesley, Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weddle, Perry.: 1978, Argument: A Guide to Critical Thinking, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, John and Walton, Douglas.: 1974, ‘Argumentum Ad VerecundiamPhilosophy and Rhetoric, 7, 135–153.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walton, D.N. Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation 3, 169–184 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128147

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128147

Key words

Navigation