21 found

Year:

  1.  14
    Designing Critical Questions for Argumentation Schemes.Michael D. Baumtrog - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):629-643.
    This paper offers insights into the nature and design of critical questions as they are found in argumentation schemes. In the first part of the paper, I address some general concerns regarding their purpose and formulation. These include a discussion of their evaluative function, their relationship with the patterns of reasoning they accompany, as well as the differing formulations of critical questions currently on offer. I argue that the purpose of critical questions for humans ought to be to provide the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  1
    Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World.Katarzyna Budzynska, Marcin Koszowy & Martín Pereira-Fariña - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):519-549.
    Ethotic arguments, such as arguments from expert opinion and ad hominem arguments, play an important role in communication practice. In this paper, we argue that there is another type of reasoning from ethos, in which people argue about actions in the world. These subspecies of ethotic arguments are very common in public debates: societies are involved in heated disputes about what should be done with monuments of historical figures such as Stalin or Colston: Should we demolish the building they funded? (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  3
    Compliance with EU Law and Argumentative Discourse: Representing the EU as a Problem-Solving Multilevel Governance System through Discursive Structures of Argumentation.Maria Ferreira - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):645-665.
    This paper analyzes how, during the Juncker Presidency, the European Commission employed argumentative strategies to address the question of member-states’ compliance with European Union law. There is a literature gap regarding how European leaders employ argumentative strategies to coax member-states to comply with EU legislation and how those strategies can be associated with multilevel governance designs and problem-solving approaches. Building on van Eemeren and Grootendorst’s pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, the paper explores what dialectical and rhetorical strategies were employed by the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  2
    Affecting Argumentative Action: The Temporality of Decisive Emotion.Prins Marcus Valiant Lantz - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):603-627.
    This paper explores the interrelations between temporality and emotion in rhetorical argumentation. It argues that in situations of uncertainty argumentation affects action via appeals that invoke emotion and thereby translate the distant past and future into the situated present. Using practical inferences, a threefold model for the interrelation of emotion and time in argumentation outlines how argumentative action depends on whether speakers provide reasons for the exigence that makes a decision necessary, the contingency of the decision, and the confidence required (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  4
    Argumentum Ad Baculum, Aristotelian Civic Fear, or Praeteritio: Threats in Anti-Choice Letters.Miriam O’Kane Mara - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):667-685.
    This essay investigates the rhetorical choices in archived letters to providers at a local abortion clinic through argumentum ad baculum and other fear appeal frames. Analysis of three types of threat—spiritual, physical, and professional—contained in the correspondence suggests that only the professional fear appeals correspond to true theat. The essay contends that while some of the letters contain either true threats or Aristotelian civic fear appeals, the writers more often make arguments that align with a new category I name sideways (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  6
    Slippery Slope Arguments in Legal Contexts: Towards Argumentative Patterns.Bin Wang & Frank Zenker - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):581-601.
    Addressing the slippery slope argument in legal contexts from the perspective of pragma-dialectics, this paper elaborates the conditions under which an SSA-scheme instance is used reasonably. We review SSA-instances in past legal decisions and analyze the basic legal SSA-scheme. By illustrating the institutional preconditions influencing the reasoning by which an SSA moves forward, we identify three sub-schemes. For each sub-scheme we propose critical questions, as well as four rules that clarify when the SSA scheme is used reasonably. The institutional preconditions (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  3
    Managing the Complexity of Dialogues in Context: A Data-Driven Discovery Method for Dialectical Reply Structures.Olena Yaskorska-Shah - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):551-580.
    Current formal dialectical models postulate normative rules that enable discussants to conduct dialogical interactions without committing fallacies. Though the rules for conducting a dialogue are supposed to apply to interactions between actual arguers, they are without exception theoretically motivated. This creates a gap between model and reality, because dialogue participants typically leave important content-related elements implicit. Therefore, analysts cannot readily relate normative rules to actual debates in ways that will be empirically confirmable. This paper details a new, data-driven method for (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  8
    Christopher W. Tindale: The Anthropology of Argument: Cultural Foundations of Rhetoric and Reason: Routledge, 2021, 202 pp.Dale Hample - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (3):509-512.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  9
    Corpus Linguistics Methods in the Study of (Meta)Argumentation.Martin Hinton - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (3):435-455.
    As more and more sophisticated software is created to allow the mining of arguments from natural language texts, this paper sets out to examine the suitability of the well-established and readily available methods of corpus linguistics to the study of argumentation. After brief introductions to corpus linguistics and the concept of meta-argument, I describe three pilot-studies into the use of the terms Straw man, Ad hominem, and Slippery slope, made using the open access News on the Web corpus. The presence (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  3
    Douglas Neil Walton.Erik C. W. Krabbe & Bart Verheij - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (3):513-518.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  9
    Defeasibility, Law, and Argumentation: A Critical View from an Interpretative Standpoint.Francesca Poggi - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (3):409-434.
    The phenomenon of defeasibility has long been a central theme in legal literature. This essay aims to shed new light on that phenomenon by clarifying some fundamental conceptual issues. First, the most widespread definition of legal defeasibility is examined and criticized. The essay shows that such a definition is poorly constructed, inaccurate and generates many problems. Indeed, the definition hides the close relationship between legal defeasibility and legal interpretation. Second, this essay argues that no new definition is needed. I will (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  7
    On the Differences Between Practical and Cognitive Presumptions.Petar Bodlović - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):287-320.
    The study of presumptions has intensified in argumentation theory over the last years. Although scholars put forward different accounts, they mostly agree that presumptions can be studied in deliberative and epistemic contexts, have distinct contextual functions, and promote different kinds of goals. Accordingly, there are “practical” and “cognitive” presumptions. In this paper, I show that the differences between practical and cognitive presumptions go far beyond contextual considerations. The central aim is to explore Nicholas Rescher’s contention that both types of presumptions (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  8
    “Those Are Your Words, Not Mine!” Defence Strategies for Denying Speaker Commitment.Ronny Boogaart, Henrike Jansen & Maarten van Leeuwen - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):209-235.
    In response to an accusation of having said something inappropriate, the accused may exploit the difference between the explicit contents of their utterance and its implicatures. Widely discussed in the pragmatics literature are those cases in which arguers accept accountability only for the explicit contents of what they said while denying commitment to the implicature. In this paper, we sketch a fuller picture of commitment denial. We do so, first, by including in our discussion not just denial of implicatures, but (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  5
    Strategic Manoeuvring by Dissociation in Corporate Crisis Communication: The Case of the 2017 United Airlines’ Passenger Dragging-Off Incident.Jieyun Feng, Fan Zhao & Aiqing Feng - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):321-338.
    Within the research framework of pragma-dialectics, this study analysed and assessed strategic manoeuvring by dissociation in corporate crisis communication, exemplified by the 2017 United Airlines’ Passenger Dragging-off Incident. As shown from the analysis of the public statements issued on its official website and Twitter, United Airlines adopted dissociation using the lexical item “volunteer” in the different stages of argumentation: bringing forward a standpoint, maintaining a standpoint and mitigating a standpoint. In so doing, the corporation strategically manoeuvred the topical potential and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  6
    Presumptions and Burdens of Proof. An Anthology of Argumentation and the Law. Ed. By H. V. Hansen, F. J. Kauffeld, J. B. Freeman, and L. Bermejo-Luque. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2019. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):357-359.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  13
    The Legitimacy Crisis of Arguments From Expert Opinion: Can’T We Trust Experts?Yanlin Liao - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):265-286.
    Recent disputes :57–79, 2013; Mizrahi in Inform Logic 36:238–252, 2016; Mizrahi in Argumentation 32:175–195, 2018; Seidel in Inform Logic 34:192–218, 2014; Seidel in Inform Logic 36:253–264, 2016; Hinton in Inform Logic 35:539–554, 2015) on the strength of arguments from expert opinion give rise to a potential legitimacy crisis of it. Mizrahi :57–79, 2013; Inform Logic 36:238–252; Argumentation 32:175–195, 2018) claims that AEO are weak arguments by presenting two independent arguments. The first argument is that AEO are weak arguments because empirical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  11
    Argument, Inference, and Persuasion.Matthew William McKeon - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):339-356.
    This paper distinguishes between two types of persuasive force arguments can have in terms of two different connections between arguments and inferences. First, borrowing from Pinto, an arguer's invitation to inference directly persuades an addressee if the addressee performs an inference that the arguer invites. This raises the question of how invited inferences are determined by an invitation to inference. Second, borrowing from Sorenson, an arguer's invitation to inference indirectly persuades an addressee if the addressee performs an inference guided by (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  2
    Pragma-Dialectical Reconstruction of Crisis Diary-Writing as a Communicative Activity Type.Iva Svačinová - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (2):237-264.
    This paper concerns the character of argumentation in inner dialogue, i.e. dialogue that an individual keeps to herself in her own mind. The problem of inner dialogue research is the methodological difficulty connected with its externalization. In the text, the activity of crisis diary-writing is suggested as a way of naturally externalizing inner decision-making. By adopting a pragma-dialectic approach to argumentation, the text attempts to characterize crisis diary-writing as an argumentative activity type. The argumentative characterization of crisis diary-writing involves identifying (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  19
    Argumentation Through Languages and Cultures.Christian Plantin - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (1):1-7.
    The four contributions in this special issue on Argumentation Through Languages and Cultures deals with clear cases of such argumentative situations as they develop in different cultures and language groups. One of these papers comes from the Inuit oral culture; three papers from written cultures, Chinese, Muslim and Indian cultures. Among written cultures, the Indian and Muslim cultures have developed sophisticated theories of argument, while the Chinese culture, according to Graham, combined “a sense of rigorous proof with the indifference to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  6
    Attack, Defense and Counter-Attack in the Inuit Duel Songs of Ammassalik.Christian Plantin - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (1):51-72.
    This study is based on a corpus of duel songs from the traditional Ammassalik culture, published by the anthropologists P.-É. Victor and J. Robert-Lamblin. In this culture, the duel is a moment in the development of a quarrel, originating in a conflictual event; one of the partners challenges the other to a song duel. Our study focuses upon the basic argumentative strategies of defense and counter attack used to reject the accusation. The charges range from what may seem to us (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  10
    Annotating Argument Schemes.Jacky Visser, John Lawrence, Chris Reed, Jean Wagemans & Douglas Walton - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (1):101-139.
    Argument schemes are abstractions substantiating the inferential connection between premise and conclusion in argumentative communication. Identifying such conventional patterns of reasoning is essential to the interpretation and evaluation of argumentation. Whether studying argumentation from a theory-driven or data-driven perspective, insight into the actual use of argumentation in communicative practice is essential. Large and reliably annotated corpora of argumentative discourse to quantitatively provide such insight are few and far between. This is all the more true for argument scheme corpora, which tend (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues