Advancing Polylogical Analysis of Large-Scale Argumentation: Disagreement Management in the Fracking Controversy
Argumentation 31 (1):179-207 (2017)
AbstractThis paper offers a new way to make sense of disagreement expansion from a polylogical perspective by incorporating various places in addition to players and positions into the analysis. The concepts build on prior implicit ideas about disagreement space by suggesting how to more fully account for argumentative context, and its construction, in large-scale complex controversies. As a basis for our polylogical analysis, we use a New York Times news story reporting on an oil train explosion—a significant point in the broader controversy over producing oil and gas via hydraulic fracturing.
Similar books and articles
Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry.Marcin Lewiński & Mark Aakhus - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):161-185.
How should fracking research be funded?Richard J. Davies & Liam G. Herringshaw - 2016 - Research Ethics 12 (2):116-118.
The Methodological Usefulness of Deep Disagreement.Steven W. Patterson - 2015 - Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 6 (2).
Deliberation digitized: Designing disagreement space through communication-information services.Mark Aakhus - 2013 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):101-126.
Eemeren & Garssen's Controversy and Confrontation: Relating Controversy Analysis with Argumentation Theory.Frank Zenker - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (4):449-479.
Critical Notice of 'Controversy and Confrontation. Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory' by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen. [REVIEW]Maria Navarro - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (1):69-74.
Argumentation and design deliberation: a mutual relationship.Chrysi Rapanta & Carole Blair - unknown
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Recognizing Argument Types and Adding Missing Reasons.Christoph Lumer - 2019 - In Bart J. Garssen, David Godden, Gordon Mitchell & Jean Wagemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). [Amsterdam, July 3-6, 2018.]. Amsterdam (Netherlands): pp. 769-777.
Discovering Argumentative Patterns in Energy Polylogues: A Macroscope for Argument Mining.Elena Musi & Mark Aakhus - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):397-430.
Shale gas debate in Europe: Pro-and-con dialectics and argumentative polylogues.Marcin Lewiński - 2016 - Discourse and Communication 10 (6):553-575.
Standing Standpoints and Argumentative Associates: What is at Stake in a Public Political Argument?Dima Mohammed - 2019 - Argumentation 33 (3):307-322.
Illocutionary Performance and Objective Assessment in the Speech Act of Arguing.Cristina Corredor - 2021 - Informal Logic 42 (4):453-483.
References found in this work
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Chaïm Perelman & Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca - 1969 - Notre Dame, IN, USA: Notre Dame University Press.
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Ch Perelman, L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, John Wilkinson & Purcell Weaver - 1969 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 3 (4):249-254.