In H. V. Hanson (ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference: Dissensus & The Search for Common Ground. Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation. pp. 1--9 (2007)

Paola Cantù
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
The paper analyses the role played by the concept of ‘common ground’ in argumentation theories. If a common agreement on all the rules of a discursive exchange is required, either at the beginning or at the end of an argumentative practice, then no violation of the rules is possible. The paper suggests an alternative understanding of ‘common ground’ as something that can change during the development of the argumentative practice, and in particular something that can change without the practice being stopped, just as one sometimes violates the rule of a game without stopping playing. The analysis of some historical examples shows that the violation of rules sometimes leads to a consensual change of a set of beliefs and values. The argumentative rationality thus needs to be reconsidered in the light of the analysis of the conditions under which it would be legitimate to change the rules of an argumentative practice: ‘common ground’ and the right to disagreement, even radical or violent, could then be defended as essential components of argumentative rationality.
Keywords agreement  disagreement  argumentation theory  argumentative rules  rationality
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Fallacies.Charles Leonard Hamblin - 1970 - London, England: Vale Press.
A Practical Study of Argument.Trudy Rose Govier - 1985 - Belmont, CA, USA: Wadsworth Pub. Co..

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Respect Fallacy: Limits of Respect in Public Dialogue.Italo Testa - 2012 - In Christian Kock & Lisa Villadsen (ed.), Rhetorical Citizenship and Public Deliberation (pp. 77-92). Pennsylvania State University Press.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Practice of Argumentative Discussion.David Hitchcock - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):287-298.
Teaching for Argumentative Thought.Shelagh Crooks - 2009 - Teaching Philosophy 32 (3):247-261.
Argumentation Without Arguments.Henry Prakken - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):171-184.
Doxa and Persuasion in Lexis.Luisa Puig - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):127-142.
Burden of Proof Rules in Social Criticism.Juha Räikkä - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (4):463-477.
Persuasion or Alignment?Christian Plantin - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):83-97.


Added to PP index

Total views
394 ( #23,228 of 2,462,465 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #30,964 of 2,462,465 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes