Coalescent argumentation

Argumentation 9 (5):837-852 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Coalescent argumentation is a normative ideal that involves the joining together of two disparate claims through recognition and exploration of opposing positions. By uncovering the crucial connection between a claim and the attitudes, beliefs, feelings, values and needs to which it is connected dispute partners are able to identify points of agreement and disagreement. These points can then be utilized to effect coalescence, a joining or merging of divergent positions, by forming the basis for a mutual investigation of non-conflictual options that might otherwise have remained unconsidered. The essay proceeds by defining and discussing ‘argument’, ‘position’ and ‘understanding’. These notions are then brought together to outline the concept of coalescent reasoning

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-01-18

Downloads
110 (#47,561)

6 months
11 (#1,140,922)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael A. Gilbert
York University

References found in this work

The web of belief.W. V. Quine & J. S. Ullian - 1970 - New York,: Random House. Edited by J. S. Ullian.
The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
The New Rhetoric.Charles Perelman & L. Olbrechts-Tyteca - 1957 - Philosophy Today 1 (1):4-10.
The Uses of Argument.Frederick L. Will & Stephen Toulmin - 1960 - Philosophical Review 69 (3):399.

View all 21 references / Add more references