Arguing at Cross-Purposes: Discharging the Dialectical Obligations of the Coalescent Model of Argumentation

Argumentation 17 (2):219-243 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The paper addresses the manner in which the theory of Coalescent Argumentation [CA] has been received by the Argumentation Theory community. I begin (section 2) by providing a theoretical overview of the Coalescent model of argumentation as developed by Michael A. Gilbert (1997). I next engage the several objections that have been raised against CA (section 3). I contend that objectors to the Coalescent model are not properly sensitive to the theoretical consequences of the genuinely situated nature of argument. I conclude (section 4) by suggesting that the resolution to the dispute between Gilbert and his objectors hinges on the outcome of several foundational theoretical questions identified over the course of the paper



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Coalescent argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):837-852.
Law, logic, rhetoric: A procedural model of legal argumentation.Arno R. Lodder - 2004 - In S. Rahman (ed.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 569--588.
Analogy argumentation in law: A dialectical perspective. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):173-187.


Added to PP

81 (#207,736)

6 months
13 (#199,525)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Godden
Michigan State University

Citations of this work

Informal Logic: A 'Canadian' Approach to Argument.Federico Puppo (ed.) - 2019 - Windsor, Canada: Windsor Studies in Argumentation.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
Coalescent argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):837-852.
Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument (ARNO R. LODDER).C. W. Tindale - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):73-78.
Two concepts of argument.Daniel J. O'Keefe - 1992 - In William L. Benoit, Dale Hample & Pamela J. Benoit (eds.), Readings in Argumentation. Foris Publications. pp. 11--79.

View all 14 references / Add more references