Topoi 40 (5):859-872 (2021)

Authors
Catherine Elisabeth Hundleby
University of Windsor
Abstract
When people argue, they are vulnerable to unwanted and costly changes in their beliefs. This vulnerability motivates the position that belief involuntarism makes argument inherently adversarial, as well as the development of alternatives to adversarial argumentation such as “invitational rhetoric”. The emphasis on involuntary belief change in such accounts, in our perspective, neglects three dimensions of arguing: the diversity of arguer intentions, audience agency, and the benefits of belief change. The complex impact of arguments on both audiences and arguers involves vulnerabilities related to various forces of argument, not just the intellectual force of premise-conclusion complexes. Shifting emphasis from adversariality to vulnerability, we propose a more holistic understanding of argument, in which vulnerability reveals various sources of strength and opportunity in addition to risk.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11245-021-09769-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,209
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

Coalescent Argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):837-852.

View all 35 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Adversariality and Argumentation.John Casey - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (1):77-108.
The Limits of Argument.Howard Darmstadter - 2021 - Philosophy Now 142:8-11.
Hungry Because of Change: Food, Vulnerability, and Climate.Alison Reiheld - 2017 - In Mary C. Rawlinson & Caleb Ward (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Food Ethics. New York, USA: Routledge. pp. 201-210.
The Role of Vulnerability in Kantian Ethics.Paul Formosa - 2014 - In Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds (eds.), Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 88-109.
Animal Vulnerability and its Ethical Implications: An Exploration.Angela K. Martin - 2021 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 38 (2):196-216.
Vulnerability as a Regulatory Category in Human Subject Research.Carl H. Coleman - 2009 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (1):12-18.
Against Adversarial Discussion.Maarten Steenhagen - 2016 - Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 22 (1):87-112.
The Principle of Vulnerability.Ralph H. Johnson - 1995 - Informal Logic 17 (2).

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-10-17

Total views
3 ( #1,329,239 of 2,455,350 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #225,792 of 2,455,350 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes