Cambridge University Press (2022)
AbstractA pervasive aspect of human communication and sociality is argumentation: the practice of making and criticizing reasons in the context of doubt and disagreement. Argumentation underpins and shapes the decision-making, problem-solving, and conflict management which are fundamental to human relationships. However, argumentation is predominantly conceptualized as two parties arguing pro and con positions with each other in one place. This dyadic bias undermines the capacity to engage argumentation in complex communication in contemporary, digital society. This book offers an ambitious alternative course of inquiry for the analysis, evaluation, and design of argumentation as polylogue: various actors arguing over many positions across multiple places. Taking up key aspects of the twentieth-century revival of argumentation as a communicative, situated practice, the polylogue framework engages a wider range of discourses, messages, interactions, technologies, and institutions necessary for adequately engaging the contemporary entanglement of argumentation and complex communication in human activities.
Similar books and articles
Advancing Polylogical Analysis of Large-Scale Argumentation: Disagreement Management in the Fracking Controversy.Mark Aakhus & Marcin Lewiński - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (1):179-207.
Deliberation digitized: Designing disagreement space through communication-information services.Mark Aakhus - 2013 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):101-126.
Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry.Marcin Lewiński & Mark Aakhus - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):161-185.
Rules for argumentation in dialogues.Frans H. Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1988 - Argumentation 2 (4):499-510.
Argumentation and the problem of agreement.John Casey & Scott F. Aikin - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-23.
Rules for argumentation in dialogues.Frans H. Van Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1988 - Argumentation 2 (4):499-510.
Discovering Argumentative Patterns in Energy Polylogues: A Macroscope for Argument Mining.Elena Musi & Mark Aakhus - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):397-430.
Reconstructing complex analogy argumentation in judicial decisions: A pragma-dialectical perspective.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):471-483.
The Methodological Usefulness of Deep Disagreement.Steven W. Patterson - 2015 - Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 6 (2).
Employing and Exploiting the Presumptions of Communication in Argumentation: An Application of Normative Pragmatics.Scott Jacobs - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (2):159-191.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads