Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):1-9 (2013)
AbstractIn this paper I shed light on the multi-purposive nature of debates in the European Parliament. As a case in point, I examine a debate on immigration in the wake of a migratory crisis in the Italian island of Lampedusa in early 2011. I analyze the points of view argued for by MEPs, aiming at identifying the different institutional goals that are typically pursued and characterizing the ways in which these goals shape the argumentative exchanges. The link between the multiple goals communicators have and the discourse choices they make can be assumed on the basis of previous research. In line with the pragma-dialectical view of argumentative discourse taking place in the context of more or less institutionalized argumentative activity types, institutional goals are understood as those goals that can be attributed to arguers on the basis of the type of activity in which they are engaged. In identifying the institutional goals, I follow Craig and consider not only goals which are intentional, formal, and directly responsible for a certain discourse choice, but also goals which are functional, strategic, and only indirectly responsible for discourse choices. The analysis shows that the MEPs pursued three kinds of goals: goals that are 1) assigned to them by the occasion of the debate; 2) related to the powers of Parliament; and 3) associated with the different identities they assume in Parliament. While the pursuit of the occasion-related and powers-related goals gave rise to multiple simultaneous discussions, the pursuit of the identity-related goals guided the MEPs’ choices and formulations in these discussions.
Similar books and articles
Debating Multiple Positions in Multi-Party Online Deliberation: Sides, Positions, and Cases.Marcin Lewiński - 2013 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):151-177.
Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse in Political Deliberation.Frans H. van Eemeren - 2013 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):10-31.
Towards a Critique-Friendly Approach to the Straw Man Fallacy Evaluation.Marcin Lewiński - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (4):469-497.
Digital Deliberation?Chris Wisniewski - 2013 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 25 (2):245-259.
Computer Decision-Support Systems for Public Argumentation: Assessing Deliberative Legitimacy. [REVIEW]William Rehg, Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons - 2005 - AI and Society 19 (3):203-228.
When Deliberation Produces Extremism.David Schkade, Cass R. Sunstein & Reid Hastie - 2010 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 22 (2-3):227-252.
Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing and Accusing.Fred J. Kauffeld - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):245-266.
Deliberation Versus Dispute: The Impact of Argumentative Discourse Goals on Learning and Reasoning in the Science Classroom.Mark Felton, Merce Garcia-Mila & Sandra Gilabert - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (4):417-446.
Marcin Lewinski: Internet Political Discussion Forums as an Argumentative Activity Type. A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Online Forms of Strategic Manoeuvring in Reacting Critically: Dissertation University of Amsterdam, SicSat, Amsterdam, 2010.Paul van den Hoven - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):255-259.
Strategic Maneuvering in Political Argumentation.David Zarefsky - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):317-330.
Toward an Ecological Theory of the Norms of Practical Deliberation.Jennifer M. Morton - 2011 - European Journal of Philosophy 19 (4):561-584.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Handbook of Argumentation Theory.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren, Erik Bart Garssen, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans C. W. Krabbe, Jean Bart Verheij & H. M. Wagemans - 2014 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
El lugar de la controversia en la argumentación.María G. Navarro - 2015 - In Fernando Leal Carretero (ed.), Argumentación y pragma-dialéctica: Estudios en honor a Frans H. van Eemeren. Guadalajara (México): Editorial Universitaria.
Deliberative Democracy and Complex Diversity. From Discourse Ethics to the Theory of Argumentation.Imaz Alias Oier - 2017 - Dissertation, Universidad Del Pais Vasco
References found in this work
No references found.