Practical Argumentation as Reasoned Advocacy

Informal Logic 37 (2):85-113 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper offers a theoretical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumentation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on “good” argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by analysing a detailed structure of practical argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a comparative approach to practical reason. I argue that given the comparative structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,264

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

Considering the roles of values in practical reasoning argumentation evaluation.Michael D. Baumtrog - 2013 - Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA).
Practical-theoritical argumentation.Robert T. Craig - 1996 - Argumentation 10 (4):461-474.
Elements for an Argumentative Method of Interpretation.María G. Navarro - 2010 - Rozenberg Quarterly. The Magazine 1 (1).
Did he jump or was he pushed?: Abductive practical reasoning.Katie Atkinson - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (2):79-99.
Shaming in and into Argumentation.Beth Innocenti Manolescu - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (4):379-395.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-06-04

Downloads
12 (#805,569)

6 months
1 (#449,844)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references