A Pragma-dialectical Procedure for a Critical Discussion

&
Argumentation 17 (4):365-386 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to the pragma-dialectical ideal of reasonableness, in case of a difference of opinion the protagonist and the antagonist of a standpoint should attempt to find out by means of a critical discussion whether the protagonist's standpoint is capable of withstanding the antagonist's criticism. In this paper, the authors formulate the latest version of their basic rules for the performance of speech acts in the various stages that can beanalytically distinguished in a critical discussion that can lead to the resolution of a single and non-mixed difference opinion

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1023/a:1026334218681

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Topical Roots of Formal Dialectic.Erik C. W. Krabbe - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (1):71-87.
The Pragma-Dialectical Theory Under Discussion.Frans H. Eemeren - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (4):439-457.
The Development of the Pragma-dialectical Approach to Argumentation.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):387-403.
Pragma-dialectical Theory and Interpersonal Interaction Outcomes: Unproductive Interpersonal Behavior as Violations of Rules for Critical Discussion.Harry Weger - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (3):313-330.
Effectiveness Through Reasonableness Preliminary Steps to Pragma-Dialectical Effectiveness Research.Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):33-53.
Effectiveness Through Reasonableness Preliminary Steps to Pragma-Dialectical Effectiveness Research.Frans H. Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):33-53.
The Diagnostic Power of the Stages of Critical Discussion in the Analysis and Evaluation of Problem-Solving Discussions.M. A. van Rees - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):457-470.
Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (3):293-305.
Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, & Bert Meuffels: Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules: Springer, Dordrecht, 2009, Volume 16 of the Springer Argumentation Library. ISBN: 978-90-481-2613-2. DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9. HB: $139.00.Dale Hample - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (3):375-381.
The Assessment of Argumentation from Expert Opinion.Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):329-339.
Fallacies in pragma-dialectical perspective.Frans H. Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1987 - Argumentation 1 (3):283-301.
A dialogical theory of legal discussions:Pragma-dialectical analysis and evaluation of legalargumentation.Eveline T. Feteris - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):115-135.
Considering pragma-dialectics: a festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday.F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.) - 2006 - Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
In What Sense Do Modern Argumentation Theories Relate to Aristotle? The Case of Pragma-Dialectics.Frans H. Eemeren - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (1):49-70.
Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective.FransH Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1988 - Argumentation 2 (2):271-291.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-11

Downloads
50 (#306,059)

6 months
5 (#565,734)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

From Axiom to Dialogue.E. M. Barth & E. C. W. Krabbe - 1985 - Studia Logica 44 (2):228-230.

Add more references