Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective

Cham: Springer Verlag (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The book offers a compact but comprehensive introductory overview of the crucial components of argumentation theory. In presenting this overview, argumentation is consistently approached from a pragma-dialectical perspective by viewing it pragmatically as a goal-directed communicative activity and dialectically as part of a regulated critical exchange aimed at resolving a difference of opinion. As a result, the book also systematically explains how the constitutive parts of the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation, which are discussed in a number of separate publications, hang together. The following crucial topics are discussed: argumentation theory as a discipline; the meta-theoretical principles of pragma-dialectics; the model of a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion; fallacies as violations of a code of conduct for reasonable argumentative discourse; descriptive research of argumentative reality; analysis as theoretically-motivated reconstruction; strategic manoeuvring aimed at combining achieving effectiveness with maintaining reasonableness; the conventionalization of argumentative practices; prototypical argumentative patterns; pragma-dialectics amidst other approaches. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective is clearly written and makes argumentation theory understandable to all scholars and advanced students interested in argumentation research.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

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

Through your library

Chapters

Prototypical Argumentative Patterns

Strategic manoeuvring while taking the institutional preconditions into account results in the various domains of argumentative reality in different kinds of argumentative patterns, consisting of specific constellations of argumentative moves. Depending on the institutional preconditions, different ... see more

Argumentation Theory as a Discipline

After an introduction and definition of the concept of argumentation the general objective of argumentation theory as a discipline is described and specified. Next, some crucial concepts of argumentation theory are discussed: standpoint, unexpressed premise, argument scheme, argumentation structure,... see more

Descriptive Studies of Argumentative Discourse

After differentiating between interpretive and judgment relevance of argumentative moves, on the one hand, and analytic and evaluative relevance of argumentative moves, on the other hand, descriptive empirical research of argumentative discourse is reported. First attention is paid to qualitative re... see more

Analysis as Resolution-Oriented Reconstruction

In order to create an adequate point of departure for a fair evaluation of an argumentative discourse an analytic reconstruction is required that results in an analytic overview of the crucial components of the discourse. As is demonstrated with the help of an argumentative text, in a theoretically-... see more

A Model of a Critical Discussion

In the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation an ideal model is developed of a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion on the merits. It is explained that a critical discussion encompasses four stages: the confrontation stage, the opening stage, the argumentation stage, an... see more

Distinguishing Between Different Kinds of Argumentative Practices

In every domain of argumentative reality various communicative activity types can be distinguished that constitute different kinds of macro-contexts for conducting argumentative discourse. These communicative activity types can be characterized argumentatively by describing the specific conventional... see more

Critical Discussion and the Identification of Fallacies

Maintaining reasonableness in argumentative discourse means first of all avoiding the use and acceptance of the wrong argumentative moves that are traditionally known as fallacies. Therefore the way in which the fallacies are treated is the litmus test of the problem-validity of the code of conduct ... see more

Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse

The “argumentative predicament” is that in every argumentative move strategic manoeuvring has to take place in order to keep the balance between aiming for effectiveness and maintaining reasonableness. In order to do justice to the strategic manoeuvring, next to dialectical insights about maintainin... see more

Pragma-Dialectics Amidst Other Approaches to Argumentation

Next to pragma-dialectics various other approaches to argumentation have developed during the past decades. First, the neo-classical views of Toulmin and Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca are discussed, which are still influential. Second, attention is paid to the formal dialectical approaches, develope... see more

Building a Theory of Argumentation

In this chapter it is explained how the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory is built starting from four meta-theoretical principles which determine the methodological starting points of the theorizing. First the required functionalization of argumentation theory is discussed and it is described ... see more

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-01-25

Downloads
45 (#344,258)

6 months
21 (#122,177)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?