Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Argument Schemes: The Procedural and Material Components.Eddo Rigotti & Sara Greco Morasso - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (4):489-512.
    This paper focuses on the inferential configuration of arguments, generally referred to as argument scheme. After outlining our approach, denominated Argumentum Model of Topics, we compare it to other modern and contemporary approaches, to eventually illustrate some advantages offered by it. In spite of the evident connection with the tradition of topics, emerging also from AMT’s denomination, its involvement in the contemporary dialogue on argument schemes should not be overlooked. The model builds in particular on the theoretical and methodological perspective (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  • Argumentative Bluff in Eristic Discussion: An Analysis and Evaluation.Jan Albert van Laar - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (3):383-398.
    How does the analysis and evaluation of argumentation depend on the dialogue type in which the argumentation has been put forward? This paper focuses on argumentative bluff in eristic discussion. Argumentation cannot be presented without conveying the pretence that it is dialectically reasonable, as well as, at least to some degree, rhetorically effective. Within eristic discussion it can be profitable to engage in bluff with respect to such claims. However, it will be argued that such bluffing is dialectically inadmissible, even (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Disputation by Design.Sally Jackson - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):183-198.
    In normative pragmatics, a kind of empirical discourse analysis organized by normative theory, the analysis of any communication process begins with an idealized model of the discourse that can be compared with actual practices. Idealizations of argumentation can be found, among other places, in theoretical descriptions of ‘critical discussion’ and other dialogue types. Comparing ideal models with actual practices can pinpoint defects in the models (leading to theoretical refinements), but it can also identify deficiencies in practice. This latter possibility invites (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   319 citations  
  • The 2015 Paris Climate Conference.Marcin Lewiński & Dima Mohammed - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):65-90.
    The paper applies argumentative discourse analysis to a corpus of official statements made by key players at the opening of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. The chief goal is to reveal the underlying structure of practical arguments and values legitimising the global climate change policy-making. The paper investigates which of the elements of practical arguments were common and which were contested by various players. One important conclusion is that a complex, multilateral deal such as the 2015 Paris Agreement is based (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Environmental Manifestoes.Soledade Rodrigues, Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):12-39.
    In this paper, we analyze the argumentative strategies deployed in the Ecomodernist Manifesto, published in 2015 by a group of leading environmental thinkers. We draw on pragma-dialectics and Perelman’s rhetoric to characterize manifesto as a genre of practical argumentation. Our goal is to explore the relation of manifesto as a discursive genre to the argumentative structures and techniques used in the Ecomodernist Manifesto. We therefore take into scrutiny the elements of practical argumentation employed in the manifesto and describe the polylogical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Deontic Power and Institutional Contexts.Isabela Fairclough - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):136-171.
    In this article I study the constraints and opportunities available to decision-makers in an institutional context, by analyzing the deliberative process that led to the rejection of an application for exploratory fracking. Drawing on a corpus of 130,000 words, I intend to develop the theorization of argumentation in institutional contexts initiated in pragma-dialectics by drawing on philosopher John Searle’s concept of “deontic power”. Illustrating both the restrictive and enabling force of the institutional context, my analysis shows that, while decisions which (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Framing Fracking.Elena Musi & Mark Aakhus - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):112-135.
    This article offers a first large scale analysis of argumentative polylogues in the fracking controversy. It provides an empirical methodology that identifies, from large quantities of text data through semantic frame analysis, the many players, positions and places presumed relevant to argumentation in a controversy. It goes beyond the usual study of framing in communication research because it considers that a controversy’s communicative context is shaped, and in turn conditions, the making and defending of standpoints. To achieve these novels aims, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Criticism and Justification of Negotiated Compromises.Jan Albert van Laar & Erik C. W. Krabbe - 2019 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 8 (1):91-111.
    The paper focuses on conflicts about an already negotiated compromise, taking as its example a debate in Dutch parliament about the approval of the Paris Agreement on climate change of 2015. It deals with a variety of worries that opponents of approval may advance and the arguments in its defense thus invited. It concludes with a profile of dialogue providing reasonable options for those involved in such a conflict.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Sophists and Sophistry in the Wealth of Nations.David Charles Gore - 2011 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 44 (1):1-26.
    The Stoic, David Hume’s “man of action and virtue,” is often considered the forerunner and foundation of Adam Smith’s market man of morals (Hume 1985, 146–54). Ian Simpson Ross notes Smith’s enthusiasm for Stoic philosophers such as Cicero and Marcus Aurelius and the way Stoic philosophy informs Smith’s arguments on various topics such as self-command, self-love, and suicide (Ross 1995, 172, 384). Pierre Force confirms the influence of Stoicism in tracing Smith’s moral system as a contrast with the Epicurean/Augustinian tradition, (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Design Thinking in Argumentation Theory and Practice.Sally Jackson - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (3):243-263.
    This essay proposes a design perspective on argumentation, intended as complementary to empirical and critical scholarship. In any substantive domain, design can provide insights that differ from those provided by scientific or humanistic perspectives. For argumentation, the key advantage of a design perspective is the recognition that humanity’s natural capacity for reason and reasonableness can be extended through inventions that improve on unaided human intellect. Historically, these inventions have fallen into three broad classes: logical systems, scientific methods, and disputation frameworks. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry.Marcin Lewiński & Mark Aakhus - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):161-185.
    In this paper, we closely examine the various ways in which a multi-party argumentative discussion—argumentative polylogue—can be analyzed in a dialectical framework. Our chief concern is that while multi-party and multi-position discussions are characteristic of a large class of argumentative activities, dialectical approaches would analyze and evaluate them in terms of dyadic exchanges between two parties: pro and con. Using as an example an academic committee arguing about the researcher of the year as well as other cases from argumentation literature, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • Agonism and Arete.Debra Hawhee - 2002 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 35 (3):185-207.
  • Sophistry In and As Its Course.Kenneth Liberman - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (1):59-70.
    Although sophistry has been characterized as separable from real philosophy, formal analysis does not work without it and one cannot always identify just where philosophy leaves off and sophistry begins. Whether sophistry offers anything to thinking reason has to do with what parties in dialogue do with sophistries. Sophistries can close down or open up philosophical perspectives, depending on the local work that sophistic strategies accomplish. Such local work of philosophers is rarely available to analyses of docile texts, but they (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation