Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Pragma-dialectics and Beyond.Daniel Bonevac - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):451-459.
    Pragma-dialectics is dynamic, context-sensitive, and multi-agent; it promises theories of fallacy and argumentative structure. But pragma-dialectic theory and practice are not yet fully in harmony. Key definitions of the theory fall short of explicating the analyses that pragma-dialecticians actually do. Many discussions involve more than two participants with different and mutually incompatible standpoints. Success in such a discussion may be more than success against each opponent. Pragma-dialectics does well at analyzing arguments advanced by one party, directed at another party; it (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • The ambiguous Relationship between Pragma-Dialectics and Logic.Ralph H. Johnson - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering pragma-dialectics: a festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 127.
  • The Development of the Pragma-dialectical Approach to Argumentation.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):387-403.
    This paper describes the development of pragma-dialectics as a theory of argumentative discourse. First the development of the pragma-dialectical model of a critical discussion is explained, with the rules that are to be complied with in order to avoid fallacies from occurring. Then the integration is discussed of rhetorical insight in the dialectical framework. In this endeavour, the concept of strategic manoeuvring is explained that allows for a more refined and more profoundly justified analysis of argumentative discourse and a better (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Epistemic Normativity, Argumentation, and Fallacies.Harvey Siegel & John Biro - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (3):277-292.
    In Biro and Siegel we argued that a theory of argumentation mustfully engage the normativity of judgments about arguments, and we developedsuch a theory. In this paper we further develop and defend our theory.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   55 citations  
  • Pragma-Dialectics and the Function of Argumentation.Christoph Lumer - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (1):41-69.
    This contribution discusses some problems of Pragma-Dialectics and explains them by its consensualistic view of the function of argumentation and by its philosophical underpinnings. It is suggested that these problems can be overcome by relying on a better epistemology and on an epistemological theory of argumentation. On the one hand Pragma-Dialectics takes unqualified consensus as the aim of argumentation, which is problematic, (Sect. 2) on the other it includes strong epistemological and rationalistic elements (Sect. 3). The problematic philosophical underpinnings of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Regulating Disagreement, Constituting Participants: A Critique of Proceduralist Theories of Democracy.Darrin Hicks & Lenore Langsdorf - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (2):139-160.
  • The Straw Thing of Fallacy Theory: The Standard Definition of 'Fallacy'.Hans Vilhelm Hansen - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (2):133-155.
    Hamblin held that the conception of 'fallacy' as an argument that seems valid but is not really so was the dominant conception of fallacy in the history of fallacy studies. The present paper explores the extent of support that there is for this view. After presenting a brief analysis of 'the standard definition of fallacy,' a number of the definitions of 'fallacy' in texts from the middle of this century – from the standard treatment – are considered. This is followed (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   37 citations  
  • 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.
    In this paper, the author describes a dialogical approach tolegal argumentation from the perspective of argumentationtheory. In a pragma-dialectical approach of legalargumentation, the argumentation is considered to be part of acritical discussion aimed at the rational resolution of thedispute. The author describes how a pragma-dialecticalanalysis and evaluation of legal argumentation can be carriedout.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Fallacies in pragma-dialectical perspective.Frans H. Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1987 - Argumentation 1 (3):283-301.
    In the pragma-dialectical approach, fallacies are considered incorrect moves in a discussion for which the goal is successful resolution of a dispute. Ten rules are given for effective conduct at the various stages of such a critical discussion (confrontation, opening, argumentation, concluding). Fallacies are discussed as violations of these rules, taking into account all speech acts which are traditionally recognized as fallacies. Special attention is paid to the role played by implicitness in fallacies in everyday language use. It is stressed (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments.F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst & Francisca Snoeck Henkemans - 1996 - Routledge.
    Argumentation theory is a distinctly multidisciplinary field of inquiry. It draws its data, assumptions, and methods from disciplines as disparate as formal logic and discourse analysis, linguistics and forensic science, philosophy and psychology, political science and education, sociology and law, and rhetoric and artificial intelligence. This presents the growing group of interested scholars and students with a problem of access, since it is even for those active in the field not common to have acquired a familiarity with relevant aspects of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  • The Pragmatics of Deductive Arguments.Erik C. W. Krabbe - unknown
  • Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument (ARNO R. LODDER).C. W. Tindale - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):73-78.
  • From Axiom to Dialogue.E. M. Barth & E. C. W. Krabbe - 1985 - Studia Logica 44 (2):228-230.