Results for 'Pragma-dialectics'

997 found
Order:
  1.  30
    Identifying Argumentative Patterns: A Vital Step in the Development of Pragma-Dialectics.Frans H. van Eemeren - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (1):1-23.
    This paper serves as an introduction to the special issue on argumentative patterns in discourse, more in particular on argumentative patterns with pragmatic argumentation as a main argument that are prototypical of argumentative discourse in certain communicative activity types in the political, the legal, the medical, and the academic domain. It situates the studies of argumentative patterns reported in these papers in the pragma-dialectical research program. In order to be able to do so, it is first explained in which consecutive (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  2.  79
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  3.  45
    Deductivism Within Pragma-Dialectics.Leo Groarke - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (1):1-16.
    The present paper elaborates a deductivist account of natural language argu-ment in the context of pragma-dialectics. It reviews earlier debates, criticizes some standard misconceptions in the literature, and argues that the identification and analysis of deductive argument schemes can be the basis of a compelling theory of argumentative discourse.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  4.  24
    In What Sense Do Modern Argumentation Theories Relate to Aristotle? The Case of Pragma-Dialectics.Frans H. van Eemeren - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (1):49-70.
    According to van Eemeren, argumentation theory is a hybrid discipline, because it requires a multidisciplinary, if not interdisciplinary approach, combining descriptive and normative insights. He points out that modern argumentation theorists give substance to the discipline by relying either on a dialectical perspective, concentrating on the reasonableness of argumentation, or on a rhetorical perspective, concentrating on its effectiveness. Both the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective are interpreted in ways related to how they were viewed by Aristotle, but in modern argumentation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  5.  66
    In What Sense Do Modern Argumentation Theories Relate to Aristotle? The Case of Pragma-Dialectics.Frans H. Eemeren - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (1):49-70.
    According to van Eemeren, argumentation theory is a hybrid discipline, because it requires a multidisciplinary, if not interdisciplinary approach, combining descriptive and normative insights. He points out that modern argumentation theorists give substance to the discipline by relying either on a dialectical perspective, concentrating on the reasonableness of argumentation, or on a rhetorical perspective, concentrating on its effectiveness. Both the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective are interpreted in ways related to how they were viewed by Aristotle, but in modern argumentation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6.  85
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  7.  36
    The Epistemic Inferiority of Pragma-Dialectics – Reply to Botting.Christoph Lumer - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (1):51-82.
    In a recent paper in this journal, David Botting defended pragma-dialectics against epistemological criticisms by exponents of the epistemological approach to argumentation, i.e. Harvey Siegel, John Biro and me. In particular, Botting tries to justify with new arguments a Functional Claim, that the function of argumentation is to resolve disputes, and a Normative Claim, that standpoints that have the unqualified consensus of all participants in a dispute will generally be epistemically sound. In this reply it is shown that Botting’s (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8.  50
    Legal Progress Through Pragma-Dialectics? Prospects Beyond Analogy and E Contrario.Hendrik Kaptein - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):497-507.
    Pragma-dialectical approaches to legal argumentation seem to be rather different from traditional approaches appealing to standards of propositional logic. Pragma-dialectical analysis of arguments by analogy and e contrario seem to fall foul to the rigors of logical analysis, in which problems or even concepts of analogy and e contrario seem to disappear. The brunt of both types of special legal argumentation appears to be borne by often implicit general principles and an appeal to the system of the law as a (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  9.  23
    A Computational Model of Pragma-Dialectics as a Tool for its Analysis and Evaluation.Alejandro Secades - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (3):342-377.
    The overall goal of this paper is to show that computational modelling of argumentation theories is a useful tool to deepen them. Specifically, it provides a basic computational formalization of part of Pragma-dialectics’ model of a critical discussion, which serves as a basis for analyzing this influential theory of argumentation. Such analysis reveals some weaknesses and leaves some questions opened for Pragma-dialectics. Particularly, it shows that the model of a critical discussion is not independent of the model of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. Mill and Pragma-Dialectics.Hans Vilhelm Hansen - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics: A Festschrift for Frans H. L. Erlbaum Associates.
  11. 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. L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 127.
  12.  8
    Brothers in Arms: Virtue and Pragma-Dialectics.José Gascón - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (4):705-724.
    Virtue argumentation theory focuses on the arguers’ character, whereas pragma-dialectics focuses on argumentation as a procedure. In this paper I attempt to explain that both theories are not opposite approaches to argumentation. I argue that, with the help of some non-fundamental changes in pragma-dialectics and some restrictions in virtue argumentation theory, it is possible to regard these theories as complementary approaches to the argumentative practice.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  9
    Towards an Interface Between Pragma‑Dialectics and Relevance Theory.Steve Oswald - 2007 - Pragmatics and Cognition 15 (1):179-201.
    This paper investigates the tentative compatibility of two pragmatic approaches, Pragma-Dialectics and Relevance Theory . The development of pragmatics historically led to conceptions of communication that supplied answers formal logic approaches had trouble capturing. Within argumentation studies, PD took this pragmatic turn while at the same time pursuing a normative agenda. This gives evidence of an external approach to language excluding, though not closing the door to cognitive insights. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the extent to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. A Place for Informal Logic Within Pragma-Dialectics.Of Argumentation - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics: A Festschrift for Frans H. L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 63.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Pragma-Dialectics and Self-Advocacy in Physician-Patient Interactions.Lance S. Rintamaki, Elaine Hsieh & Jennifer Peterson - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics: A Festschrift for Frans H. L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 23.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  42
    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 - L. Erlbaum Associates.
    Considering Pragma-Dialectics honors the monumental contributions of one of the foremost international figures in current argumentation scholarship: Frans van Eemeren. The volume presents the research efforts of his colleagues and addresses how their work relates to the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation with which van Eemeren’s name is so intimately connected. This tribute serves to highlight the varied approaches to the study of argumentation and is destined to inspire researchers to advance scholarship in the field far into the future. Replete (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Considering Pragma-Dialectics: A Festschrift for Frans H.F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.) - 2006 - L. Erlbaum Associates.
    Considering Pragma-Dialectics honors the monumental contributions of one of the foremost international figures in current argumentation scholarship: Frans van Eemeren. The volume presents the research efforts of his colleagues and addresses how their work relates to the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation with which van Eemeren’s name is so intimately connected. This tribute serves to highlight the varied approaches to the study of argumentation and is destined to inspire researchers to advance scholarship in the field far into the future. Replete (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  14
    In What Sense Do Modern Argumentation Theories Relate to Aristotle? The Case of Pragma-Dialectics.Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Springer Verlag. pp. 49-70.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  19. The Case of Pragma-Dialectics.Peter Houtlosser, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Peter Houtlosser, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Springer Verlag.
  20.  15
    Within Pragma-Dialectics: Comments on Bonevac.M. A. van Rees - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):461-464.
  21. Pragma-Dialectics-a Radical Departure in Fallacy Theory.John Woods - 1991 - Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 24 (1):43-53.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  22.  36
    E. Feteris, B. Garssen and F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds): Keeping in Touch with Pragma-Dialectics. In Honor of Frans H. Van Eemeren. [REVIEW]Paul van den Hoven - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):409-412.
  23.  17
    E. Feteris, B. Garssen and F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds): Keeping in Touch with Pragma-Dialectics. In Honor of Frans H. Van Eemeren. [REVIEW]Paul den Hoven - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):409-412.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24.  43
    Advances in Pragma-Dialectics.David Hitchcock - 2003 - Informal Logic 23 (1).
  25.  27
    Review Of: Frans H. Van Eemeren : Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics, Cham , Springer , 880 Pp. [REVIEW]Fernando Leal - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (4):527-532.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  13
    Frans H. Van Eemeren and Wu Peng : Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics: John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 2017. Volume 12 of the Argumentation in Context Series, Ix, 367 Pp, ISBN: 9789027211293 , €99.00, ISBN: 9789027264800 , €99.00.Sally Jackson - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):293-299.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  18
    The Rational Reconstruction of Complex Forms of Legal Argumentation: Approaches From Artificial Intelligence and Law and Pragma-Dialectics[REVIEW]Eveline T. Feteris - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):393-400.
  28. Missing Premisses in Pragma-Dialectics.John Woods - 1990 - Logique Et Analyse 33 (29):155.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics. Edited by Frans H. Van Eemeren and Wu Peng.David Zarefsky - 2020 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 9 (2).
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  58
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  31.  36
    The Pragma-Dialectical Theory Under Discussion.Frans H. van Eemeren - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (4):439-457.
    During the past thirty years the pragma-dialectical theorizing has developed in various steps from designing an abstract ideal model for critical discussion to examining strategic manoeuvring in the various argumentative activity types in which argumentative discourse manifests itself in argumentative reality. The response to the theoretical proposals that have been made includes, next to approval, also various kinds of criticisms. This paper explores the nature and thrust of these criticisms. In doing so, a distinction is made between criticisms concerning the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  32.  49
    The Pragma-Dialectical Theory Under Discussion.Frans H. Eemeren - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (4):439-457.
    During the past thirty years the pragma-dialectical theorizing has developed in various steps from designing an abstract ideal model for critical discussion to examining strategic manoeuvring in the various argumentative activity types in which argumentative discourse manifests itself in argumentative reality. The response to the theoretical proposals that have been made includes, next to approval, also various kinds of criticisms. This paper explores the nature and thrust of these criticisms. In doing so, a distinction is made between criticisms concerning the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  33.  70
    Fallacies in Transition: An Assessment of the Pragma-Dialectical Perspective.Christopher W. Tindale - 1996 - Informal Logic 18 (1).
    The paper critically investigates the pragma-dialectics of van Eemeren and Grootendorst, particularly the treatment of fallacies. While the pragma-dialectieians claim that dialectics combines the logical and rhetorical approaches to argumentation, it is argued here that the perspective relies heavily on rhetorical features that have been suppressed in the account and that overlooking these features leads to significant problems in the pragma-dialectical perspective. In light of these problems, the author advocates turning attention to a rhetorical account which subsumes the logical (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  34.  31
    The Role of Quasi-Logical Arguments in Critical Dialogue: A Pragma-Dialectical Redefinition.Iva Svačinová - 2017 - Informal Logic 37 (1):42-69.
    The article focuses on the New Rhetoric’s concept of quasi-logical arguments imitating logical or mathematical demonstrations, and examines it from point of view of pragma-dialectics as a device contributing towards resolving the difference of opinion. It is shown that the category of quasi-logical arguments cannot be considered as an argument scheme or a united type of strategic maneuvering. It is suggested to consider the category of quasi-logical arguments as a cluster of specific strategic maneuvers increasing the efficiency of arguments (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. The Impact of Argumentation on Artificial Intelligence.David Godden - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser & M. A. van Rees (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics: A Festschrift for Frans H. L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 287-299.
    In this chapter, we explore the development and importance of the connection between argumentation and artificial intelligence. Specifically, we show that the influence of argumentation on AI has occurred within a framework that is consistent with the basic approach of Pragma-Dialectics. While the pragma-dialectical approach is typically conceived of as applying primarily to argumentation occurring between human agents, we show that the basic features of this approach can consistently be applied in a virtual context, whereby the goal-directed activities of, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  36.  51
    Toward an Alliance Between the Issue-Processing Approach and Pragma-Dialectical Analysis.David Braybrooke - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):513-535.
    On the approach to discussions of policy choices that treats such discussions as instances of issue-processing, the joint use of the logic of questions and the logic of rules gives precise formulation to two sorts of issues. To one sort of issue belong issue-circumscribing questions; to another sort, issues-simplicter, which consist of disjunctions of policy proposals – so many proposed social rules – that are answers, in the case of each disjunction, to a given issue-circumscribing question. Work in pragma-dialectics (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  27
    A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of the Inquisition.Dale Hample - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (2):135-149.
    Disagreement space consists of all the commitments and understandings required for an utterance to take on its discourse function. These are virtual standpoints that can be called out for explicit argumentation. This paper shows how the Inquisition systematically controlled disagreement space, preventing some apparently important standpoints from ever being argued about, and requiring attention to others that may not have initially seemed relevant. This control of disagreement space constituted violation of the rules for critical discussion. The essay suggests that the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  31
    Effectiveness Through Reasonableness Preliminary Steps to Pragma-Dialectical Effectiveness Research.Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):33-53.
    The introduction of the concept of strategic maneuvering into the pragma-dialectical theory makes it possible to formulate testable hypotheses regarding the persuasiveness of argumentative moves that are made in argumentative discourse. After summarizing the standard pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, van Eemeren, Garssen, and Meuffels explain what the extension of the pragma-dialectical approach with strategic maneuvering involves and discuss the fallacies in terms of the extended pragma-dialectical approach as derailments of strategic maneuvering. Then they give an empirical interpretation of the extended (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  39.  41
    Effectiveness Through Reasonableness Preliminary Steps to Pragma-Dialectical Effectiveness Research.Frans H. Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):33-53.
    The introduction of the concept of strategic maneuvering into the pragma-dialectical theory makes it possible to formulate testable hypotheses regarding the persuasiveness of argumentative moves that are made in argumentative discourse. After summarizing the standard pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, van Eemeren, Garssen, and Meuffels explain what the extension of the pragma-dialectical approach with strategic maneuvering involves and discuss the fallacies in terms of the extended pragma-dialectical approach as derailments of strategic maneuvering. Then they give an empirical interpretation of the extended (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  40.  38
    A Pragma-Dialectical Procedure for a Critical Discussion.Frans H. van Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):365-386.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  41.  39
    Pragma-Dialectical Analysis and Evaluation of Problem-Solving Discussion.M. A. van Rees - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):465-479.
    In this article, after arguing that present approaches to improving problem-solving discussions for various reasons are not satisfactory, I turn to the pragma-dialectic approach to argumentative discourse to derive a normative framework that can serve as a point of departure to enhance the quality of problem-solving discussions. I then show how this approach can be used as analytical and evaluative instrument that can help the analyst to establish whether participants in actual practice act in a fashion that is in accord (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  42.  57
    Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (3):293-305.
    The paper reacts against the strict separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentation and argues that argumentative discourse can be analyzed and evaluated more adequately if the two are systematically combined. Such an integrated approach makes it possible to show how the opportunities available in each of the dialectical stages of a critical discussion have been used strategically to further the rhetorical aims of the speaker or writer. The approach is illustrated with the help of an analysis of an (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  43.  72
    Conductive Argument as a Mode of Strategic Maneuvering.Yun Xie - 2017 - Informal Logic 37 (1):2-22.
    This paper is to argue that conductive arguments could be understood from a rhetorical perspective. It contends that conductive arguments can be regarded as a particular mode of strategic maneuvering, rather than a new type of argument. Moreover, it demonstrates that the use of conductive arguments can be adequately analyzed and evaluated by adopting the theoretical tools developed in the extended Pragma-Dialectics.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  44.  58
    Towards a Critique-Friendly Approach to the Straw Man Fallacy Evaluation.Marcin Lewiński - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (4):469-497.
    In this article I address the following question: When are reformulations in argumentative criticisms reasonable and when do they become fallacious straw men? Following ideas developed in the integrated version of pragma-dialectics, I approach argumentation as an element of agonistic exchanges permeated by arguers’ strategic manoeuvring aimed at effectively defeating the opponent with reasonable means. I propose two basic context-sensitive criteria for deciding on the reasonableness of reformulations: precision of the rules for interpretation (precise vs. loose) and general expectation (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  45.  44
    Topical Roots of Formal Dialectic.Erik C. W. Krabbe - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (1):71-87.
    Formal dialectic has its roots in ancient dialectic. We can trace this influence in Charles Hamblin’s book on fallacies, in which he introduced his first formal dialectical systems. Earlier, Paul Lorenzen proposed systems of dialogical logic, which were in fact formal dialectical systems avant la lettre, with roles similar to those of the Greek Questioner and Answerer. In order to make a comparison between ancient dialectic and contemporary formal dialectic, I shall formalize part of the Aristotelian procedure for Academic debates. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  46.  47
    Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise. [REVIEW]Christopher W. Tindale - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (4):447-466.
    This paper discusses some of the ways recent models have brought rhetoric into argumentation theory. In particular, it explores the rationale for and role of rhetoric in the strategic maneuvering project of pragma-dialectics and compares it with the author’s own implementation of rhetorical features. A case is made for considering the active ways audiences influence the strategies of arguers and for seeing the role of rhetoric in argumentation as both fundamental and reasonable on its own terms.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  47.  30
    Strategic Maneuvering in Mathematical Proofs.Erik C. W. Krabbe - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):453-468.
    This paper explores applications of concepts from argumentation theory to mathematical proofs. Note is taken of the various contexts in which proofs occur and of the various objectives they may serve. Examples of strategic maneuvering are discussed when surveying, in proofs, the four stages of argumentation distinguished by pragma-dialectics. Derailments of strategies are seen to encompass more than logical fallacies and to occur both in alleged proofs that are completely out of bounds and in alleged proofs that are at (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  48.  61
    Pragma-Dialetics Epistemologized: Reply to Lumer.David Botting - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (2):269-285.
    I would like to thank Christoph Lumer for his illuminating comments on my paper “The question of truth” published in this journal (Botting 2010) and would like to exercise my right of reply on a few of the issues that he raises.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  49.  43
    A World of Difference: The Rich State of Argumentation Theory.Frans H. Van Eemeren - 1995 - Informal Logic 17 (2).
    This paper surveys the contributions to the study of argumentation in the two decades since the work of Toulmin and Perelman. Developments include Radical Argumentativism (Anscombre and Ducot), Communication and Rhetoric (American Speech Communication Theory), Informal Logic (Johnson and Blair), Formal Analyses of Fallacies (Woods and Walton), Formal Dialectics (Barth and Krabbe), and Pragma-Dialectics (van Eemeren and Grootendorst). From the survey it is concluded that argumentation theory has been considerably enriched. If the contributions can be made to converge, a (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  50.  37
    The Question of Truth.David Botting - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):413-434.
    The problem with the pragma-dialectical view, it has been argued, is that it takes argumentation as aiming at consensus rather than truth or justified belief. The pragma-dialecticians often imply that an argumentative process aiming at consensus in a way constrained by the “Ten Commandments” will in the long run converge on epistemically favourable standpoints. I will argue that they are right provided (i) pragma-dialectics is construed, as they say, as a theory of criticism; (ii) pragma-dialectics and the other (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 997