Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. On the rational resolution of (deep) disagreements.Eugen Octav Popa - 2022 - Synthese 200 (4):1-15.
    Disagreements come in all shapes and sizes, but epistemologists and argumentation theorists have singled out a special category referred to as deep disagreements. These deep disagreements are thought to pose philosophical and practical difficulties pertaining to their rational resolution. In this paper, I start with a critique of the widespread claim that deep disagreements are qualitatively different from normal disagreements because they arise from a difference in ‘fundamental principles’ or ‘hinge commitments.’ I then defend the following two claims: All disagreements (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Speech Acts in a Dialogue Game Formalisation of Critical Discussion.Jacky Visser - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (2):245-266.
    In this paper a dialogue game for critical discussion is developed. The dialogue game is a formalisation of the ideal discussion model that is central to the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. The formalisation is intended as a preparatory step to facilitate the development of computational tools to support the pragma-dialectical study of argumentation. An important dimension of the pragma-dialectical discussion model is the role played by speech acts. The central issue addressed in this paper is how the speech act perspective (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Christian Plantin: Dictionnaire de l’Argumentation. Une Introduction aux Études d’Argumentation: ENS Éditions, Lyon, 2016.Assimakis Tseronis - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (4):727-734.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Introduction: Ramus, Perelman and Argumentation, a way through the wood. [REVIEW]Peter Sharratt - 1991 - Argumentation 5 (4):335-345.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation and the Challenge of Time: Perelman, Temporality, and the Future of Argument.Blake D. Scott - 2020 - Argumentation 34 (1):25-37.
    Central to Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s philosophical revival of rhetoric and dialectic is the importance given to the temporal character of argumentation. Unlike demonstration, situated within the “empty time” of a single instant, the authors of The New Rhetoric understand argumentation as an action that unfolds within the “full time” of meaningful human life. By taking a broader view of his work beyond The New Rhetoric, I first outline Perelman’s understanding of time and temporality and the challenge that it poses for (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Conjunction of a French Rhetoric of Unity with a Competing Nationalism in New Caledonia: A Critical Discourse Analysis.Margo Lecompte-Van Poucke - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):351-395.
    France and New Caledonia are currently involved in an ongoing debate surrounding the independence of the latter from the former that will lead to referenda in 2018–2022. The main stakeholders in the negotiation process are France, the Caldoche population of the island agglomeration and its Kanak inhabitants. Most critical discourse studies analyse texts as expressions of power entrenched in monologues. In this paper, however, the debate between the social actors is seen as a plurilogue. The study argues that the dominant (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Adding a temporal dimension to the analysis of argumentative discourse: Justified reframing as a means of turning a single-issue discussion into a complex argumentative discussion.Chiara Mercuri, Chiara Pollaroli, Rebecca Schär & Sara Greco - 2018 - Discourse Studies 20 (6):726-742.
    This article seeks to extend existing models of argumentation by considering an important dimension of real-life argumentative discourse: how complex argumentative discussions evolve over time. We define a complex argumentative discussion as a multi-issue discussion, in which the different issues are interrelated in the form of a hierarchy. We claim that justified reframing might be used to transform a single-issue argumentative discussion into a complex argumentative discussion. To illustrate this, we examine the Facebook discourse of the Rhodes Must Fall movement (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Jacobus C. Visser, A Dialogue Game for Critical Discussion: Groundwork in the Formalisation and Computerisation of the Pragma-Dialectical Model of Argumentation. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam: Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication, Amsterdam, xiv + 153 pp.Erik Krabbe - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (3):457-460.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Kati Hannken-Illjes: Argumentation. Einführung in die Theorie und Analyse der Argumentation. Narr/Francke/Attempto: Tübingen, 2018, 193 pp. [REVIEW]Manfred Kienpointner - 2019 - Argumentation 33 (1):147-151.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • When Evaluative Adjectives Prevent Contradiction in a Debate.Thierry Herman & Diane Liberatore - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (2):155-176.
    This paper argues that some words are so highly charged with meaning by a community that they may prevent a discussion during which each participant is on an equal footing. These words are indeed either unanimously accepted or rejected. The presence of these adjectival groups pushes the antagonist to find rhetorical strategies to circumvent them. The main idea we want to develop is that some propositions are not easily debatable in context because of some specific value-bearing words, and one of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Frans H. van Eemeren and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans: Argumentation: Analysis and Evaluation: 2nd Edition, Routledge, New York and London, 2017, 174 pp.Sara Greco - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (1):151-153.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Problem-Solving Argumentative Patterns in Plenary Debates of the European Parliament.Bart Garssen - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (1):25-43.
    The aim of this paper is to describe the way in which argumentative patterns come into being in plenary debate over legislative issues in the European Parliament. What kind of argumentative patterns are to be expected within this macro context? It is shown that the argumentative patterns that come into being in legislative debate in the European Parliament depend for the most part on the problem-solving argumentation that is put forward in the opening speech by the rapporteur of the parliamentary (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • 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 (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Evidential Reasoning.Marcello Di Bello & Bart Verheij - 2018 - In G. Bongiovanni, G. Postema, A. Rotolo, G. Sartor, C. Valentini & D. Walton (eds.), Handbook in Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp. 447-493.
    The primary aim of this chapter is to explain the nature of evidential reasoning, the characteristic difficulties encountered, and the tools to address these difficulties. Our focus is on evidential reasoning in criminal cases. There is an extensive scholarly literature on these topics, and it is a secondary aim of the chapter to provide readers the means to find their way in historical and ongoing debates.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Polish School of Argumentation: A Manifesto.Katarzyna Budzynska, Michal Araszkiewicz, Barbara Bogołȩbska, Piotr Cap, Tadeusz Ciecierski, Kamila Debowska-Kozlowska, Barbara Dunin-Kȩplicz, Marcin Dziubiński, Michał Federowicz, Anna Gomolińska, Andrzej Grabowski, Teresa Hołówka, Łukasz Jochemczyk, Magdalena Kacprzak, Paweł Kawalec, Maciej Kielar, Andrzej Kisielewicz, Marcin Koszowy, Robert Kublikowski, Piotr Kulicki, Anna Kuzio, Piotr Lewiński, Jakub Z. Lichański, Jacek Malinowski, Witold Marciszewski, Edward Nieznański, Janina Pietrzak, Jerzy Pogonowski, Tomasz A. Puczyłowski, Jolanta Rytel, Anna Sawicka, Marcin Selinger, Andrzej Skowron, Joanna Skulska, Marek Smolak, Małgorzata Sokół, Agnieszka Sowińska, Piotr Stalmaszczyk, Tomasz Stawecki, Jarosław Stepaniuk, Alina Strachocka, Wojciech Suchoń, Krzysztof Szymanek, Justyna Tomczyk, Robert Trypuz, Kazimierz Trzȩsicki, Mariusz Urbański, Ewa Wasilewska-Kamińska, Krzysztof A. Wieczorek, Maciej Witek, Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska, Olena Yaskorska, Maria Załȩska, Konrad Zdanowski & Żure - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):267-282.
    Building on our diverse research traditions in the study of reasoning, language and communication, the Polish School of Argumentation integrates various disciplines and institutions across Poland in which scholars are dedicated to understanding the phenomenon of the force of argument. Our primary goal is to craft a methodological programme and establish organisational infrastructure: this is the first key step in facilitating and fostering our research movement, which joins people with a common research focus, complementary skills and an enthusiasm to work (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Introduction: Argument Studies in Poland.Katarzyna Budzynska & Marcin Koszowy - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):259-266.
    Contemporary argument studies in Poland began with the research of the Lvov-Warsaw School and its successors in Artificial Intelligence and legal theory, as well as with the studies of Polish rhetoricians . The last decade has witnessed a major transformation in the Polish landscape, beginning with several landmark publications which have attracted an ever-growing number of young researchers and students. As a result, the research movement of the Polish School of Argumentation has begun to emerge .In 2008, the nationwide initiative (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Fake, the Flimsy, and the Fallacious: Demarcating Arguments in Real Life.Maarten Boudry, Fabio Paglieri & Massimo Pigliucci - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (4):10.1007/s10503-015-9359-1.
    Philosophers of science have given up on the quest for a silver bullet to put an end to all pseudoscience, as such a neat formal criterion to separate good science from its contenders has proven elusive. In the literature on critical thinking and in some philosophical quarters, however, this search for silver bullets lives on in the taxonomies of fallacies. The attractive idea is to have a handy list of abstract definitions or argumentation schemes, on the basis of which one (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Dialogical Features of Presumptions: Difficulties for Walton’s New Dialogical Theory.Petar Bodlović - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (3):513-534.
    According to Douglas Walton, the concept of presumption relates to both logical and dialogical components. Logically, a presumption is the conclusion of a presumptive defeasible inference. Dialogically, the function of a presumptions to shift the burden of proof to the respondent in order to move the dialogue forward when the proponent, due to an objective lack of evidence, cannot present a sufficiently persuasive proposition. Presumptive status, assigned only at the argumentation stage of dialogue, is provisional: a particular presumption stands until (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Pressupostos da Lógica Informal: do argumento à inferência.Rosiandra de Fatima Toledo - 2017 - Dissertation, Uem, Brazil