Argumentation Theory

Rhetorical Materialism: The Cognitive Division of Labor and the Social Dimensions of Argument."

by Ron Greene

Co-authored with Heather Ashley Hayes. Argumentation and Advocacy 48.3 (Winter 2012): 190-193, Part of special forum on Mercier and Sperber's Why Do Humans Reason?"

Misyurov D.A. Dialectical formulas based on the binary notation as the development formulas // Credo New. 2012. №2

by Dmitry Misyurov

The article suggests dialectical formulas based on the binary notation as the development formulas: formula with... more The article suggests dialectical formulas based on the binary notation as the development formulas: formula with dominant and the non-dominant elements; universal formula; formula with symbolic weight of elements; tautological formula. For example, it suggests an opportunity to use the dialectical formulas for modeling and artificial intelligence creation, etc.

Contextual frames and their argumentative implications: A case study in media argumentation

by Sara Greco Morasso

Discourse Studies April 2012 vol. 14 no. 2 197-216

By presenting a case study based on the argumentative analysis of news in the press, this article introduces and... more By presenting a case study based on the argumentative analysis of news in the press, this article introduces and discusses strategic manoeuvring with contextual frames. Drawing on the linguistic notion of frame, I introduce the concept of contextual frame to refer to the news context, that is, the background against which a certain event is presented as a piece of news. I argue that newspapers and journalists make use of contextual frames in the apparently neutral genre of news reporting to propose specific interpretations of the facts at issue, which become the basis for explicit comments and editorials. To show how this works, I investigate in detail a case of newspaper coverage of a complex episode using the pragma-dialectical notion of strategic manoeuvring and the Argumentum Model of Topics (AMT) to analyse argument schemes. I show that, in the use of contextual frames, there is a prominent relation between presentational devices (the lexical choices that build up the frame) and topical potential; contextual frames provide the implicit material premises (endoxa) which are at the basis of argumentations through which newspapers interpret and comment on the news.

R. Pilgram (2012). Reasonableness of a doctor's argument by authority: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the specific soundness conditions. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 1(1), 33-50.

by Roosmaryn Pilgram

Ragionare con la mente estesa. Facebook, il pensiero e l’argomentazione

by Edoardo Acotto

Published on Alfabeta 2, july 2011

Per chi può permettersi un computer e un abbonamento a internet – e non sono ancora tutti, nemmeno nei paesi più... more Per chi può permettersi un computer e un abbonamento a internet – e non sono ancora tutti, nemmeno nei paesi più ricchi – l’esistenza odierna è parzialmente online. Sembra allora un compito arduo provare a indicare un senso globale delle interazioni tra i soggetti che popolano i social network, per la pervasività delle pratiche di vita online e per il continuo intreccio di attuale e virtuale.

Considero i social network in generale come una “tecnologia dell’intelletto” (Jack Goody a proposito della scrittura) e in particolare come un’esteriorizzazione della facoltà di ragionare: non solo luoghi virtuali ma veri e propri dispositivi cognitivi allargati, una protesi delle facoltà mentali innate e culturalmente implementate.

(Book Review) Argumenter en classe de sciences. C. Buty and C. Plantin (Eds.)

by Antonio Bova

Direct-to-consumer advertisements for prescription drugs as an argumentative activity type

by Renske Wierda

Co-authored with Jacky Visser, University of Amsterdam
Journal of Argumentation in Context 1:1 (2012), 81–96.

With direct-to-consumer advertisements (DTCA), pharmaceutical companies can market their prescription drugs directly... more With direct-to-consumer advertisements (DTCA), pharmaceutical companies can market their prescription drugs directly to consumers. In order to properly study the argumentative aspect of these advertisements from a pragma-dialectical perspective, it is necessary to characterize DTCA as an ‘argumentative activity type’. This characterization shows that in DTCA, the advertiser combines two genres of communicative activity: promotion and consultation. The use of promotion stems from the advertiser’s commercial objective of selling products, while the use of consultation is a result of the legal obligation to present a fair balance between arguments for and against the use of a drug.

Keywords: DTCA, Pragma-Dialectics, argumentative activity type, promotion, consultation

The pragma-dialectical method of analysis and evaluation

by Jean H.M. Wagemans

Eemeren, F.H. van, Garssen, B.J., & Wagemans, J.H.M. (2011). The pragma-dialectical method of analysis and evaluation. In R.C. Rowland, (Ed.), Reasoned Argument and Social Change: Selected Papers from the 17th Biennial Conference on Argumentation (pp. 25-47). Washington: National Communication Association.

This essay provides an overview of what the pragma-dialectical method of analysis and evaluation involves. It contains... more This essay provides an overview of what the pragma-dialectical method of analysis and evaluation involves. It contains an explanation of the central notions of the theoretical framework, as well as a fully-fledged analysis and evaluation of the strategic maneuvering in an apologia by KLM Royal Dutch Airlines concerning the destruction of 440 ground squirrels.

Quantifying disagreement in argument-based reasoning

by Richard Booth

with Martin  Caminada, Mikolaj Podlaszewski and Iyad Rahwan

An argumentation framework can be seen as expressing, in an abstract way, the conflicting information of an under-... more An argumentation framework can be seen as expressing, in an abstract way, the conflicting information of an under- lying logical knowledge base. This conflicting information often allows for the presence of more than one possible rea- sonable position (extension/labelling) which one can take. A relevant question, therefore, is how much these positions differ from each other. In the current paper, we will examine the issue of how to define meaningful measures of distance between the (complete) labellings of a given argumentation framework. We provide concrete distance measures based on argument-wise label difference, as well as based on the notion of critical sets, and examine their properties.

What Mediators Do With Words: Implementing Three Models of Rational Discussion In Dispute Mediation

by Mark Aakhus

This study identifies three models of rationality that mediators employ in interpreting conflict situations and... more This study identifies three models of rationality that mediators employ in interpreting conflict situations and formulating the most sensible and appropriate way to proceed. These models, critical discussion, bargaining, and therapy articulate what mediators presume about the nature of conflict and the framework of activity required to manage the conflict. The models were developed through a close analysis of a corpus of forty-one mediation sessions. The analysis shows that the substance, direction, and outcome of mediation is shaped by the framework of activity implemented by the mediator. This can be seen by the way in which arguments are deflected and discouraged in bargaining and therapy models. These models suggest that mediation competence can be understood in terms of two issues: which model to implement when and how best to implement any model in a stream of discourse.

Science Court: A case study in designing discourse to manage policy controversy

by Mark Aakhus

Aakhus, M. (1999). Science court: A case study in designing discourse to manage policy controversy. Knowledge Technology and Policy, 12(2), 20-37.

doi:10.1007/s12130-999-1020-6

Disagreement among experts is important to scientific progress, but it creates a dilemma for decision-makers who often... more Disagreement among experts is important to scientific progress, but it creates a dilemma for decision-makers who often depend on the authority of those experts to render decisions. When experts disagree there seems to be no good way to incorporate expertise into decision-making. This study examines the "Science Court" proposed to facilitate the resolution of policy controversies involving expert disagreement. Science Court is examined here as a communication tool designed to (1) resolve disputes among experts so that (2) policy decision-making can proceed.The concern lies not so much in Science Court's design but with the rationale about designing communication tools to facilitate policy deliberations reflected in Science Court's design.

Models of Reasoning in Ancient China (中国古代的推理模型)

by Jeremy Seligman

LIU, F. (刘奋荣); SELIGMAN, J.M; VAN BENTHEM, J. 'Models of Reasoning in Ancient China', Studies in Logic, Vol. 4, No. 3 (2011): 57–81 PII: 1674-3202(2011)-03-0057-25

In this paper we take a look at some key aspects of ancient Chinese views on language and argumentation, particularly... more In this paper we take a look at some key aspects of ancient Chinese views on language and argumentation, particularly those of the Confucians and the Mohists. We advocate the use of light-weight logical models of some key concepts, without importing the full machinery of modern logical calculi. Our topics include: discrimination and response, correct naming in terms of appropriate responses, and the extension of kinds via standards and criteria. We also make a first attempt at representing the practice of ancient argumentation using games for disputes about categorisation of objects in a Mohist spirit. We end by discussing the wider potential of game modeling for understanding the reasoning practices of ancient China.

文章主要针对中国古代语言和论证的一些重要方面进行探讨,特别地,我们重点考察了儒家和墨家的观点。我们主张使用轻型的逻辑模型方法(不引进全部的现代逻辑演算)对一些重要的概念提供解释。我们所关注的问题主要有:情景辨别和做出反应、根据合适的反应来正名、以及通过"法"和"因"两个方面讨论类的外延。我们尝试使用博弈模型来表示古代论证的实际情形,重点讨论关于对象和类之间关系的争辩。在文章的最后,我们讨论了使用博弈建模方法对于理解古代中国推理实践潜在的可能性。

Introduction to the Special Issue on Coding Argument in Social Interaction

by Mark Aakhus

This special double issue focuses on the coding of argument in social interaction. The interest is the Conversational... more This special double issue focuses on the coding of argument in social interaction. The interest is the Conversational Argument Coding Scheme (CACS) that has been developed over the last three decades for the purposes of investigating the role of conversational argument in interpersonal relationships and in group decision-making. The CACS is clearly relevant to those involved in argumentation studies as well as those addressing other key topics in communication research where argument may become a matter of attention such as research on persuasion, social influence, conflict, relationship development, decision-making, policy processes, computer supported collaboration, social media, and deliberation. This special issue highlights the CACS as a methodological development that is of interest to the broader field of communication research, as well as argument relevant research.

Prevenire l'avvelenamento del pozzo: politica, verità e teoria dell'argomentazione

by Guglielmo Feis

Review of Franca D'Agostini "Verità avvelenata. Buoni e cattivi argomenti nel dibaddito pubblico".

La médiation en tant que dialogue raisonnable

by Sara Greco Morasso

Take My Advice--I Am Not Following It: Ad Hominem Arguments as Legitimate Rebuttals to Appeals to Authority

by Moti Mizrahi

In this paper, I argue that ad hominem arguments are not always fallacious. More explicitly, in certain cases of... more In this paper, I argue that ad hominem arguments are not always fallacious. More explicitly, in certain cases of practical reasoning, the circumstances of a person are relevant to whether or not the conclusion should be accepted. This occurs, I suggest, when a person gives advice to others or prescribes certain courses of action but fails to follow her own advice or act in accordance with her own prescriptions. This is not an instance of a fallacious tu quoque provided that such circumstantial ad hominem arguments are construed as rebuttals to appeals (administrative) authority (of expertise), or so I argue.

The Third Theory of Legal Objectivity

by Aldo Schiavello

The question of the objectivity of law rotates around the determination of the status of the norms that constitute the... more The question of the objectivity of law rotates around the determination of the status of the norms that constitute the major premise of the practical syllogism representing the formal scheme of the justification of judicial decisions. Those who deny the objectivity of law believe that the existence and meaning of legal norms depend on the opinion of judges and jurists considered individually. The different versions of the objectivity of law reject this sceptical conclusion. The strongest versions of objectivity accepted by the different doctrines of natural law presuppose metaphysical realism and rule out the idea that what seems correct to someone can determine what is effectively correct; the weakest versions, upheld by legal positivism, believe – at least in relation to the existence of legal social practice – that what seems correct to most members of a community determines what is effectively correct. Does a space exist between these two versions of objectivity? In this essay arguments are put forward in support of a negative answer.

Is Common Ground a Word or Just a Sound? Second Order Consensus and Argumentation Theory

by Italo Testa

(with P. Cantù), published in "Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground", ed. by Hans V. Hansen, Christopher W. Tindale, J. Anthony Blair, Ralph H. Johnson and David M. Godden, OSSA,Windsor, ON, 2007

This paper focuses on the role played by the concept of Common Ground by investigating various roles played by... more This paper focuses on the role played by the concept of Common Ground by investigating various roles played by consensus and dissensus in different argumentation theories. A dynamic conception of Common Ground as a second order consensus will be invoked.

The Respect Fallacy: On the Limits of Respect in Public Dialogue

by Italo Testa

Draft, forthcoming in: Christian Kock & Lisa Villadsen (eds.), Rhetorical Citizenship and Public Deliberation, Penn State University Press, 2012

Deliberative politics should start from an adequate and differentiated image of our dialogical practices and their... more Deliberative politics should start from an adequate and differentiated image of our dialogical practices and their normative structures; the ideals that we eventually propose for deliberative politics should be tested against this background. In this article I will argue that equal respect, understood as respect a priori conferred on persons, is not and should not be counted as a constitutive normative ground of public discourse. Furthermore, requiring such respect, even if it might facilitate dialogue, could have negative effects and lead to fallacious paths of thought –as seems to happen on matters of deep disagreement such as the Colorado Fundamentalist/Gay HIV issue I discuss in paragraph 6. I will put forward this argument from the standpoint of argumentation or discourse theory, drawing consequences for dialogical theories of politics. Basing my argument on a pluralistic notion of public discourse – understood as a mixed discourse of persuasion, information-seeking and negotiation – I will argue that respect is a dynamic, situational phenomenon, and that the norm of equal respect for persons is contextually contingent in political deliberation: equal respect should be considered as a potential outcome, a discursive achievement – which I understand as a second order consensus achieved dynamically on a provisional basis – rather than as an universal condition for dialogue.

Coffin, C. and O’Halloran, K.A. (2008) 'Researching argumentation in educational contexts: new methods, new directions' in Coffin, C. and O’Halloran, K.A. (eds.) (2008) Researching argumentation in educational contexts: new methods, new directions. Special Edition of the International Journal of Research and Method in Education 31(3).

by Kieran O'Halloran