A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach

✍ Scribed by Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst

• Publisher: Cambridge University Press
• Year: 2003
• Tongue: English
• Leaves: 225
• Category: Library

✦ Synopsis

Two authorities in argumentation theory present a view of argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion by testing the acceptability of the disputed positions. Their model of a ''critical discussion'' serves as a theoretical tool for analyzing, evaluating and producing argumentative discourse. This major contribution to the study of argumentation will be of particular value to professionals and graduate students in speech communication, informal logic, rhetoric, critical thinking, linguistics, and philosophy.

✦ Table of Contents

Half-title......Page 2
Dedication......Page 3
Title......Page 4
Copyright......Page 5
Contents......Page 6
Preface......Page 8
1 Introduction......Page 10
Argumentation theory as normative pragmatics......Page 18
The philosophical estate......Page 20
The theoretical estate......Page 27
The analytical estate......Page 31
The empirical estate......Page 36
The practical estate......Page 40
A program for the study of argumentation......Page 46
Classical roots of argumentation studies......Page 51
New rhetorics and new dialectics......Page 53
Meta-theoretical principles of pragma-dialectics......Page 61
Dialectical stages in the process of resolving a difference......Page 66
Pragmatic moves in the resolution process......Page 71
Different approaches to relevance......Page 78
From interpretation to analysis......Page 82
Integration of Searlean and Gricean insights......Page 84
A pragma-dialectical notion of relevance......Page 89
The identification of a relevance problem......Page 93
Conditional relevance......Page 96
Complications in argumentative reality......Page 104
Transformations in an analytical reconstruction......Page 109
The justification of a reconstruction......Page 119
Making an analytic overview......Page 127
A critical-rationalistic view of reasonableness......Page 132
Conceptions of reasonableness in the study of argumentation......Page 136
A dialectical notion of reasonableness......Page 140
The pragma-dialectical discussion procedure......Page 144
Rule 1......Page 145
Rule 2......Page 146
The obligation to defend......Page 147
Rule 3......Page 148
Allocation of the burden of proof......Page 149
Allocation of the discussion roles......Page 150
Agreements concerning the discussion rules......Page 151
Attacking and defending standpoints......Page 152
Rule 6......Page 153
The intersubjective identification procedure......Page 154
Rule 7......Page 156
The intersubjective explicitization procedure......Page 157
The intersubjective testing procedure......Page 158
Attacking and defending standpoints conclusively......Page 159
Optimal use of the right to attack......Page 160
Rule 11......Page 161
The orderly conduct of the discussion......Page 162
Rule 14......Page 163
Rights and obligations regarding usage declaratives......Page 165
Rule 15......Page 166
The state of the art in the study of fallacies......Page 167
Fallacies and the concept of a critical discussion......Page 171
Violations of rules for the confrontation stage......Page 174
Violations of rules for the opening stage......Page 176
Violations of rules for the argumentation stage......Page 177
Violations of the rule for the concluding stage......Page 182
The pragma-dialectical discussion procedure and the analysis of fallacies......Page 183
Examples of an analysis of some well-known fallacies......Page 184
Fallacies and implicit language use......Page 189
The identification of fallacies......Page 193
Characteristics of reasonable discussants......Page 196
Ten commandments for reasonable discussants......Page 199
References......Page 206
Index......Page 216