Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Conceptions of Speech Acts in the Theory and Practice of Argumentation: A Case Study of a Debate About Advocating.Jean Goodwin - 2014 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 36 (1):79-98.
    Far from being of interest only to argumentation theorists, conceptions of speech acts play an important role in practitioners’ self-reflection on their own activities. After a brief review of work by Houtlosser, Jackson and Kauffeld on the ways that speech acts provide normative frameworks for argumentative interactions, this essay examines an ongoing debate among scientists in natural resource fields as to the appropriateness of the speech act of advocating in policy settings. Scientists’ reflections on advocacy align well with current scholarship, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Roles We Make Others Take: Thoughts on the Ethics of Arguing.Katharina Stevens - 2019 - Topoi 38 (4):693-709.
    Feminist argumentation theorists have criticized the Dominant Adversarial Model in argumentation, according to which arguers should take proponent and opponent roles and argue against one another. The model is deficient because it creates disadvantages for feminine gendered persons in a way that causes significant epistemic and practical harms. In this paper, I argue that the problem that these critics have pointed out can be generalized: whenever an arguer is given a role in the argument the associated tasks and norms of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Should Climate Scientists Fly?Jean Goodwin - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (2):157-203.
    I inquire into argument at the system level, exploring the controversy over whether climate scientists should fly. I document participants’ knowledge of a skeptical argument that because scientists fly, they cannot testify credibly about the climate emergency. I show how this argument has been managed by pro-climate action arguers, and how some climate scientists have developed parallel reasoning, articulating a sophisticated case why they will be more effective in the controversy if they fly less. Finally, I review some strategies arguers (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Commentary on “Where is the reasonable?”.Jean Goodwin - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Where is the reasonable? Objectivity and bias of practical argument.Lewinski Marcin - unknown
    The paper offers a theoretical investigation regarding the sources of normativity in practical argument from the following perspective: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on “good” argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I will address this problem by analysing a detailed structure of practical argument and its varieties. I will argue that given the structure proposed, biased advocacy upholds reasonableness whenever the argumentative activity is adequately designed.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation