A means-end classification of argumentation schemes

In Frans van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.), Reflections on theoretical issues in argumentation theory. Cham, Switzerland: pp. 183-201 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of the crucial problems of argumentation schemes as illustrated in (Walton, Reed & Macagno 2008) is their practical use for the purpose of analyzing texts and producing arguments. The high number and the lack of a classification criterion make this instrument extremely difficult to apply practically. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure of argumentation schemes and outline a possible criterion of classification based on alternative and mutually-exclusive possibilities. Such a criterion is based not on what an argument is, but how it can be understood and interpreted. The schemes are grouped according to an end-means principle, which is strictly bound to the ontological structure of the conclusion and the premises. On this view, a scheme can be selected according to the intended or reconstructed purpose of an argument and the possible strategies that can be used to achieve it.

Author's Profile

Fabrizio Macagno
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-01-16

Downloads
288 (#50,965)

6 months
164 (#15,054)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?