Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Theories of Presumptions and Burdens of Proof.Hans V. Hansen - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Plausible Argument in Everyday Conversation.Douglas N. Walton - 1992 - SUNY Press.
    This book provides a practical and accessible way of evaluating good and bad arguments used in everyday conversations by applying normative models of dialectical (interactive) argumentation, where two parties reason together in an orderly and cooperative way. Using case studies, the author analyzes correct and incorrect uses of argumentation on controversial issues that engage the reader's interest while illustrating points in a practical way. Walton gives clear explanations of the most common errors and tricky deceptions -- traditionally called "fallacies" -- (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  • (1 other version)The Question of Truth.David Botting - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):413-434.
    The problem with the pragma-dialectical view, it has been argued, is that it takes argumentation as aiming at consensus rather than truth or justified belief. The pragma-dialecticians often imply that an argumentative process aiming at consensus in a way constrained by the “Ten Commandments” will in the long run converge on epistemically favourable standpoints. I will argue that they are right provided (i) pragma-dialectics is construed, as they say, as a theory of criticism; (ii) pragma-dialectics and the other theories of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The pragma-dialectician’s dilemma: Reply to Garssen and van Laar.Harvey Siegel & John Biro - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):457-480.
    Garssen and van Laar in effect concede our main criticism of the pragma-dialectical approach. The criticism is that the conclusions of arguments can be ‘P-D reasonable’ yet patently unreasonable, epistemically speaking. The concession consists in the claim that the theory “remains restricted to the investigation of standpoints in the light of particular sets of starting points” which are “up to individual disputants to create” and the admission that all the relevant terms of normative appraisal have been redefined. We also discuss (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • The Arguers.Dale Hample - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (2):163-178.
    I wish to argue in favor of a particular orientation, one expressed in Brockriede’s remark that “aruments are not in statements but in people.” While much has been gained from textual analyses, even more will accrue by additional attention to the arguers. I consider that textual materials are really only the artifacts of arguments. The actual arguing is done exclusively by people, either the argument producers or receivers, and never by words on a page. In fact, most of our textua (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Pragma-Dialectics and the Function of Argumentation.Christoph Lumer - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (1):41-69.
    This contribution discusses some problems of Pragma-Dialectics and explains them by its consensualistic view of the function of argumentation and by its philosophical underpinnings. It is suggested that these problems can be overcome by relying on a better epistemology and on an epistemological theory of argumentation. On the one hand Pragma-Dialectics takes unqualified consensus as the aim of argumentation, which is problematic, (Sect. 2) on the other it includes strong epistemological and rationalistic elements (Sect. 3). The problematic philosophical underpinnings of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Fallacies.Charles Leonard Hamblin - 1970 - Newport News, Va.: Vale Press.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   355 citations  
  • A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 2003 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   172 citations  
  • Strategic Maneuvering with the Burden of Proof.Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   45 citations  
  • (1 other version)The Study of Argumentation as Normative Pragmatics.Peter Houtlosser, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag. pp. 161-177.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Democracy and Argumentation.Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The Skill of Identifying Argumentation.Bert Meuffels, Rob Grootendorst, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Ideal Argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • A pragma-dialectical response to objectivist epistemic challenges.Bart Garssen & Jan Albert van Laar - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (2):122-141.
    The epistemologists Biro and Siegel have raised two objections against the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation. According to the first objection the pragma-dialectical theory is not genuinely normative. According to the second objection the rejection of justificationism by pragma-dialecticians is unwarranted: they reject justificationism prematurely and they are not consistent in accepting some arguments (‘justifications’) as sound. The first objection is based on what we regard as the misconception that the goal of resolving differences of opinion cannot provide a normative approach. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Pragma-dialectics and Beyond.Daniel Bonevac - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):451-459.
    Pragma-dialectics is dynamic, context-sensitive, and multi-agent; it promises theories of fallacy and argumentative structure. But pragma-dialectic theory and practice are not yet fully in harmony. Key definitions of the theory fall short of explicating the analyses that pragma-dialecticians actually do. Many discussions involve more than two participants with different and mutually incompatible standpoints. Success in such a discussion may be more than success against each opponent. Pragma-dialectics does well at analyzing arguments advanced by one party, directed at another party; it (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Begging the question: circular reasoning as a tactic of argumentation.Douglas Neil Walton - 1991 - New York: Greenwood Press.
    This book offers a new theory of begging the question as an informal fallacy, within a pragmatic framework of reasoned dialogue as a normative theory of critical argumentation. The fallacy of begging the question is analyzed as a systematic tactic to evade fulfillment of a legitimate burden of proof by the proponent of an argument. The technique uses a circular structure of argument to block the further progress of dialogue and, in particular, the capability of the respondent to ask legitimate (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   51 citations  
  • Fallacies: Selected Papers 1972-1982.John Hayden Woods & Douglas N. Walton - 1989 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Foris.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  • (1 other version)Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   552 citations  
  • Within Pragma-dialectics: Comments on Bonevac.M. A. van Rees - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):461-464.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Ralph H. Johnson (2000), Manifest Rationality. A Pragmatic Theory of Argument.M. A. Van Rees - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (2):231-237.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren - 2009 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed at the University of Amsterdam, their home university. In these studies they test methodically the intersubjective acceptability of the rules for critical discussion proposed in this theory by confronting ordinary arguers who (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  • (1 other version)A pragma-dialectical default on the question of truth.David Botting - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):413-434.
    The problem with the pragma-dialectical view, it has been argued, is that it takes argumentation as aiming at consensus rather than truth or justified belief. The pragma-dialecticians often imply that an argumentative process aiming at consensus in a way constrained by the “Ten Commandments” will in the long run converge on epistemically favourable standpoints. I will argue that they are right provided pragma-dialectics is construed, as they say, as a theory of criticism; pragma-dialectics and the other theories of argumentation have (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Rhetoric and Dialectic: Some Historical and Legal Perspectives. [REVIEW]Hanns Hohmann - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (3):223-234.
    The thesis is defended that rhetoric is not, as is often said, a discipline which is hierarchically subordinate to dialectic. It is argued that the modalities of the links between rhetoric and dialectic must be seen in a somewhat different light: rhetoric and dialectic should be viewed as two complementary disciplines. On the basis of a historical survey of the views of various authors on the links between rhetoric and dialectic, it is concluded that efforts to establish clear boundaries or (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The Epistemic Inferiority of Pragma-Dialectics – Reply to Botting.Christoph Lumer - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (1):51-82.
    In a recent paper in this journal, David Botting defended pragma-dialectics against epistemological criticisms by exponents of the epistemological approach to argumentation, i.e. Harvey Siegel, John Biro and me. In particular, Botting tries to justify with new arguments a Functional Claim, that the function of argumentation is to resolve disputes, and a Normative Claim, that standpoints that have the unqualified consensus of all participants in a dispute will generally be epistemically sound. In this reply it is shown that Botting’s arguments (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Pragma-Dialectic’s Necessary Conditions for a Critical Discussion.Frank Zenker - unknown
    I present a “reduced” version of the fifteen Pragma-dialectical rules and inquire into their theoretical status as necessary conditions for a critical discussion. Questions: In what respect is PD’s non-sufficiency a deficiency, can and must it be remedied? Brief answers: with respect to defining the concept ‘critical discussion,’ possibly, yes, if, and only if, one seeks to identify the concept ‘critical discussion’; no, if PD is for fallacy-detection.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The Death of Argument: Fallacies in Agent Based Reasoning.John Hayden Woods - 2004 - Dordrecht and London: Springer.
    The present work is a fair record of work I've done on the fallacies and related matters in the fifteen years since 1986. The book may be seen as a sequel to Fallacies: Selected papers 1972-1982, which I wrote with Douglas Walton, and which appeared in 1989 with Foris. This time I am on my own. Douglas Walton has, long since, found his own voice, as the saying has it; and so have I. Both of us greatly value the time (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  • Coalescent argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):837-852.
    Coalescent argumentation is a normative ideal that involves the joining together of two disparate claims through recognition and exploration of opposing positions. By uncovering the crucial connection between a claim and the attitudes, beliefs, feelings, values and needs to which it is connected dispute partners are able to identify points of agreement and disagreement. These points can then be utilized to effect coalescence, a joining or merging of divergent positions, by forming the basis for a mutual investigation of non-conflictual options (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   171 citations  
  • (1 other version)Bermejo-Luque, Lilian. Giving Reasons. A Linguistic-Pragmatic Approach to Argumentation Theory: Springer, Argumentation Library, Dordrecht, 2011, volume 20, 209 pp.C. Andone - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (2):291-296.
    Bermejo-Luque, Lilian. Giving Reasons. A Linguistic-Pragmatic Approach to Argumentation Theory Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-6 DOI 10.1007/s10503-011-9258-z Authors C. Andone, Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, Spuistraat 134, 1012 VB Amsterdam, The Netherlands Journal Argumentation Online ISSN 1572-8374 Print ISSN 0920-427X.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse.Peter Houtlosser & Frans H. van Eemeren - 1999 - Discourse Studies 1 (4):479-497.
    This article reacts against the undesirable ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentative discourse. It argues that a sound evaluation of argumentation requires an analysis that reveals all aspects of the discourse pertinent to critical testing. To explain the rationale of the various moves made in the discourse and the strategic patterns behind them, not only the interlocutors' dialectical goals must be taken into account, but also their rhetorical goals. After explaining how rhetorical insight can be instrumental in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   124 citations  
  • Look, Ma! No Frans!Michael J. Wreen - 1994 - Pragmatics and Cognition 2 (2):285-306.
    This paper criticizes the pragma-dialectical conception of a fallacy, according to which a fallacy is an argumentative speech act which violates one or more of the rules of 'rational discussion'. That conception is found to be neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for committing a fallacy. It is also found wanting in several other respects.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective.Frans H. Van Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1988 - Argumentation 2 (2):271-291.
    Starting from a concept of reasonableness as well-consideredness, it is discussed in what way science could serve as a model for reasonable argumentation. It turns out that in order to be reasonable two requirements have to be fulfilled. The argumentation should comply with rules which are both problem-valid and intersubjectively valid. Geometrical and anthropological perspectives don't meet these criteria, but a critical perspective does. It is explained that a pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation which agrees with this critical perspective is indeed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  • Pragma-Dialetics Epistemologized: Reply to Lumer.David Botting - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (2):269-285.
    I would like to thank Christoph Lumer for his illuminating comments on my paper “The question of truth” published in this journal (Botting 2010) and would like to exercise my right of reply on a few of the issues that he raises.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Perspective.Louise Cummings - 2005 - L. Erlbaum Associates.
    The first truly multidisciplinary text of its kind, this book offers an original analysis of the current state of linguistic pragmatics. Cummings argues that no study of pragmatics can reasonably neglect the historical and contemporary influences on this.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Comments on `Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework.Eugene Garver - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (3):307-314.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument.Ralph H. Johnson - 2000 - Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
    He further argues that it is necessary to rethink traditional conceptions of argument, and to find a position that avoids the limitations of both the highly abstract approach of formal logic and the highly contextualized approaches of rhetoric and communication theory.".
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   337 citations  
  • Strategic Maneuvering: Maintaining a Delicate Balance.Peter Houtlosser, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   70 citations  
  • Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument (ARNO R. LODDER).C. W. Tindale - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):73-78.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   111 citations  
  • Begging the Question: Circular Reasoning as a Tactic of Argumentation.Douglas N. Walton - 1995 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 28 (2):171-175.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  • Hamblin on the Standard Treatment of Fallacies.Douglas N. Walton - 1991 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 24 (4):353 - 361.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • (1 other version)Bermejo-Luque, Lilian. Giving Reasons. A Linguistic-Pragmatic Approach to Argumentation Theory. [REVIEW]C. Andone - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (2):291-296.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • On Pragma-Dialectic's Appropriation of Speech Act Theory.Fred J. Kauffeld - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering pragma-dialectics: a festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 140.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Pragma-dialectics-a radical departure in fallacy theory.John Woods - 1991 - Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 24 (1):43-53.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • A Pragmatic View of the Burden of Proof.Peter Houtlosser, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations