By Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen
The essays which are accrued in Controversy and Confrontation supply a more in-depth perception into the connection among controversy and disagreement that deepens our knowing of the functioning of argumentative discourse in coping with changes of opinion. Their authors stem from backgrounds. First, the debate students Dascal, Marras, Euli, Regner, Ferreira, and Lessl talk about old controversies in technology, either from a theoretical and an empirical standpoint; Saim concentrates on a historic controversy; Fritz presents a ancient point of view on controversies by means of examining verbal exchange rules. moment the argumentation students Johnson, van Laar, van Eemeren, Garssen and Meuffels handle theoretical or empirical points of argumentative disagreement; Aakhus and Vasilyeva study argumentative discourse from the viewpoint of dialog research; Jackson analyzes argumentative disagreement in a up to date debate among scientists and politicians. final yet now not least, participants, Kutrovátz and Zemplén, make an try and bridge the examine of old controversy and the research of argumentation.
Read Online or Download Controversy and Confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory (Controversies) PDF
Similar rhetoric books
Smaller, unmarried web page, retail caliber model of a prior upload
Examines the concept that of rhetorical invention from an affirmative, nondialectical perspective.
From the again Cover
The way forward for Invention hyperlinks classical rhetorical practices of invention with the philosophical paintings of Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Derrida and proposes that probably the most the most important implications of postmodern idea have long gone principally unattended. Drawing on such classical rhetorical options as doxa, imitation, kairos, and topos, and fascinating key works through Aristotle, Plato, the Sophists, and others, John Muckelbauer demonstrates how rhetorical invention can provide a nondialectical, "affirmative" experience of switch that invitations us to reconsider the ways that we learn, write, and reply to others.
"This is likely to be the main attention-grabbing and cutting edge (inventive) ebook on rhetorical invention I've encountered given that Deleuze's what's Philosophy? Muckelbauer not just contributes to but in addition essentially alters the dialog in this subject. He manages anything that's nearly nonexistent within the field--to learn (to persist with textual strains, openings, possibilities) instead of just to interpret. so much reports in rhetorical invention, formerly, were mired in a number of humanist presumptions in regards to the thinking/inventing subject--this paintings deals a major problem to that method, no longer via arguing with it yet through acting whatever very diversified. " -- Diane Davis, writer of breaking apart [at] Totality: A Rhetoric of Laughter
"This ebook incorporates a wealth of creative ways to special concerns in either postmodern thought and the sector of rhetorical stories. Muckelbauer argues for and gives an unique type of engagement with those concerns that transforms scholarly discourse on invention. " -- Bradford Vivian, writer of Being Made unusual: Rhetoric past Representation
About the Author
John Muckelbauer is Assistant Professor of English on the collage of South Carolina.
This e-book represents the main finished account to this point of overseas language writing. Its easy target is to mirror severely on the place the sphere is now and the place it must cross subsequent within the exploration of international language writing on the degrees of concept, study, and pedagogy.
Many facets is the 1st full-length examine of Protagorean antilogic, an argumentative perform with deep roots in rhetorical heritage and renewed relevance for modern tradition. based at the philosophical relativism of Protagoras, antilogic is a dynamic instead of a proper method of argument, targeted mostly at the dialogical interplay of opposing positions (anti-logoi) in controversy.
In Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse, Frans H. van Eemeren brings jointly the dialectical and the rhetorical dimensions of argumentation via introducing the concept that of strategic maneuvering. Strategic maneuvering refers back to the arguer’s continuous efforts to reconcile aiming for effectiveness with being moderate.
- Doing Rhetorical History: Concepts and Cases (Studies Rhetoric & Communicati)
- The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction (2nd Edition)
- Cicero's Topica (Oxford Classical Monographs)
- Empowering Young Writers: The "Writers Matter" Approach
- Let Us Talk of Many Things : The Collected Speeches with New Commentary by the Author
Extra resources for Controversy and Confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory (Controversies)
1957). Methods and Criteria of Reasoning: An Inquiry into the Structure of Controversy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Dascal, M. (1998). Types of polemics and types of polemical moves. Cmejrkova et al. 1. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1533. Controversy and confrontation in argumentative discourse Dascal, M. (2001). How rational can a polemic across the analytic-continental ‘divide’ be? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9(3), 313–339. Dascal, M. (2007). Traditions of controversy and conflict resolution.
Topic management). By looking at their context of application and justification, one obtains a more detailed picture of the way in which they are embedded in a historical form of life. Empirical research shows that communication principles are often fine-grained, context-specific, and controversial. 8 Van Eemeren cum suis generally conclude from their experimental research that ordinary arguers too consider the vast majority of the discussion moves to be unreasonable that are judged fallacious by pragma-dialectical standards.
Reasonableness in confrontation: Empirical evidence concerning the assessment of ad hominem fallacies. Ch. 11. H. van, Garssen, B. & Meuffels, B. (in press) Judgments on Fallacies. Systematic Empirical Research of the Conventional Validity of the Pragma-dialectical Discussion Rules. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach.