Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Aesthetics (1)
- Argument scheme (1)
- Art (1)
- Axiomatic approach (1)
- Bijection (1)
-
- Case based reasoning (CBR) (1)
- Case law (1)
- Casuistry (1)
- Cognition (1)
- Common law (1)
- Engineering (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Example (1)
- Exemplar (1)
- Frame (1)
- Homology (1)
- Homomorphism (1)
- Homoplasty (1)
- Isomorphism (1)
- Lance (1)
- Language (1)
- Law (1)
- Newspapers (1)
- Student newspapers (1)
- University of Windsor (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 196
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Winning And Losing For Arguers, Erik C W Krabbe
Winning And Losing For Arguers, Erik C W Krabbe
OSSA Conference Archive
What roles do “winning” and “losing” have to play in argumentative discussions? We say that someone has “won” a discussion or debate, but also an emphasis on “winning” is often rejected. The question is: can these concepts be so interpreted that justice is done to these antagonistic views? Starting from Aristotelian ideas, the paper purports to establish that the views mentioned above can indeed be reconciled.
Argumentative Bluff In Eristic Discussion: An Analysis And Evaluation, Jan Albert Van Laar
Argumentative Bluff In Eristic Discussion: An Analysis And Evaluation, Jan Albert Van Laar
OSSA Conference Archive
How does the evaluation of argumentation depend on the dialogue type in which the argumentation has been put forward? This paper focuses on argumentative bluff in eristic (or: polemic) discussion. Any arguer conveys the pretence that his argumentation is dialectically reasonable and, at least to some degree, rhetorically effective. Within eristic discussion, it can be profitable to bluff that these claims are correct. However, it will be defended that such bluffing is dialectically inadmissible, even within an eristic discussion.
Commentary On Van Laar, George Boger
Ad Hominem As A Derailment Of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvring, Dima Mohammed
Ad Hominem As A Derailment Of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvring, Dima Mohammed
OSSA Conference Archive
In order for confrontational strategic manoeuvring, aimed at defining in a reasonable way the difference of opinion to one’s own advantage, to be sound, arguers’ attempt to arrive at a particular (favourable) definition must not prevent other (non-favourable) definitions from coming about. This paper discusses the ad hominem fallacy as an obstruction of the procedure of critical testing as a result of failure to meet this particular soundness conditions.
Normative Validity, Cultural Identity, And Ideology Critique, Radu Neculau
Normative Validity, Cultural Identity, And Ideology Critique, Radu Neculau
OSSA Conference Archive
Following a critical reconstruction of the shift from norms of communication (Habermas) to norms of identity formation (Honneth), and thus from conditions of argumentation to conditions of recognition, the paper argues that a non-foundationalist critique of ideology must be based on a theory of motivation and social mobilization.
Commentary On Neculau, Raymie Mckerrow
Commentary On O'Halloran, Beth Innocenti
Commentary On O'Halloran, Beth Innocenti
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On Pilgram, Kara M. Gilbert
Telling Examples. Strategic Manoeuvring In Plenary Debates In The European Parliament, H José Plug
Telling Examples. Strategic Manoeuvring In Plenary Debates In The European Parliament, H José Plug
OSSA Conference Archive
Members of Parliament may make use of argumentation from examples to justify policies and legislation. In this contribution I concentrate on how argumentation from example may be used to manoeuvre strategically in plenary legislative debates in the European parliament. As a framework for the analysis of the strategic use of examples in the institutional setting of the European parliament, I shall make use of van Eemeren and Houtlosser’s (1999, 2002) concept of strategic manoeuvring.
Commentary On Plug, Frank Zenker
Commentary On Ripley, Cristian Santibanez Yanez
Commentary On Ripley, Cristian Santibanez Yanez
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Reframing Emotional Arguments In Ads In The Culture Of Informal Logic, M Louise Ripley
Reframing Emotional Arguments In Ads In The Culture Of Informal Logic, M Louise Ripley
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper examines, in studies utilizing Gilbert’s Multi-Modal Argumentation Model, processing of emotional arguments in ads which, due to Western Society’s bias, has tended toward logical analysis, even though they are emotional arguments. It explores reframing the analysis in the culture of Informal Logic, with particular reference to issues of the alethic status of premises, the ethics of claims, the context of assumptions, and the question of what constitutes truth in the context of emotions
Commentary On Wofford, Philip Rose
Objections, Rebuttals And Refutations, Douglas Walton
Objections, Rebuttals And Refutations, Douglas Walton
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper considers how the terms ‘objection,’ ‘rebuttal,’ ‘attack,’ ‘refutation,’ ‘rebutting defeater’ and ‘undercutting defeater’ (often referred to as rebutters versus undercutters) are used in writings on argumentation and artificial intelligence. The central focus is on the term ‘rebuttal.’ A provisional classification system is proposed that provides a normative structure within which the terms can be clarified, distinguished from each other, and more precisely defined.
Reply To My Commentator - Lewinski, Marcin Lewinski
Reply To My Commentator - Lewinski, Marcin Lewinski
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Sincerity, Santa Claus Arguments And Dissensus In Coalitions, Daniel H. Cohen
Sincerity, Santa Claus Arguments And Dissensus In Coalitions, Daniel H. Cohen
OSSA Conference Archive
It is a virtue of virtue theory approaches to argumentation that they integrate many of the different factors that make arguments good arguments. The insights of virtue argumentation are brought to bear on a variety of versions of the requirement that good arguments must have good premises, concluding that a sincerity condition serves better than truth or assertability conditions, despite apparently counterintuitive consequences for arguments involving heterogeneous coalitions.
Commentary On Godden, Mark Weinstein
Commentary On Hample, Christian Kock
Argumentative Discourse As A Sign, Paul Van Den Hoven
Argumentative Discourse As A Sign, Paul Van Den Hoven
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper discusses the text format of judicial and semi-judicial decisions. That format does not optimize comprehensibility. It should be understood as a sign that symbolizes an ideology. It symbolizes the values of an inevitable decision that follows from the facts and an a priori given coherent and complete legal system. The narrative text format with it stylistic features is also a very welcome instrument to hide the moments that this ideal is impracticable.
Commentary On Shirali, Manfred Kraus
The Invisible Argument: Recognizing Race Through Visceral Reasoning, Kristine Warrenburg
The Invisible Argument: Recognizing Race Through Visceral Reasoning, Kristine Warrenburg
OSSA Conference Archive
This project works to define a visceral mode of reasoning in relation to Gilbert’s (1997) system of argumentation and evaluates whether or not the body is always implicated in discourse. Kennedy’s announcement of King’s assassination will illustrate how a transgression of subjectivity was met by a momentary suspension of racialized terms of the day. The racialized body allows examination into the excess of the argument or that which lies beyond the words.
Legal Reasoning When The Supreme Court Is Corrupt, Sheldon Wein
Legal Reasoning When The Supreme Court Is Corrupt, Sheldon Wein
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper suggests a way of thinking about the legal reasoning done by conscientious judges working in a legal system during periods when those judges believed that their Supreme Court was malfunctioning. Seeing a legal system as a shared cooperative activity allows us to best understand how legal decision-making can remain consistent when it contains elements at the highest level which are believed not to be functioning properly.
Two Contrasting Cultures, Mark Weinstein
Two Contrasting Cultures, Mark Weinstein
OSSA Conference Archive
I have argued that argumentation theorists should concern themselves with scientific argument as a source for images of epistemic virtue in argument. In this paper I will contrast the lessons learned from this endeavour with their counterpart in the evaluation of political arguments. Despite obvious differences, fundamental symmetries between the two argumentation cultures point to the need for a more serious engagement with rigorous disciplinary arguments in argument theory.
Commentary On Woods, Charles V. Blatz
Reply To My Commentator - Champagne, Marc Champagne
Reply To My Commentator - Champagne, Marc Champagne
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On Aberdein, David M. Godden
Rhetoric, Dialectic And Derailment In Church-State Arguments, Todd Battistelli
Rhetoric, Dialectic And Derailment In Church-State Arguments, Todd Battistelli
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper will examine chronically derailed church-state separation arguments in order to explore the extent to which rhetorical and dialectical approaches can be reconciled. I will consider broader conceptions of rhetoric than those employed to date in studies of strategic manoeuvring. While rhetorical appeals, such as claims of persecution, can terminally polarize church-state arguments, they may also serve as means for recovering from dialectical derailment.
Commentary On Bermejo-Luque, Bart Garssen
Commentary On Bermejo-Luque, Bart Garssen
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
The Philosophy Of Argument, J Anthony Blair
The Philosophy Of Argument, J Anthony Blair
OSSA Conference Archive
The paper argues that argument and argumentation deserve philosophical attention but do not receive it, and proposes some explanations. It then asks whether there is a field of philosophy, “philosophy of argument,” that might attract philosophers’ attention. A case is made that such a field exists. However, challenges to that case seriously undermine it. Thus those who want philosophers to pay more attention to argument must find other ways to make their case.
Culture, Judgment, Integration Of Attention And Argumentation, Charles V. Blatz
Culture, Judgment, Integration Of Attention And Argumentation, Charles V. Blatz
OSSA Conference Archive
Some exchanges of reasons are agonistic. Others work mutually, as in planning and adjusting divergent understanding. Mutual argumentation subconsciously yields judgment that integrates and clarifies a common vision coordinating interrelated lives. It harmonizes agents sharing a space of action and understanding. Pierre Bourdieu held that such thought generates and expresses culture, patterning a logic that reflexively constrains itself. This discussion examines Bourdieu’s views as an analysis of mutual argumentation.