Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness : empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules
Author(s)
Bibliographic Information
Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness : empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules
(Argumentation library / series editors, Frans H. van Eemeren ... [et al.], v. 16)
Springer, c2009
- : softcover
Available at 3 libraries
  Aomori
  Iwate
  Miyagi
  Akita
  Yamagata
  Fukushima
  Ibaraki
  Tochigi
  Gunma
  Saitama
  Chiba
  Tokyo
  Kanagawa
  Niigata
  Toyama
  Ishikawa
  Fukui
  Yamanashi
  Nagano
  Gifu
  Shizuoka
  Aichi
  Mie
  Shiga
  Kyoto
  Osaka
  Hyogo
  Nara
  Wakayama
  Tottori
  Shimane
  Okayama
  Hiroshima
  Yamaguchi
  Tokushima
  Kagawa
  Ehime
  Kochi
  Fukuoka
  Saga
  Nagasaki
  Kumamoto
  Oita
  Miyazaki
  Kagoshima
  Okinawa
  Korea
  China
  Thailand
  United Kingdom
  Germany
  Switzerland
  France
  Belgium
  Netherlands
  Sweden
  Norway
  United States of America
Note
Includes bibliographical references (p. 225-228) and index
Description and Table of Contents
Description
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 have not received any special education in argumentation and fallacies with discussion fragments containing both fallacious and non-fallacious argumentative moves. The research covers a wide range of informal fallacies. In this way, the authors create a basis for comparing the theoretical reasonableness conception of pragma-dialectics with the norms for judging argumentative moves prevailing in argumentative practice. Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness provides a unique insight into the relationship between theoretical and practical conceptions of reasonableness, supported by extensive empirical material gained by means of sophisticated experimental research.
Table of Contents
- 1. Theoretical backgrounds and organization of the study. 2. Considerations for the study design. 3. Ad hominem fallacies
- an exemplary study. 4. The confrontation stage
- the freedom rule. 5. The opening stage
- the burden of proof rule I (shifting the burden of proof). 6. The opening stage
- the burden of proof rule II (evading the burden of proof). 7. The argumentation stage
- the argument scheme rule. 8. The concluding stage
- the closure rule. 9. The conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules.
by "Nielsen BookData"