Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Erik C.W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij and Jean H.M. Wagemans: Handbook of Argumentation Theory

Scientific Disagreements, Fast Science and Higher-Order Evidence

“…According to pragma-dialectics, argumentation is a process aimed at resolving a difference of opinion on the merits by means of a critical exchange of argumentative moves. These moves take place between the “protagonist” of the standpoint at issue and an “antagonist” who doubts the acceptability of this standpoint or even rejects it (van Eemeren et al 2014). Pragma-dialectics is thus a consensualist approach that sees successful exchange as requiring both the protagonist and the antagonist to agree on when the protagonist has been successful in their argumentation.…”

“…We will therefore have to go beyond the pragma-dialectic theory to specify these norms. They concern common starting points that function as “substantive commitments” (in addition to the “procedural” ones) of the participants in a discussion, specifying what counts as legitimate content of an argument (van Eemeren et al 2014, 529). As such, they are, according to the pragma-dialectic approach, a matter that is settled at the “opening stage” of the discussion.…”