Pivotal Issues and Norms in Rhetorical Theories of Argumentation

Kauffeld, Fred J.

doi:10.1007/978-94-015-9948-1_8

Cited by 29 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our program encourages argumentation theorists to consider how a speaker can so design his discourse to create the conditions for its optimal reception, even under conditions of deep disagreement. Normative pragmatic studies have examined practical strategies for managing the local normative terrain by undertaking and imposing obligations regulating the ongoing interaction (Kauffeld 1998(Kauffeld , 2002Innocenti forthcoming); appropriate and inappropriate tactics for responding to bad behavior by other arguers (Jackson 2008); the design of deliberative fora for managing disagreements (Jackson 1998); and in general, how the force of the better argument is an achievement of the participants (Goodwin 2007). As the label ''normative pragmatics'' indicates, we are interested in accounting for how the discourse of deliberation can be both effective and good.…”

Section: A Normative Pragmatic Account Of the Appeal To Expert Authoritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for the Appeal to the Authority of Experts

Goodwin

2011

Argumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Work in Argumentation Studies (AS) and Studies in Expertise andExperience (SEE) has been proceeding on converging trajectories, moving from resistance to expert authority to a cautious acceptance of its legitimacy. The two projects are therefore also converging on the need to account for how, in the course of complex and confused civic deliberations, nonexpert citizens can figure out which statements from purported experts deserve their trust. Both projects recognize that nonexperts cannot assess expertise directly; instead, the nonexpert must judge whether to trust the expert. But how is this social judgment accomplished? A normative pragmatic approach from AS can complement and extend the work from SEE on this question, showing that the expert's putting forward of his view and ''bonding'' it with his reputation for expertise works to force or ''blackmail'' his audience of citizens into heeding what he says. Appeals to authority thus produce the visibility and accountability we want for expert views in civic deliberations.My goal in this essay is to trace a convergence between scholarship in Argumentation Studies (AS) and in Studies in Expertise and Experience (SEE), and then to explore one way the two projects can complement and extend each other. I start by following the trajectories AS and SEE have taken from resistance to expert authority to a cautious acceptance of its legitimacy. Both AS and SEE thus find themselves confronting an important problem: to account for how, in the course

show abstract

Section: A Normative Pragmatic Account Of the Appeal To Expert Authoritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for the Appeal to the Authority of Experts

Goodwin

2011

Argumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In actual argumentative practice these aspects usually work together (cf. Kauffeld, 2002;Tindale, 2004).…”

Section: Aspects Of Strategic Maneuveringmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Pragmatic Study of Strategic Maneuvering in Selected Political Interviews

Al-Duleimi¹,

Hammoodi²

2015

OJML

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study deals with strategic maneuvering in selected political interviews from the pragmatic point of view represented by two interviews with: Cheney and Obama. The study attempts to investigate strategic maneuvering strategies and stages. To achieve such aims, a model is developed for the analysis of strategic maneuvering in the selected political interviews. The findings of the analysis verify the hypotheses represented by the process of strategic maneuvering stages and strategies in the two selected political interviews. Precisely, this study attempts to shed light on the most problematic areas in political maneuvering. These fuzzy areas must be delineated and made clear because they impinge upon understanding how political speeches appeal themselves to the readers and how in turn these readers could find out the impetus behind these maneuvering.

show abstract

“…To earn her addressee's attention, the speaker undertakes an obligation to answer all doubts and objections to the proposal; in other words, she undertakes a substantial burden of proof. Her addressee can then reason that the speaker would not do this unless she was confident that her proposal could withstand critical scrutiny, and thus further that his attention is unlikely to be wasted (Kauffeld, 1998(Kauffeld, , 1999(Kauffeld, , 2002. On the opposite extreme, in order to allow a free flow of potentially important social information, in gossiping a speaker expressly waives a commitment to veracity and even sincerity (Kauffeld & Fields, 2003); gossipers thus undertake no obligation to make good arguments.…”

Section: Speech Acts In Argumentation Theory: An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptions of Speech Acts in the Theory and Practice of Argumentation: A Case Study of a Debate About Advocating

Goodwin¹

2014

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Far from being of interest only to argumentation theorists, conceptions of speech acts play an important role in practitioners’ self-reflection on their own activities. After a brief review of work by Houtlosser, Jackson and Kauffeld on the ways that speech acts provide normative frameworks for argumentative interactions, this essay examines an ongoing debate among scientists in natural resource fields as to the appropriateness of the speech act of advocating in policy settings. Scientists’ reflections on advocacy align well with current scholarship, and the scholarship in turn can provide a deeper understanding of how to manage the communication challenges scientists face.

show abstract

Pivotal Issues and Norms in Rhetorical Theories of Argumentation

Cited by 29 publications

References 9 publications

Accounting for the Appeal to the Authority of Experts

Accounting for the Appeal to the Authority of Experts

A Pragmatic Study of Strategic Maneuvering in Selected Political Interviews

Conceptions of Speech Acts in the Theory and Practice of Argumentation: A Case Study of a Debate About Advocating

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About