Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Argumentative Indicators in DiscourseThe Ideal Model of a Critical Discussion as a Theoretical Framework

Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: The Ideal Model of a Critical Discussion as a Theoretical... [In order to clarify the meaning of the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentative discourse, an ideal model of a critical discussion has been formulated that is aimed at resolving a difference of opinion on the merits (van Eemeren & Grootendorst 1984, 2004). This model specifies the dialectical stages that have to be distinguished in resolving a difference of opinion, as well as the verbal moves that serve a constructive purpose in the different stages of the resolution process. The point of departure is that a difference of opinion is resolved only when the parties involved agree whether the controversial standpoint is acceptable or not. This means either that one party must be convinced through the other party’s argumentation that his standpoint is acceptable, or that the other party has to retract his standpoint, because he recognises that his argumentation is unable to withstand the criticism passed on it. Resolving a difference of opinion is not the same thing as settling a dispute. A dispute is settled when the difference of opinion has been ended one way or the other, for example, by means of a vote or because an outsider intervened. However, this does not have to mean that the difference of opinion has actually been resolved. The latter is only the case if a regulated exchange of arguments and criticism occurs and eventually leads to a common agreement about the acceptability or unacceptability of the standpoints under discussion] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Argumentative Indicators in DiscourseThe Ideal Model of a Critical Discussion as a Theoretical Framework

Part of the Argumentation Library Book Series (volume 12)
Editors: van Eemeren, Frans H.; Houtlosser, Peter; Henkemans, A. Francisca Snoeck
Argumentative Indicators in Discourse — Jan 1, 2007
Download PDF
10 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/argumentative-indicators-in-discourse-the-ideal-model-of-a-critical-yXZAUWTPZS

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007
ISBN
978-1-4020-6243-8
Pages
9 –19
DOI
10.1007/978-1-4020-6244-5_2
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[In order to clarify the meaning of the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentative discourse, an ideal model of a critical discussion has been formulated that is aimed at resolving a difference of opinion on the merits (van Eemeren & Grootendorst 1984, 2004). This model specifies the dialectical stages that have to be distinguished in resolving a difference of opinion, as well as the verbal moves that serve a constructive purpose in the different stages of the resolution process. The point of departure is that a difference of opinion is resolved only when the parties involved agree whether the controversial standpoint is acceptable or not. This means either that one party must be convinced through the other party’s argumentation that his standpoint is acceptable, or that the other party has to retract his standpoint, because he recognises that his argumentation is unable to withstand the criticism passed on it. Resolving a difference of opinion is not the same thing as settling a dispute. A dispute is settled when the difference of opinion has been ended one way or the other, for example, by means of a vote or because an outsider intervened. However, this does not have to mean that the difference of opinion has actually been resolved. The latter is only the case if a regulated exchange of arguments and criticism occurs and eventually leads to a common agreement about the acceptability or unacceptability of the standpoints under discussion]

Published: Jan 1, 2007

Keywords: Critical Discussion; Resolution Process; Argumentative Discourse; Strategic Manoeuvring; Verbal Move

There are no references for this article.