Selective Dispute Avoidance, Deep Disagreements, and Pragmatic Meta-Arguments for Engagement

IF 1.3 2区文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-09-11 DOI:10.1007/s10503-025-09672-1

Scott Aikin

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The phenomenon of selective dispute avoidance is that there are issues we debate and issues we recoil from debating, despite the fact that they are very similar in values at stake. What accounts for this variance? That some disagreements are deep and engagements on some deep issues yields meta-argumentatively bad results is a plausible explanation. However, practical second-order rebutting reasons to these considerations are proposed, essentially that not engaging has foreseeably worse consequences than engaging. What favors engagement, then, is that only when engaged can one address the negative second-order reasons one yields on either approach. What follows is a pragmatic meta-argument for engagement, even in cases of deep disagreement.

查看原文本刊更多论文

选择性争议回避、深度分歧和参与的实用主义元论证

选择性争议回避的现象是，有些问题我们辩论，有些问题我们回避辩论，尽管它们在价值观上非常相似。是什么导致了这种差异？一些分歧是深刻的，在一些深刻问题上的参与产生了元论证性的坏结果，这是一个合理的解释。然而，对这些考虑提出了实际的二阶反驳理由，即不参与比参与的后果更糟糕。那么，有利于参与的是，只有在参与的情况下，一个人才能解决两种方法产生的负面二阶原因。接下来是一个实用主义的元论证，即使在存在严重分歧的情况下也是如此。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Argumentation Multiple-

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Argumentation is an international and interdisciplinary journal. Its aim is to gather academic contributions from a wide range of scholarly backgrounds and approaches to reasoning, natural inference and persuasion: communication, rhetoric (classical and modern), linguistics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, psychology, philosophy, logic (formal and informal), critical thinking, history and law. Its scope includes a diversity of interests, varying from philosophical, theoretical and analytical to empirical and practical topics. Argumentation publishes papers, book reviews, a yearly bibliography, and announcements of conferences and seminars.To be considered for publication in the journal, a paper must satisfy all of these criteria:1. Report research that is within the journals’ scope: concentrating on argumentation 2. Pose a clear and relevant research question 3. Make a contribution to the literature that connects with the state of the art in the field of argumentation theory 4. Be sound in methodology and analysis 5. Provide appropriate evidence and argumentation for the conclusions 6. Be presented in a clear and intelligible fashion in standard English