发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Argumentation and Advocacy最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
Charity for moral reasons? – A defense of the principle of charity in argumentation 出于道德原因的慈善?-在辩论中为仁爱原则辩护
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-03-10 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1897327
Katharina Stevens
{"title":"Charity for moral reasons? – A defense of the principle of charity in argumentation","authors":"Katharina Stevens","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1897327","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1897327","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper I argue for a pro tanto moral duty to be charitable in argument. Further, I argue that the amount of charitable effort required varies depending on the type of dialogue arguers are engaged in. In non-institutionalized contexts, arguers have influence over the type of dialogue that will be adopted. Arguers are therefore responsible with respect to charity on two levels: First, they need to take reasons for charity into account when determining the dialogue-type. Second, they need to invest the amount of effort towards charity required by the dialogue-type.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"16 1","pages":"67 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74724752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
First Amendment audits: comparing the arguments for the right to record on the street to arguments in case law 第一修正案审计:比较在街上记录权利的争论和判例法的争论
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-03-08 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1897276
David R. Dewberry
{"title":"First Amendment audits: comparing the arguments for the right to record on the street to arguments in case law","authors":"David R. Dewberry","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1897276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1897276","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study compares arguments made on the streets during First Amendment audits (FAAs)—YouTubers who purposefully record the police—to the arguments made in the courts over the right to record. After examining FAAs on YouTube (N = 120), the results reveal that the arguments made on the streets reflect and differ from the arguments in case law. As such, FAAs offer insights and variations upon themes of arguments made in case law about the right to record. The results also show the police’s and public officials’ response to recording in public reflect the inconsistent holdings about the right to record in circuit court opinions. From these findings, I make a number of observations, which suggest that First Amendment auditors are well-versed in the law and can offer contributions to the legal debate over the right to record. I then address the expressive nature of recording by highlighting the auditor’s corporeal body in the situation over the mediated dialogue seen on YouTube. I conclude with the study’s implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"3 1","pages":"85 - 102"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81407580","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Awful archives: conspiracy theory, rhetoric, and acts of evidence 可怕的档案:阴谋论、修辞和证据行为
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-02-09 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1878323
Joseph Packer
{"title":"Awful archives: conspiracy theory, rhetoric, and acts of evidence","authors":"Joseph Packer","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1878323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1878323","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"95 1","pages":"146 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73807152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
The limitations of the open mind, by jeremy fantl, oxford university press, 2018, pp. 229, $60.00 (hardcover), ISBN 978-0-19-880795-7 《开放思想的局限》，杰里米·芬特著，牛津大学出版社，2018年，第229页，60.00美元(精装)，ISBN 978-0-19-880795-7
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-01-20 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1873480
Kory Riemensperger
{"title":"The limitations of the open mind, by jeremy fantl, oxford university press, 2018, pp. 229, $60.00 (hardcover), ISBN 978-0-19-880795-7","authors":"Kory Riemensperger","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1873480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1873480","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"103 1","pages":"143 - 145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79927168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Rivaling the rhetoric of accountability: dissociation as an advocacy strategy in U.S. higher education policy 与问责制的修辞相抗衡:作为美国高等教育政策倡导策略的分离
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1894392
Carolyn D. Commer
{"title":"Rivaling the rhetoric of accountability: dissociation as an advocacy strategy in U.S. higher education policy","authors":"Carolyn D. Commer","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1894392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1894392","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Previous rhetorical scholarship has examined how the rhetoric of accountability has replaced the rhetoric of opportunity for education policy resulting in damaging consequences for public education. Likewise, higher education scholarship has traced the adverse effects of accountability rhetoric to the rise of new assessment metrics and an obsession with quantification in rankings systems that perpetuate inequity in higher education. This article responds to that work by examining a 2006 case when higher education advocates attempted to rival the accountability reforms proposed by the U.S. Department of Education’s Spellings Commission. Offering a rhetorical analysis of more than one hundred responses to the commission, I found that higher education leaders utilized dissociation to offer an “alternative reality” and an alternate set of criteria for evaluating the quality of higher education. The analysis identifies five “dissociative topoi” used to argue that standardized accountability metrics were incompatible with U.S. higher education values. I conclude by suggesting that a dissociation of market accountability from public accountability in education can be a generative heuristic for inventing a rival alternative to current accountability rhetoric.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"34 1","pages":"18 - 36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78947278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Examining the normative and persuasive effects of televised U.S. Senate debates 研究电视转播的美国参议院辩论的规范性和说服力效果
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1894393
Josh C. Bramlett
{"title":"Examining the normative and persuasive effects of televised U.S. Senate debates","authors":"Josh C. Bramlett","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1894393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1894393","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Televised political debates are largely studied at the presidential level, and there is a paucity of research on debate effects for nonpresidential campaigns. This study explored televised debate effects in the context of the 2018 U.S. midterm Senate elections. A pretest/posttest design tested the normative and persuasive outcomes of debate viewing. Viewing one of the two Senate debates promoted information acquisition, influenced attitudes such as political information efficacy, candidate evaluations, intention to vote for a candidate, and intention to vote in the midterm elections, and had marginal influences on political cynicism and political interest. Presidential debates are not the only debates that matter: nonpresidential televised debates can also persuade voters and foster positive democratic outcomes.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"44 1","pages":"37 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77803889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Crafting rhetorical precedent: the paradox of the LGBT asylum seeker in the Matter of Toboso-Alfonso 创造修辞先例:托博索-阿方索事件中LGBT寻求庇护者的悖论
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2021.1894395
Emily S. Kofoed
{"title":"Crafting rhetorical precedent: the paradox of the LGBT asylum seeker in the Matter of Toboso-Alfonso","authors":"Emily S. Kofoed","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2021.1894395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1894395","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The 1990 Board of Immigration Appeals case, the Matter of Toboso-Alfonso, was the first to establish lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people as eligible for asylum in the United States upon proof of their “homosexual” identity and of their “well-founded fear of persecution” in another nation. The Toboso-Alfonso case united issues of immigration and sexual orientation, complicating notions of private and public and questioning the necessity of exclusionary immigration policies. I argue that in making Toboso-Alfonso precedent for similar cases, the U.S. ultimately removed a barrier to entry for LGBT migrants but set in place norms that continue to regulate LGBT identity. My findings assert that administrative legal arguments hold the ability to set in place a rhetorical precedent that shapes future performances associated with that precedent—performances of citizenship in particular—by shaping the collective understanding of citizenship (and citizens) in the social imaginary.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"2 1","pages":"1 - 17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78508441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Painting publics: Transnational legal graffiti scenes as spaces for encounter, by Caitlin Frances Bruce 绘画公众:作为相遇空间的跨国法律涂鸦场景，凯特琳·弗朗西斯·布鲁斯
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2020-12-22 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2020.1858241
Victoria J. Gallagher, Max M. Renner
{"title":"Painting publics: Transnational legal graffiti scenes as spaces for encounter, by Caitlin Frances Bruce","authors":"Victoria J. Gallagher, Max M. Renner","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2020.1858241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2020.1858241","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"60 1","pages":"140 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90589656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The struggle over black lives matter and all lives matter by amanda nell edgar nd andre E. Johnson, london, lexington books, 2018, pp. 137, $39.99 (paperback) ISBN: 978-1-4985-7207-1 作者:阿曼达·内尔·埃德加和安德烈·e·约翰逊，伦敦，列克星敦书局，2018年，第137页，39.99美元(平装)ISBN: 978-1-4985-7207-1
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2020-11-10 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2020.1845497
J. A. McVey
{"title":"The struggle over black lives matter and all lives matter by amanda nell edgar nd andre E. Johnson, london, lexington books, 2018, pp. 137, $39.99 (paperback) ISBN: 978-1-4985-7207-1","authors":"J. A. McVey","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2020.1845497","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2020.1845497","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"12 1","pages":"57 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79525495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Homeless advocacy and the rhetorical construction of the civic home 无家可归者的倡导和公民家园的修辞建设
Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2020-11-07 DOI: 10.1080/10511431.2020.1845927
Michael K. Middleton
{"title":"Homeless advocacy and the rhetorical construction of the civic home","authors":"Michael K. Middleton","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2020.1845927","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2020.1845927","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"45 1","pages":"60 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74012230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整，为了账户安全，请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们：info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务，方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号：481959085
Book学术官方微信