Argumentation最新文献_第2页

Latest Developments in Asian Argumentation Studies 亚洲议论文研究的最新进展

IF 1.3 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-05-19 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-025-09660-5

Peng Wu

引用次数: 0

One Concept of Argument 论证的一个概念

IF 1.3 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-05-14 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-025-09654-3

Marcin Lewiński

{"title":"One Concept of Argument","authors":"Marcin Lewiński","doi":"10.1007/s10503-025-09654-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10503-025-09654-3","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Part of the business of argumentation theory involves resolving a conceptual dispute over what argumentation and argument are in the first place. This dispute has produced various “concepts of argument.” The goal of this paper is twofold: (1) to develop a complete ontology of argumentative phenomena, capable of accounting for various conceptions of argument—something, as I argue, that is badly wanting in argumentation theory; and, within this ontology, (2) to defend a position that there is but one concept of argument needed to grasp these diverse phenomena and conceptions of argument and argumentation. I move in four steps. First, I briefly sketch the discussion over arguments-as-activities and arguments-as-products. Second, I go back to the classic work of Twardowski on actions and products and adapt it for argumentation theory, producing a complex yet systematically organized conceptual ontology of argument and argumentation. This conceptual housekeeping allows me, third, to critically engage some of the recent, Frege-inspired philosophical literature on the concept of argument, while defending act-based approaches to argument(ation). Fourth, I present a positive proposal of a minimal, contrastivist concept of argument as <i>a set of reasons advanced to support a conclusion C</i><sub><i>1</i></sub><i> rather than another conclusion C</i><sub><i>n</i></sub>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 3","pages":"393 - 418"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10503-025-09654-3.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145073770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Exploring Visual Argument from Latent Authority in Short Video Advertising 从短视频广告的潜在权威看视觉论证

IF 1.3 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-025-09653-4

Chuanrui Zhang, Zelin Fan, Cihua Xu

{"title":"Exploring Visual Argument from Latent Authority in Short Video Advertising","authors":"Chuanrui Zhang, Zelin Fan, Cihua Xu","doi":"10.1007/s10503-025-09653-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10503-025-09653-4","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Visual argumentation has attracted the attention of argumentation theorists for several decades, with research focus evolving from the legitimacy of the use of visuals in argumentation to exploring how images can function as integral parts of argumentation. Scholars (e.g., Kjeldsen 2015b, 2016) have noted that images perform dual functions in argumentation: as symbols contributing <i>noesis</i> and as phenomena invoking <i>aesthesis</i>. Building on this foundation, the present study focuses on latent images that are overlooked in current argumentation studies. It is argued that latent images are conveyed in an “expressed implicit” manner. These images not only serve as visual flags to capture the audience’s attention and harness the advantages of visual representation to deliver direct sensory stimulation, but also reshape the original structure of visual argumentation and argument schemes. Short video advertisements for financial management courses are discussed as a case study to demonstrate how one specific type of argument by latent images—visual argument from latent authority—achieves an interplay of <i>noesis</i> and <i>aesthesis</i>, thereby transforming the original argumentative structure, establishing various forms of authority, and maneuvering strategically to deliver a direct emotional impact to the audience and shift the burden of proof.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 2","pages":"213 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145169480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Refined Concept of A Fortiori Arguments for Argumentation Theory 论证理论中强化论证的精炼概念

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-03-13 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-024-09647-8

Igor Martinjak, Jakub Pruś

引用次数: 0

Legal Normativism, Argumentation and Logic 法律规范主义、论证与逻辑

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-024-09649-6

Andrew Schumann, Elena Lisanyuk

{"title":"Legal Normativism, Argumentation and Logic","authors":"Andrew Schumann, Elena Lisanyuk","doi":"10.1007/s10503-024-09649-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10503-024-09649-6","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The paper substantiates the prospects of normativism in law, namely the possibility of using purely logical means to make a judgment as a logical conclusion. The main criticism of normativism is based on the possibility of conflicts of judicial decisions and especially on conflicts of the norms themselves, when a court under similar circumstances can make opposing decisions which are formally valid. Critics of normativism argue that logic is helpless in resolving the conflicts and that higher justice must be guided by the discretion of judges who share common values or a common ideology, especially in the case of totalitarian societies. However, we show that there are two types of logical argumentation in the elimination of these conflicts: (a) Aristotelian, when a more general basis is sought, from which only one of the contradictions follows; (b) non-Aristotelian, when a compromise is reached between two contrary statements. In the second case, this technique is used mainly for civil cases. Moreover, this technique is quite formal and does not require an appeal to paraconsistent or other non-classical logics for eliminating the conflict. Using two recent court cases, we demonstrate how the proposed two types of logical argumentation work.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 1","pages":"45 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143716847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Changes in the Editorship of the Journal Argumentation 《论辩》编辑的变化

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-02-14 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-025-09652-5

Frans van Eemeren

引用次数: 0

Strategic Manoeuvring in the Depp-Heard Defamation Trial 2022: Dual Dialectical Goals and a Topical Shift 德普-赫德诽谤案2022的战略操纵：双重辩证目标和话题转移

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-025-09651-6

Hédi Virág Csordás, István Danka

{"title":"Strategic Manoeuvring in the Depp-Heard Defamation Trial 2022: Dual Dialectical Goals and a Topical Shift","authors":"Hédi Virág Csordás, István Danka","doi":"10.1007/s10503-025-09651-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10503-025-09651-6","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In pragma-dialectics, a study of legal reasoning analyses judicial judgements’ dialectical and rhetorical aspects. Most analytical studies of legal reasoning focus on the role of judges and their decision-making mechanisms. In our study, we focus on the strategic manoeuvring of the opposing parties. Depending on the context, parties may have to justify their decision to litigants, a professional audience, and the public in rhetorically and dialectically different ways. What makes strategic manoeuvring special in judicial trials is that rhetorical aims (winning the debate) and dialectical aims (convincing the jury), in contrast with debates where parties dialectically aim at resolving a dispute by reaching consensus, are not in conflict. We analyse the Depp ctr. Heard trial 2022, focusing on the parties’ dialectical potential in cases when rhetorical aspects play an important role in addition to objective evidence required by the legal framework. Depp’s party started the trial with a strategic movement we shall call as a ‘topical shift’, doubling their starting position, aiming at dual dialectical goals, and hence also beginning a new debate parallel with the apparently only one by introducing a not directly relevant factor into the debate. Although other factors also played a role in Depp’s victory, setting up his position in the confrontation stage this way was decisive for the trial’s outcome: Heard’s party, following a traditional route, joined actively in one of the dual debates only, effectively giving up the extra debate started by Depp. This way, analysing the trial offers wider consequences to how to understand strategic manoeuvring in judicial trials, and in general as well.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 1","pages":"21 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10503-025-09651-6.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143716690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Charity Principles in Philosophical Argumentation 哲学论证中的慈善原则

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2025-01-23 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-024-09648-7

R. A. J. Shields

引用次数: 0

Why Argumentation Theory? Realizing the Practical Objectives of Argumentation Theory as the Study of Effectiveness Through Reasonableness 为什么是论证理论？通过合理性研究有效性，实现论证理论的实践目标

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2024-12-27 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-024-09650-z

Frans H. van Eemeren

{"title":"Why Argumentation Theory? Realizing the Practical Objectives of Argumentation Theory as the Study of Effectiveness Through Reasonableness","authors":"Frans H. van Eemeren","doi":"10.1007/s10503-024-09650-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10503-024-09650-z","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The central question of this contribution is: Why argumentation theory? Its points of departure are: (1) argumentative discourse is aimed at resolving a difference of opinion based on the merits of the argumentative moves that are made (“effectiveness through reasonableness”); (2) argumentation theory concentrates on the problems involved in the production, analysis and evaluation of argumentative discourse. The comprehensive research program that needs to be carried out to tackle these problems includes philosophical, theoretical, empirical, analytical, and practical research. It is illuminating to see to what extent these five components are given their due in the versions of the research program of the currently most prominent approaches: (1) the formal logical, (2) rhetorical/pragmalinguistic, (3) informal logical, and (4) pragmadialectical paradigm. Based on the research results, the discipline should serve several practical objectives: (1) providing a profound understanding of the concept of argumentation and a sound body of knowledge about the ways in which argumentation manifests itself; (2) assisting people in getting a better grip on the argumentative discourses they encounter in public life; (3) supplying tools for improving the quality of argumentative practices. The different versions of the research program implemented in the four approaches are not equally strongly designed to serve these practical objectives. Three basic problems complicate the treatment of argumentative discourse: (1) the natural communication predicament; (2) the varying institutional constraints on argumentative discourse in different macro-contexts; (3) the higher order conditions for resolving a difference that are prerequisites for reasonable argumentative discourse.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 1","pages":"3 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143716650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Against the Neutral View of Poisoning the Well 反对毒害水井的中立观点

IF 1 2区文学

Argumentation Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI: 10.1007/s10503-024-09646-9

Manuel Almagro Holgado, Amalia Haro Marchal

引用次数: 0