October 16, 2013
In Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013, edited by D. Mohammed & M. Lewiński. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 2013. This essay advances an account of the ordinary speech activity of advocating. The ethical principles developed within advocacy professions such as law […]
Lippmann's thoroughgoing pessimism may lead us to a better understanding of the role of communication in public deliberations between scientists and citizens.
We teachers of argument have nothing to apologize for.
Argument has no determinable function in the sense Walton needs, and even if it did, that function would not ground norms for argumentative practice.
In this paper, I try to reach past our theories and capture a conception of argument held by practitioners.
At first glance, arguing does look angry and futile. But on second view, it's more complicated.
A report on students' attitudes towards debates used primarily to promote learning of a subject.
As seen in the OJ Simpson criminal trial, arguing can be both noncooperative and normatively good.
Given the pragmatic turn recently taken by argumentation studies, we owe renewed attention to Henry Johnstone's views on the primacy of process over product.