Browsing All posts tagged under »conceptual work«

Re-framing climate controversy: The strategies of The Hartwell Paper

October 8, 2018


Goodwin, Jean. (Forthcoming, 2019) Re-framing climate controversy: The strategies of The Hartwell Paper. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. In the public sphere, standpoints often seem to be locked into pro/con constellations. This essay documents the strategies of “pointing out,” narrative and metaphor used in The Hartwell Paper […]

Audiences as normative roles

September 11, 2015


Goodwin, J. (2016). Audiences as Normative Roles. In D. Mohammed & M. Lewinski (Eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action (Vol. 1, pp. 589–592). London: College Publications. Palmieri and Mazzali-Lurati have it right: audiences in argumentative transactions should be defined by the normatively-grounded roles they take. Get this paper.

Conceptions of speech acts in the theory and practice of argumentation

April 20, 2014


Goodwin, Jean. (2014).  Conceptions of speech acts in the theory and practice of argumentation: A case study of a debate about advocating.  Studies in Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric, 36 (49), 79-98. Far from being of interest only to argumentation theorists, concep- tions of speech acts play an important role in practitioners’ self-reflection on their own activities. […]

Communication strategies for earning trust in climate change debates

December 3, 2013


Climate scientists need the trust of lay audiences if they are to share their knowledge. But significant audience segments—those doubtful or dismissive of climate change—distrust climate scientists.

Norms of advocacy

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 […]

L’autorità di Wikipedia

July 4, 2013


Sistemi Intelligenti 25 (2013) 9-38; very kindly translated by Fabio Paglieri from the original. Philosophers of argumentation and of testimony suggest that we can rely on what someone says because of its epistemic merits. If so, then we should never credit Wikipedia, since we cannot assess what its anonymous contributors know. I propose instead that […]

What is ‘responsible advocacy’ in science? Good advice.

July 14, 2012


"Responsible" advocacy is still advocacy. To be good, it should be zealous. But zeal undermines scientific authority. So advising, not advocating, should be the speech act of choice.

Good reasons for trusting climate science communication

July 14, 2012


Scientists can earn trust--but only by making themselves vulnerable.

Accounting for the appeal to the authority of experts

July 14, 2012


Experts have methods for earning the trust of lay audiences--but using their authority is costly. I explain how.

Trust in experts as a principal-agent problem

July 14, 2012


Principal-agent theory can help us understand some of the reasons we may have for distrusting experts--and how that distrust can be addressed.