Browsing All posts tagged under »critiques«

The pragmatic force of making reasons apparent

September 15, 2015

0

Goodwin, Jean & Beth Innocenti (Forthcoming, 2016). The pragmatic force of making reasons apparent. In D. Mohammed & M. Lewinski (Eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Argumentation. Making arguments makes reasons apparent. Sometimes those reasons may affect audiences. But over-emphasis on effects distracts from other things that making arguments […]

How to be a better functionalist

September 13, 2015

0

Goodwin, Jean. (Forthcoming, 2016). How to be a better functionalist. In D. Mohammed & M. Lewinski (Eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Argumentation. Theorists have found it easy to derive norms for argumentation from asserted functions of argument. The work of Dima Mohammed has taken a big step forward […]

Actually existing rules for closing arguments

July 14, 2012

0

Arguing is unruly.

Theoretical pieties, Johnstone’s impiety, and ordinary views of argumentation

July 14, 2012

0

We teachers of argument have nothing to apologize for.

Argument has no function

July 14, 2012

0

Argument has no determinable function in the sense Walton needs, and even if it did, that function would not ground norms for argumentative practice.

The public sphere and the norms of transactional argument

July 13, 2012

0

Papers by Asen and Rehg get us halfway to an understanding of the activity of arguing in the public sphere.

One question, two answers

July 13, 2012

0

I lay out the basics of "design theory"--a/k/a the normative pragmatics of arguing, particularly in contrast to other approaches.