Subscribe:
RSS feed
Browsing All posts tagged under »normative pragmatic approach«
Lippmann, the indispensable opposition
Lippmann's thoroughgoing pessimism may lead us to a better understanding of the role of communication in public deliberations between scientists and citizens.
Theoretical pieties, Johnstone’s impiety, and ordinary views of argumentation
July 14, 2012
We teachers of argument have nothing to apologize for.
Argument has no function
July 14, 2012
Argument has no determinable function in the sense Walton needs, and even if it did, that function would not ground norms for argumentative practice.
Institutions for argument: Cultivating the formation of collective intent
July 13, 2012
Argumentation, while it seldom resolves issues, does create conditions under which collective intentions can more securely be ascribed.
Designing premises
July 13, 2012
But how do people who disagree--often deeply--manage to locate the shared premises they need in order to have an argument?
Manifestly adequate premises
July 13, 2012
What practical means do arguers who have little motivation to cooperate with each other nevertheless manage to force each other to make some propositions the unchallenged starting points or premises of arguments?
Designing issues
July 13, 2012
"Issue" is a central regulatory concept within argumentative practice; the issues are what we argue about. In this paper, I develop a theory of issues, and in particular, the practical means arguers have for forcing others to attend to their issues.
One question, two answers
July 13, 2012
I lay out the basics of "design theory"--a/k/a the normative pragmatics of arguing, particularly in contrast to other approaches.
On the blog
- But you haven’t told me how to persuade!
- Should climate scientists fly? 2. Argumentative bad faith
- Should climate scientists fly? 1. The skeptics’ hypocrisy argument
- Should climate scientists fly? An analysis of the arguments
- Stop looking for specks of climate skepticism
- Should the existence of an “anti-vax” movement change what scientists can say in publications?
- Morano v. Bauman
- Why do people (scientists) think there is a “war on science”?–Bibliography
- Post & Ramirez (2018): Scientists’ (mis)perceptions of press bias induce advocacy in response
- Responsibility for polar bear arguments
Jean Goodwin 
July 14, 2012
0