Speech Acts and Reasonableness in Pragma-Dialectics.

We begin by explaining why formulating the pragma-dialectical (henceforth PD) account of argumentation in terms of some central notions of speech act theory, as Frans van Eemeren and Ton van Haaften (Argumentation 37:341–376, 2023) propose, fails. We go on to suggest that this failure reveals a deep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy Vol. 43; no. 4; pp. 1287 - 1295
Autores principales: Biro, John, Siegel, Harvey
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Oct2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=180990353&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 180990353
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        01677411
        NM2
      jtl: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy
      issn: 01677411
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2024
      vid: 43
      iid: 4
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        180990353
        10.1007/s11245-024-10081-4
      ppf: 1287
      ppct: 8
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 633KB
      tig:
        atl: Speech Acts and Reasonableness in Pragma-Dialectics.
      aug:
        au:
          Biro, John
          Siegel, Harvey
        affil:
          https://ror.org/02y3ad647 University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
          https://ror.org/02dgjyy92 University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA
      su:
        Argument
        Discourse
      sug:
        subj:
          Argument
          Discourse
      keyword:
        Argumentation
        Pragma-dialectics
        Reasonableness
        Speech act theory
      ab: We begin by explaining why formulating the pragma-dialectical (henceforth PD) account of argumentation in terms of some central notions of speech act theory, as Frans van Eemeren and Ton van Haaften (Argumentation 37:341–376, 2023) propose, fails. We go on to suggest that this failure reveals a deeper problem with the theory, one that makes it impossible for it to meet what van Eemeren and van Haaften recognize as the most important requirement for it. They say "The crucial problem in the study of argumentation therefore is how maintaining reasonableness in argumentative discourse can lead to effective convincingness." (Argumentation 37:341–376, 2023, p. 3) But on a proper understanding of what it is for an argument to be reasonable, this circle cannot be squared, since reasonableness and convincingness vary independently. A reasonable argument does not always convince, nor is one that does always reasonable. If this is, indeed, the crucial problem for pragma-dialectics, we will argue that it cannot be solved in the way that PD proposes.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy is a copyright of Springer, 2024. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2024
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N