Argumentation

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 95–112

Negotiation, Persuasion and Argument

  • Chris Provis
Article

Abstract

Argument is often taken to deal with conflicting opinion or belief, while negotiation deals with conflicting goals or interests. It is widely accepted that argument ought to comply with some principles or norms. On the other hand, negotiation and bargaining involve concession exchange and tactical use of power, which may be contrasted with attempts to convince others through argument. However, there are cases where it is difficult to draw a clear distinction between bargaining and argument: notably cases where negotiators persuade others through `framing' and cases where the aims of negotiation have to do with public assertion and acceptance. Those cases suggest that the distinction between negotiation and argument is not absolute, and this raises the question whether rules about what is acceptable in argument and rules about what is acceptable in negotiation can all be viewed as instances of more general common norms about human interaction.

argument assertion bargaining concession exchange framing negotiation persuasion rationality 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bar-Tal, D.: 1990, Group Beliefs, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Baumeister, R. F.: 1993, 'Lying to Yourself', in M. Lewis and C. Saarni (eds.), Lying and Deception in Everyday Life, The Guilford Press, New York, 166–183.Google Scholar
  3. Bazerman, M. H. and M. A. Neale: 1992, Negotiating Rationally, The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, J.: 1990, 'Why is Belief Involuntary?' Analysis 50, 87–107.Google Scholar
  5. Bok, S.: 1978, Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life, Harvester, London.Google Scholar
  6. Carroll, J. S. and J. W. Payne: 1991, 'An Information Processing Approach to Two-Party Negotiations', in M. H. Bazerman, R. J. Lewicki and B. H. Sheppard (eds.), Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. 3, JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., 3–34.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, L. J.: 1992, An Essay on Belief and Acceptance, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  8. Connolly, W. E.: 1993, The Terms of Political Discourse, 3rd ed., Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Elster, J.: 1989, The Cement of Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  10. Firth, A. (ed.): 1995a, The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace, Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Firth, A.: 1995b, 'Introduction and Overview', in A. Firth (ed.), The Discourse of Negotiation, Pergamon, Oxford, 3–39.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher, R. and W. L. Ury: 1981, Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.Google Scholar
  13. Habermas, J.: 1983, Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt. Translation partly reprinted in William Outhwaite (ed.) The Habermas Reader (Polity Press, Cambridge, 1996).Google Scholar
  14. Hamblin, C. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  15. Harré, R. and L. van Langenhove (eds): 1999, Positioning Theory, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Jacobs, S.: 1987, 'The Management of Disagreement in Conversation', in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline, Foris, Dordrecht, 229–239.Google Scholar
  17. Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch and R. Thaler: 1991, 'The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias', Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 193–206.Google Scholar
  18. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky: 1979, 'Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk', Econometrica 47, 263–291.Google Scholar
  19. Lewicki, R. J., J. A. Litterer, J. W. Minton and D. M. Saunders: 1994, Negotiation, 2nd ed., Irwin, Burr Ridge, Ill.Google Scholar
  20. Mackenzie, J.: 1989, 'Reasoning and Logic', Synthese 79, 99–117.Google Scholar
  21. Matheson, P.: 1972, Cardinal Contarini at Regensburg, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Naess, A.: 1966, Communication and Argument. Trans. A. Hannay. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo.Google Scholar
  23. Parsons, S., C. Sierra and N. Jennings: 1998, 'Agents that Reason and Negotiate by Arguing', Journal of Logic and Computation 8, 261–292.Google Scholar
  24. Phillips, A.: 1993, Democracy and Difference, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  25. Provis, C.: 1996, 'Interests vs Positions: A Critique of the Distinction', Negotiation Journal 12, 305–323.Google Scholar
  26. Provis, C.: 2000, 'Honesty in Negotiation', Business Ethics: A European Review 9, 3–12.Google Scholar
  27. Pruitt, D. G.: 1981, Negotiation Behavior, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Pruitt, D. G. and P. J. Carnevale: 1993, Negotiation in Social Conflict, Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  29. Rojot, J.: 1991, Negotiation: From Theory to Practice, Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  30. Schelling, T. C.: 1980, The Strategy of Conflict, 2nd ed., Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. First edition 1960.Google Scholar
  31. Schick, F.: 1988, 'Coping with Conflict', Journal of Philosophy 85, 362–375.Google Scholar
  32. Schick, F.: 1992, 'Allowing for Understandings', Journal of Philosophy 89, 30–41.Google Scholar
  33. Sigmon, S. T. and C. R. Snyder: 1993, 'Looking at Oneself in a Rose-Colored Mirror', in M. Lewis and C. Saarni (eds.), Lying and Deception in Everyday Life, The Guilford Press, New York, 148–165.Google Scholar
  34. Solso, R. L.: 1995, Cognitive Psychology, 4th ed., Allyn and Bacon, Boston.Google Scholar
  35. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1984, Inquiry, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  36. Sycara, K. P.: 1990, 'Persuasive Argument in Negotiation', Theory and Decision 28, 203–242.Google Scholar
  37. Tambe, M. and H. Jung: 1999, 'The Benefits of Arguing in a Team', AI Magazine, 85–92.Google Scholar
  38. Toulmin, S. E.: 1950, The Place of Reason in Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Canbridge.Google Scholar
  39. van Eemeren, F. H.: 1987, 'For Reason's Sake: Maximal Argumentative Analysis of Discourse', in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline, Foris, Dordrecht, 201–215.Google Scholar
  40. van Eemeren, F. H. and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  41. van Eemeren, F. H. and R. Grootendorst: 1996, 'Developments in Argumentation Theory', in J. van Benthem, F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst and F. Veltman (eds.), Logic and Argumentation, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 9–26.Google Scholar
  42. Wagner, J.: 1995, 'What Makes a Discourse a Negotiation?', in K. Ehlich and J. Wagner (eds.), The Discourse of Business Negotiation, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, 9–36.Google Scholar
  43. Walker, E.: 1995, 'Making a Bid for Change: Formulations in Union/Management Negotiations', in A. Firth (ed.), The Discourse of Negotiation, Pergamon, Oxford, 101–140.Google Scholar
  44. Walton, D. N.: 1989, Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Walton, D. N.: 1990, 'What Is Reasoning? What Is an Argument?' Journal of Philosophy 87, 399–419.Google Scholar
  46. Walton, D. N.: 1998, The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.Google Scholar
  47. Walton, R. E. and R. B. McKersie: 1991, A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations, 2nd ed., ILR Press, Ithaca, N.Y. Original edition McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965.Google Scholar
  48. Williams, B.: 1973, 'Deciding to Believe', in Problems of the Self, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 136–151.Google Scholar
  49. Winch, P.: 1992, 'Persuasion', Midwest Studies in Philosophy 17, 123–137.Google Scholar
  50. Winters, B.: 1979, 'Believing at Will', Journal of Philosophy 76, 243–256.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Provis

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations