I propose some changes to the conceptions of argument and of argumentative discussion in Ralph Johnson's Manifest Rationality (2000). An argument is a discourse whose author seeks to persuade an audience to accept a thesis by producing reasons in support of it and discharging his dialectical obligations. An argumentative discussion (what Johnson calls ‘argumentation’) is a sociocultural activity of constructing, presenting, interpreting, criticizing, and revising arguments for the purpose of reaching a shared rationally supported position on some issue. Johnson's theory of argumentative discussion, with occasional modifications, is derived from this definition as a sequence of 17 theorems. Argumentative discussion is a valuable cultural practice; it is the most secure route to correct views and wise policies.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Aristotle: 1959, Ars Rhetorica, Clarendon Press, Oxford. (First published ca. 350 BCE.)Google Scholar
- Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Arts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
- Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
- Johnson, Ralph H.: 2000, Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
- Willard, Charles A.: 1983, Argumentation and the Social Grounds of Knowledge, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
- Willard, Charles A.: 1989, A Theory of Argumentation, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
- Wohlrapp, Harald: 1998, ‘A New Light on Non-deductive Argumentation Schemes’, Argumentation 12, 341–350.Google Scholar