Abstract
In the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation an ideal model is developed of a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion on the merits. It is explained that a critical discussion encompasses four stages: the confrontation stage, the opening stage, the argumentation stage, and the concluding stage. Next the argumentative moves that are instrumental in each of these stages are described in terms of speech acts. After the notion of profiles of dialectically relevant argumentative moves has been introduced as a way of portraying the various dialectical routes that can be chosen in a critical discussion, dialectical profiles are sketched of the main types of argumentation: symptomatic argumentation, comparison argumentation, and causal argumentation.
This chapter is primarily based on van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1992: 13–43, 94–102) and van Eemeren et al. (2007: 17–19).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In line with the critical rationalist perspective, testing the tenability of a standpoint by means of a critical discussion involves in the first place trying to detect inconsistencies between the standpoint at issue and the arguer’s other commitments (Albert 1975: 44).
- 2.
- 3.
See for these distinctions van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1992: 13–25).
- 4.
For an argumentative exchange in which this precondition has clearly not been fulfilled, see van Eemeren et al. (1993: 142–169).
- 5.
- 6.
Although declaratives do not lead to a resolution of a difference of opinion, due to their dependence on the authority of the speaker or writer in a certain institutional context they can sometimes lead to a settlement, as when a judge pronounces a verdict in a law case. Such a settlement can be to a large extent based on a reasonable argumentative exchange.
- 7.
The subcategory of the usage declarative s is introduced by van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984: 109–110).
- 8.
In Chap. 6 we will explain why in certain cases expressives nevertheless need to be taken into account in analyzing argumentative discourse because they indirectly convey constructive argumentative moves.
- 9.
- 10.
In the negative variant it is claimed that an action should not be carried out because it leads to an undesirable result.
References
Albert, H. (1975). Traktat über kritische Vernunft [Treatise on critical reason]. 2nd ed. Tübingen: Mohr. (1st ed. 1968, 5th improved and enlarged ed. 1991).
Krabbe, E. C. W. (2002). Profiles of dialogue as a dialectical tool. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in pragma-dialectics (pp. 153–167). Amsterdam: Sic Sat & Newport News, VA: Vale Press.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (1997). Analysing complex argumentation. The reconstruction of multiple and coordinatively compound argumentation in a critical discussion. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
van Eemeren, F. H. (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Argumentation in Context 2.
van Eemeren, F. H. (Ed. 2017), Prototypical argumentative patterns. Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Argumentation in Context 11.
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., & Meuffels, B. (2009). Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness. Empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. Dordrecht etc.: Springer. Argumentation Library 16.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions. A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht/Cinnaminson: Foris & Berlin: de Gruyter.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2007). Seizing the occasion. Parameters for analysing ways of strategic manoeuvring. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard & B. Garssen (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 375–380). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
van Eemeren, F. H., Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2007). Argumentative indicators in discourse. A pragma-dialectical study. Dordrecht: Springer. Argumentation Library 12.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2016). Argumentation. Analysis and evaluation. New York/London: Routledge. (2th revised ed.).
van Eemeren, F. H., & Wu Peng (2017). Introduction contextualizing pragma-dialectics. In F. H. van Eemeren & Wu Peng (Eds.), Contextualizing pragma-dialectics (pp. 1–10). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Argumentation in Context 12.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Wu Peng (Eds.). (2017), Contextualizing pragma-dialectics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Argumentation in Context 12.
Walton, D. N. (1999). Profiles of dialogue for evaluating arguments from ignorance. Argumentation, 13(1), 53–71.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Eemeren, F.H. (2018). A Model of a Critical Discussion. In: Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Argumentation Library, vol 33. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95380-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95381-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)