Conclusion

Abstract

In this study, I proposed to understand normativity from the standpoint of a dialogical approach to rhetoric. A dialogico-rhetorical understanding of normativity differs from a dialectical approach, as well as from a mono-logical one. The latter holds that there is only one logic that controls the correctness of inferences. I argued that mono-logic requires a strong understanding of truth, and I hope to have explained sufficiently that we should be skeptical about the possibilities of appealing to this kind of truth. This conclusion is affirmed by many logicians who, over the last thirty years or so, have preferred a dialectical approach to logic. They acknowledge that there is more than one sensible system of logic and that we should choose one conventionally to be in force. Yet, they argue, the choice cannot be a matter of mere will: it must be a rational one. Whereas mono-logic normativity depends upon truth, we have seen that dialectical rationality depends upon rationality.