If a good argument is indeed the “one that fulfills its purpose”, then considering the multiple purposes of a (public political) argument becomes indispensable for its assessment. But different purposes may be in conflict, resulting in an inconsistent assessment. In this paper, I argue in favour of considering the distinction between rationality and reasonableness in order to solve this complication and arrive at a non-fragmented and consistent assessment of the quality of public political arguments.
|Title of host publication||Argumentation and Reasoned Action|
|Subtitle of host publication||Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation|
|Editors||Dima Mohammed, Marcin Lewiński|
|Number of pages||15|
|Publication status||Published - 2016|
|Event||Argumentation and Reasoned Action: 1st European Conference on Argumentation - Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal|
Duration: 9 Jun 2015 → 12 Jun 2015
Conference number: 1
|Conference||Argumentation and Reasoned Action|
|Period||9/06/15 → 12/06/15|
- critical testing
- European Parliament
- political argument
- purpose of argument
Mohammed, D. (2016). Not just rational, but also reasonable: critical testing in the service of external uses of public political arguments. In D. Mohammed, & M. Lewiński (Eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation (pp. 499-514). College Publications.