Abstract
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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| 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 |
| Publisher | College Publications |
| Pages | 499-514 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| ISBN (Print) | 978-1-84890-211-4 |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
| Event | 1st European Conference on Argumentation: Argumentation and Reasoned Action - FCSH/NOVA, Lisboa, Portugal Duration: 9 Jun 2015 → 12 Jun 2015 Conference number: 1 http://www.fcsh.unl.pt/submissao-de-artigos-cientificos/1st-european-conference-on-argumentation |
Conference
| Conference | 1st European Conference on Argumentation |
|---|---|
| Abbreviated title | ECA |
| Country/Territory | Portugal |
| City | Lisboa |
| Period | 9/06/15 → 12/06/15 |
| Internet address |
Keywords
- accountability
- critical testing
- deliberation
- European Parliament
- political argument
- purpose of argument
- rationality
- reasonableness
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Not just rational, but also reasonable: critical testing in the service of external uses of public political arguments'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver