Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)
38 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The paper offers a theo retical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumen tation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on "good" argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by ana lysing a detailed structure of practi cal argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a com parative approach to practical rea son. I argue that given the compara tive structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)85-113
Number of pages29
JournalInformal Logic
Volume37
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Advocacy
Argumentation
Reasonableness
Normativity
Tenets

Keywords

  • Advocacy
  • Argumentation
  • Comparativism
  • Deliberation
  • Polylogue
  • Practical argument

Cite this

@article{f1b0c5afd8fb47dfaa5a0f1308d3aa54,
title = "Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy",
abstract = "The paper offers a theo retical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumen tation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on {"}good{"} argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by ana lysing a detailed structure of practi cal argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a com parative approach to practical rea son. I argue that given the compara tive structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.",
keywords = "Advocacy, Argumentation, Comparativism, Deliberation, Polylogue, Practical argument",
author = "Marcin Lewinski",
note = "info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/5876/147240/PT# UID/FIL/00183/2013",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.22329/il.v37i2.4775",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "85--113",
journal = "Informal Logic",
issn = "0824-2577",
publisher = "University of Windsor",
number = "2",

}

Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy. / Lewinski, Marcin.

In: Informal Logic, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2017, p. 85-113.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy

AU - Lewinski, Marcin

N1 - info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/5876/147240/PT# UID/FIL/00183/2013

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - The paper offers a theo retical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumen tation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on "good" argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by ana lysing a detailed structure of practi cal argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a com parative approach to practical rea son. I argue that given the compara tive structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.

AB - The paper offers a theo retical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumen tation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on "good" argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by ana lysing a detailed structure of practi cal argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a com parative approach to practical rea son. I argue that given the compara tive structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.

KW - Advocacy

KW - Argumentation

KW - Comparativism

KW - Deliberation

KW - Polylogue

KW - Practical argument

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020393032&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.22329/il.v37i2.4775

DO - 10.22329/il.v37i2.4775

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 85

EP - 113

JO - Informal Logic

JF - Informal Logic

SN - 0824-2577

IS - 2

ER -