Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)
58 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

Keywords

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

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Practical argumentation as reasoned advocacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this