Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness : Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules

Frans H. Van Eemeren

ISBN 10: 9400726015 / ISBN 13: 9789400726017

Edité par Springer Netherlands, Springer Netherlands, 2011

A propos de cet article

Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed at the University of Amsterdam, their home university. In these studies they test methodically the intersubjective acceptability of the rules for critical discussion proposed in this theory by confronting ordinary arguers who have not received any special education in argumentation and fallacies with discussion fragments containing both fallacious and non-fallacious argumentative moves. The research covers a wide range of informal fallacies. In this way, the authors create a basis for comparing the theoretical reasonableness conception of pragma-dialectics with the norms for judging argumentative moves prevailing in argumentative practice. Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness provides a unique insight into the relationship between theoretical and practical conceptions of reasonableness, supported byextensive empirical material gained by means of sophisticated experimental research.

N° de réf. du vendeur 9789400726017

Détails bibliographiques

• Titre: Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness : Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules
• Éditeur: Springer Netherlands, Springer Netherlands
• Date de parution: 2011
• Langue: anglais
• ISBN à 10 chiffres: 9400726015
• ISBN à 13 chiffres: 9789400726017
• Reliure: Taschenbuch
• État de l'article: Neu
• Dimensions: 235 L x 155 H x 14 P (en millimètres) 235 millimètres de largeur par 155 millimètres de hauteur par 14 millimètres de profondeur
• Poids: 376 grammes

A propos de ce titre

Synopsis

In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed at the University of Amsterdam, their home university. In these studies they test methodically the intersubjective acceptability of the rules for critical discussion proposed in this theory by confronting ordinary arguers who have not received any special education in argumentation and fallacies with discussion fragments containing both fallacious and non-fallacious argumentative moves. The research covers a wide range of informal fallacies. In this way, the authors create a basis for comparing the theoretical reasonableness conception of pragma-dialectics with the norms for judging argumentative moves prevailing in argumentative practice. Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness provides a unique insight into the relationship between theoretical and practical conceptions of reasonableness, supported by extensive empirical material gained by means of sophisticated experimental research.

Présentation de l'éditeur

In this book, the authors report on their Systematic Empirical Research of the Conventional Validity of the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules. Starting from a clearly defined theoretical basis, they report about a continued series of experimental tests.