Towards a New Paradigm for Argumentation Theory

There are numerous possible approaches to the phenomena of argumentation, all of which fall into one of three general categories:

Garssen, is a collection of 20 papers selected from contributions to the proceedings of the 8 th conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), held in Amsterdam in 2014. This collection is filtered into six dimensions of argumentation theory: general perspectives; analysis of argumentation; evaluation of argumentation; argument schemes; contextual embedding of argumentation; and linguistic approaches to argumentation. These six themes chosen for the collection appear to be distilled from the 18 themes featured in the ISSA conference, although the absence of editorial commentary on this organizational scheme leaves such speculation up to the reader. The different parts follow a natural order, beginning with ways to approach the process of argument theory as a whole, continuing with ways to work through the actual argument construction and ending with ways to put these theories into verbal practice.

Argumentation Theory provides a very powerful set of principles, ideas and models. Yet, in this paper we will show that its fundamental principles unsatisfactorily explain real-world human argumentation and should be adapted. We will present an extensive empirical study on the incompatibility of abstract argumentation and human argumentative behavior, followed by practical expansion of existing models.

Towards an integrated theory of argumentation, 2000

https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA3/papersandcommentaries/24/ Julieta Haidar & Pedro Reygadas The purpose of this paper is to establish some main characteristics of the argumentation field and to link argumentation theory and Discourse Analysis to contribute to its project with a systematic consideration of power, ideology and culture functioning. After a brief initial summary about the diversity of this field, we consider some central issues of analytical theories (in this case, we leave practically aside argument formation theories) in order to establish contact between approaches normally working in isolation and ignoring each other. At last, we summarize our position and set the link between argumentation and Discourse Analysis.

Informal Logic, 2024

'Argument' has multiple meanings and referents in contemporary argumentation theory. Theorists are well aware of this but often fail to acknowledge it in their theories. In what follows, I distinguish several senses of 'argument' and argue that some highly visible theories are largely correct about some senses of the term but not others. In doing so, I hope to show that apparent theoretical rivals are better seen as collaborators or partners, rather than rivals, in the multidisciplinary effort to understand 'argument,' arguments, and argumentation in all their varieties. I argue as well for a pluralistic approach to argument evaluation and argumentative norms, since arguments and argumentation can be legitimately evaluated along several dimensions, but urge that epistemic norms enjoy conceptual priority.

Research in Language

This paper has a dual purpose: it both seeks to introduce the other works in this issue by illustrating how they are related to the field of argumentation as a whole, and to make clear the tremendous range of research currently being carried out by argumentation theorists which is concerned with the interaction and inter-reliance of language and argument. After a brief introduction to the development of the field of argumentation, as many as eight language-based approaches to the study of argument are identified, taking as their perspective: rhetoric, argument structure, argument as act, discourse analysis, corpus methods, emotive argument, and narrative argument. The conclusion makes it clear that these branches of study are all themselves interconnected and that it is the fusion of methodologies and theory from linguistics and the philosophical study of argument which lends this area of research its dynamism.

2019

The present paper offers a survey of prevailing lines of research on linguistic argumentation, which is a fundamental part of a logical communication structure of any sense bearing text. The paper explores the character and structure of linguistic argumentation with regards to communication and pragmatic aspects. It also substantiates a broad understanding of argumentation as an indispensable element for the universal communication process, which lies behind any piece of information to be transferred further on in the context of the discourse activity. Unlike most scholars who, while interpreting argumentation, focus on the logical (evidentiary) aspect of this phenomenon, the authors of the paper consider and prove argumentation to be a pragmatic framework to build any extended language construct characterized by relatively accomplished meaningfulness, i.e. conveying a certain informative value. Ranged and classified views on the nature of argumentation make it possible to draw a li...