Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules
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 th...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Otros Autores: | , |
| Formato: | Libro electrónico |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Dordrecht ; London :
Springer
2009.
|
| Edición: | 1st ed. 2009. |
| Colección: | Argumentation library ;
v. 16. |
| Materias: | |
| Ver en Biblioteca Universitat Ramon Llull: | https://discovery.url.edu/permalink/34CSUC_URL/1im36ta/alma991009445841506719 |
Tabla de Contenidos:
- Theoretical Background and Organization of the Study
- Considerations Regarding the Design of the Study
- Ad Hominem Fallacies: An Exemplary Study
- The Confrontation Stage: The Freedom Rule
- The Opening Stage: The Obligation-to-Defend Rule (I)
- The Opening Stage: The Obligation-to-Defend (II)
- The Argumentation Stage: The Argument Scheme Rule
- The Concluding Stage: The Concluding Rule
- Conventional Validity of the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules.
