Procedural Reasonableness and Normativity of Argumentation: Pragma-Dialectical Responses to Epistemologist Objections

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Procedural Reasonableness and Normativity of Argumentation

T2 - Pragma-Dialectical Responses to Epistemologist Objections

AU - Lo Presti, Patrizio

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Pragma-dialectical argumentation theory has received criticism from epistemological argumentation theorists. While the former emphasizes argumentation as aimed at resolving differences of opinion through adequate procedures, the latter emphasizes that argumentation is aimed at reaching a justified conclusion of the argumentation. In this paper pragma-dialectics is analyzed and two objections considered. The first objection pertains to the pragma-dialectical definition of reasonable argumentation, the other to the lack of an account of normativity of argumentation in pragma-dialectics. It is argued that the objections are not convincing.

AB - Pragma-dialectical argumentation theory has received criticism from epistemological argumentation theorists. While the former emphasizes argumentation as aimed at resolving differences of opinion through adequate procedures, the latter emphasizes that argumentation is aimed at reaching a justified conclusion of the argumentation. In this paper pragma-dialectics is analyzed and two objections considered. The first objection pertains to the pragma-dialectical definition of reasonable argumentation, the other to the lack of an account of normativity of argumentation in pragma-dialectics. It is argued that the objections are not convincing.

KW - Pragma-Dialectics

KW - Epistemology

KW - Normativity

KW - Discussion rules

KW - Consensus

KW - Reasonableness

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 53

EP - 69

JO - Cogency - Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation

JF - Cogency - Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation

SN - 0718-8285

IS - 1

ER -