This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a dialogical point of view. According to my account, a counterconsideration is part of a critical reaction from a real or imagined opponent, and an arguer may take it into account in his argument in at least six fully responsive ways. Conductive arguments (or: pro and con arguments, balance of con-siderations arguments) will be characterized as one of these types. In this manner, the paper aims to show how conducive, and related kinds of argument can be understood dialogically
Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentati...
ABSTRACT: Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in a...
Conciliatory views of disagreement are an intuitive class of views on the epistemic significance of ...
This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a ...
Abstract: This paper examines arguments that take counter-considerations into account, and it does s...
This paper examines arguments that take counterconsiderations into account, and it does so from a di...
In pro and con arguments, an arguer acknowledges that there are points against the conclu-sion reach...
ABSTRACT: This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative dis...
This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative discourse, su...
Some critical reactions hardly give clues to the arguer as to how to respond to them convincingly. O...
The topic of conductive argument has attracted much attention in recent argumentation studies, but m...
This paper is to argue that conductive arguments could be understood from a rhetorical perspective. ...
Abstract: This paper challenges the view that arguments are (by definition, as it were) attempts to ...
Abstract Using tools like argument diagrams and profiles of dialogue, this paper studies a number of...
Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentati...
Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentati...
ABSTRACT: Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in a...
Conciliatory views of disagreement are an intuitive class of views on the epistemic significance of ...
This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a ...
Abstract: This paper examines arguments that take counter-considerations into account, and it does s...
This paper examines arguments that take counterconsiderations into account, and it does so from a di...
In pro and con arguments, an arguer acknowledges that there are points against the conclu-sion reach...
ABSTRACT: This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative dis...
This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative discourse, su...
Some critical reactions hardly give clues to the arguer as to how to respond to them convincingly. O...
The topic of conductive argument has attracted much attention in recent argumentation studies, but m...
This paper is to argue that conductive arguments could be understood from a rhetorical perspective. ...
Abstract: This paper challenges the view that arguments are (by definition, as it were) attempts to ...
Abstract Using tools like argument diagrams and profiles of dialogue, this paper studies a number of...
Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentati...
Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentati...
ABSTRACT: Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in a...
Conciliatory views of disagreement are an intuitive class of views on the epistemic significance of ...