Coalescent Argumentation

According to the canons of Informal Logic the goal of an argument is to persuade one’s opposer of the truth of the proffered claim. The argument, therefore, is always about the claim, and all argumentative activities focus on it. However, arguments occurring between people are more than propositionalizable entities which are Claim-Reason Complexes [CRC] whose structure is locatable. They are also communications occurring between two complex entities with a range of desires, needs and goals. It certainly may be the case that persuading one’s opposer of the truth of a claim is a goal of a given argumentation, but it will rarely, if ever, be the case that it is the only goal of an argumentation. 1 Within Communication Theory the idea of goals is considered to be inherently manifold. That is, every persuasive interaction has more than one goal. On the one hand there is the obvious goal that is the apparent focus of the encounter, it is what an arguer wants to achieve. But, on the other hand, there are goals relating to the relationship between the arguers as well as goals dealing with the maintenance of the interaction itself. These have been called primary and influence goals (Dillard, 1990,) task or instrumental and face goals (Tracy & Coupland 1990,) and instrumental and maintenance goals, (O’keefe 1995.