Many French-speaking approaches to argumentation are deeply rooted in a linguistic background. Hence, they naturally tend to adopt a descriptive stance on argumentation. This is the reason why the issue of the virtues of argumentation – and, specifically, the question of what makes an argument virtuous – is not central to them. The argumentative norms issue nevertheless cannot be discarded, as it obviously is crucial to arguers themselves: the latter often behave as if they were invested with some kind of argumentative policing duty when involved in dissensual exchanges. We propose to account for a number of researches developing a descriptive approach to such an ordinary argumentative police: we claim that the virtues of argumentation ...