Add to ORKGAbstract: 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
Political debate is a distinctive domain in argumentation, characterized by these features: it is ab...
Being challenged by opposing views in a controversial discussion can stimulate the production of mor...
Addressing anticipated countermoves is a commonplace practice in argumentative discourse. A speaker ...
This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a ...
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...
Some critical reactions hardly give clues to the arguer as to how to respond to them convincingly. O...
ABSTRACT: This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative dis...
This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative discourse, su...
The topic of conductive argument has attracted much attention in recent argumentation studies, but m...
From a (pragma) dialectical point of view, the evaluation of argumentation includes consideration of...
This paper is to argue that conductive arguments could be understood from a rhetorical perspective. ...
It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical...
Abstract: This paper challenges the view that arguments are (by definition, as it were) attempts to ...
A critical examination of the dialectical approach, focusing on a comparison ofthe illative and the ...
Political debate is a distinctive domain in argumentation, characterized by these features: it is ab...
Being challenged by opposing views in a controversial discussion can stimulate the production of mor...
Addressing anticipated countermoves is a commonplace practice in argumentative discourse. A speaker ...
This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a ...
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...
Some critical reactions hardly give clues to the arguer as to how to respond to them convincingly. O...
ABSTRACT: This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative dis...
This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative discourse, su...
The topic of conductive argument has attracted much attention in recent argumentation studies, but m...
From a (pragma) dialectical point of view, the evaluation of argumentation includes consideration of...
This paper is to argue that conductive arguments could be understood from a rhetorical perspective. ...
It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical...
Abstract: This paper challenges the view that arguments are (by definition, as it were) attempts to ...
A critical examination of the dialectical approach, focusing on a comparison ofthe illative and the ...
Political debate is a distinctive domain in argumentation, characterized by these features: it is ab...
Being challenged by opposing views in a controversial discussion can stimulate the production of mor...
Addressing anticipated countermoves is a commonplace practice in argumentative discourse. A speaker ...