Constructive Controversy: Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Constructive Controversy : Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse. / Kock, Christian Erik J.

In: Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2009, p. 89-112.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Kock, CEJ 2009, 'Constructive Controversy: Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse', Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 89-112.

APA

Kock, C. E. J. (2009). Constructive Controversy: Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse. Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation, 1(1), 89-112.

Vancouver

Kock CEJ. Constructive Controversy: Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse. Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation. 2009;1(1):89-112.

Author

Kock, Christian Erik J. / Constructive Controversy : Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse. In: Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation. 2009 ; Vol. 1, No. 1. pp. 89-112.

Bibtex

@article{64713ff0b1a411debc73000ea68e967b,
title = "Constructive Controversy: Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse",
abstract = "Current theories of argumentation underestimate the difference, emphasizedalready by Aristotle, between theoretical and practical (action-oriented) argumentation.This is exemplified with the argument theories of Toulmin, pragma-dialectics,Habermas, Walton, and Perelman. Since antiquity, rhetoric has defined itself, notas argument designed to “win,” but as action-oriented argument. Several distinctivefeatures of action-oriented argument are identified. One is that its warrants includevalue concepts in audiences, implying an element of subjectivity in argument assessment.Between individuals, but also inside each individual, several conflicting valuedimensions are typically involved, not just the dimension of truth-falsity, which makessustained, reasonable dissensus inevitable.",
author = "Kock, {Christian Erik J}",
note = "Paper id:: 0718-8285",
year = "2009",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "89--112",
journal = "Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation",
issn = "0718-8285",
publisher = "Diego Portales University, Chile",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Constructive Controversy

T2 - Rhetoric as Dissensus-oriented Discourse

AU - Kock, Christian Erik J

N1 - Paper id:: 0718-8285

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Current theories of argumentation underestimate the difference, emphasizedalready by Aristotle, between theoretical and practical (action-oriented) argumentation.This is exemplified with the argument theories of Toulmin, pragma-dialectics,Habermas, Walton, and Perelman. Since antiquity, rhetoric has defined itself, notas argument designed to “win,” but as action-oriented argument. Several distinctivefeatures of action-oriented argument are identified. One is that its warrants includevalue concepts in audiences, implying an element of subjectivity in argument assessment.Between individuals, but also inside each individual, several conflicting valuedimensions are typically involved, not just the dimension of truth-falsity, which makessustained, reasonable dissensus inevitable.

AB - Current theories of argumentation underestimate the difference, emphasizedalready by Aristotle, between theoretical and practical (action-oriented) argumentation.This is exemplified with the argument theories of Toulmin, pragma-dialectics,Habermas, Walton, and Perelman. Since antiquity, rhetoric has defined itself, notas argument designed to “win,” but as action-oriented argument. Several distinctivefeatures of action-oriented argument are identified. One is that its warrants includevalue concepts in audiences, implying an element of subjectivity in argument assessment.Between individuals, but also inside each individual, several conflicting valuedimensions are typically involved, not just the dimension of truth-falsity, which makessustained, reasonable dissensus inevitable.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 1

SP - 89

EP - 112

JO - Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation

JF - Cogency. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation

SN - 0718-8285

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 14912582