Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation
  • Cited by 278
      • Show more authors
      • You may already have access via personal or institutional login
    • Select format
    • Publisher:
      Cambridge University Press
      Publication date:
      January 2010
      November 2003
      ISBN:
      9780511616389
      9780521830751
      9780521537728
      DOI:
      https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616389
      Dimensions:
      (228 x 152 mm)
      Weight & Pages:
      0.44kg, 224 Pages
      Dimensions:
      (228 x 152 mm)
      Weight & Pages:
      0.34kg, 226 Pages
      • Subjects:
      Philosophy: General Interest, Philosophy
    You may already have access via personal or institutional login
    • Selected: Digital
    Add to cart View cart Buy from Cambridge.org
    Subjects:
    Philosophy: General Interest, Philosophy
    Information

    Book description

    In this book two of the leading figures in argumentation theory present a view of argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion by testing the acceptability of the disputed positions. Their model of a 'critical discussion' serves as a theoretical tool for analysing, evaluating and producing argumentative discourse. They develop a method for the reconstruction of argumentative discourse that takes into account all aspects that are relevant to a critical assessment. They also propose a practical code of behaviour for discussants who want to resolve their differences in a reasonable way. This is a major contribution to the study of argumentation and will be of particular value to professionals and graduate students in speech communication, informal logic, rhetoric, critical thinking, linguistics, and philosophy.

    Reviews

    ‘This is the most important argumentation theory in the world today. It is the only theory that incorporates a developed underlying philosophical perspective with a complete elaboration of a theory and a full account of its practical applications. It is the only theory that integrates insights from the complete range of fields in which argumentation is studied (among others: linguistics, philosophy of language, logic, communications, rhetoric) … It has had simply a huge influence on argumentation studies around the world.’

    J. Anthony Blair Source: University of Windsor

    ‘… a major event in argumentation theory scholarship.’

    Michael C. Leff Source: Northwestern University

    Refine List

    Actions for selected content:

    Select all | Deselect all
    • View selected items
    • Export citations
    • Download PDF (zip)
    • Save to Kindle
    • Save to Dropbox
    • Save to Google Drive

    Save Search

    You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

    Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
    Cancel
    ×

    Contents

    Contents
    References
    References
    Albert, H. (1967/1975). Traktat über kritische Vernunft. 3rd ed. 1975. Tübingen: Mohr
    Anscombre, J.-C. & Ducrot, O. (1983). L'argumentation dans la langue. Liege: Pierre Mardaga
    Aristotle (1928a). Prior Analytics. W. D. Ross (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Aristotle (1928b). Posterior Analytics. W. D. Ross (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Aristotle (1928c). Sophistical Refutations. W. D. Ross (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Aristotle (1928d). Topics. W. D. Ross. (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Aristotle (1991). On Rhetoric. A Theory of Civic Discourse. G. A. Kennedy (ed.), New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press
    Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Barth, E. M. (1974). The Logic of the Articles in Traditional Philosophy. Dordrecht/ Boston: Reidel
    Barth, E. M. & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1982). From Axiom to Dialogue. A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter
    Barth, E. M. & Martens, J. L. (1977). Argumentum ad hominem: From chaos to formal dialectic. The method of dialogue tableaus as a tool in the theory of fallacy. Logique et analyse, 20, 76–96
    Benoit, P. J. (1985). Strategies for threatening face: mitigating and aggravating bids and rejections. In: J. R. Cox, M. O. Sillars, & G. B. Walker (eds.), Argument and Social Practice. Proceedings of the Fourth Summer Conference on Argumentation. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, 604–618
    Benoit, W. L. & Benoit, P. J. (1987). Everyday argument practices of naive social actors. In: J. W. Wenzel (ed.), Argument and Critical Practices. Proceedings of the Fifth SCA/ AFA Conference on Argumentation. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association (465–473)
    Bentham, J. (1952). The Works of Jeremy Bentham (1838–1843). J. Browning (ed.), Edinburgh
    Blair, J. A. (1986). Comments on Frans van Eemeren: “Dialectical analysis as a normative reconstruction of argumentative discourse.”Text, 6, 17–24
    Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In: E. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56–311
    Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Burleson, B. R. (1979). On the analysis and criticism of arguments: Some theoretical and methodological considerations. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 15, 137–147
    Cicero (1942). De oratore. E. W. Sutton & H. Rackham (eds.), London: Heinemann
    Cicero (1949). De inventione. De optimo genere oratorum. Topica. M. Hubbell (ed.), London: Heinemann
    Cicero (1954). Rhetorica ad Herennium. H. Caplan (ed. and transl.), London: Heinemann. [Nowadays, Cicero is no longer seen as the author of the Rhetorica ad Herennium.]
    Clarke, D. D. (1977). Rules and sequences in conversation. In: P. Collett (ed.), Social Rules and Social Behaviour. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
    Clarke, D. D. (1983). Language and Action. A Structural Model of Behaviour. Oxford: Pergamon
    Cleary, J. W. & Haberman, F. W. (eds., 1964). Rhetoric and Public Address. A Bibliography 1947–1961. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press
    Cohen, M. R. & Nagel, E. (1964). An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
    Copi, I. M. (1972). Introduction to Logic (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan
    Corbett, E. P. J. (1966). Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press
    Crawshay-Williams, R. (1957). Methods and Criteria of Reasoning. An Inquiry into the Structure of Controversy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
    Crosswhite, J. (1989). Universality in rhetoric: Perelman's universal audience. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 22, 157–173
    Dascal, M. (1977). Conversational relevance. Journal of Pragmatics, 1, 309–328
    Duncan, S. & Fiske, D. W. (1977). Face-to-Face Interaction. Research, Methods, and Theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
    Ede, L. S. (1989). Rhetoric versus philosophy: the role of the universal audience in Chaim Perelman's The New Rhetoric. In: R. D. Dearin (ed.), The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman. Statement and Response. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 141–151
    Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse. A Model for Analysis. New York: Longman
    Eemeren, F. H. (1986). Dialectical analysis as a normative reconstruction of argumentative discourse. Text, 6, 1–16
    Eemeren, F. H. van (1987a). Argumentation studies' five estates. In: J. Wenzel (ed.), Argument and Critical Practices. Proceedings of the Fifth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, 9–24
    Eemeren, F. H. van (1987b). For reason's sake: Maximal argumentative analysis of discourse. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Berlin/New York: Foris Publications, 201–216
    Eemeren, F. H. van (ed., 2001). Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Berlin/Dordrecht: De Gruyter/Foris Publications
    Eemeren, F. H. & Grootendorst, R. (1987). Fallacies in pragma-dialectical perspective. Argumentation, 1, 3, 283–301
    Eemeren, F. H. & Grootendorst, R. (1988). Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective. Argumentation, 2, 2, 271–291
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1990). Analyzing argumentative discourse. In: R. Trapp & J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation. Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 86–106
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1991a). Making the best of argumentative discourse. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat, 431–440
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1991b). The study of argumentation from a speech act perspective. In: J. Verschueren (ed.), Pragmatics at Issue. Selected Papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, August 17–22, 1987. Volume I. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 151–170
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
    Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse. Tuscaloosa/London: The University of Alabama Press
    Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Meuffels, B. (1989). The skill of identifying argumentation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 25, 239–245
    Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002). Argumentation. Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst, R., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H., Krabbe, E. C. W., Plantin, Chr., Walton, D. N., Willard, Ch. A., Woods, J., & Zarefsky, D. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    Eemeren, F. H. & Houtlosser, P. (1999). Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse. Discourse Studies, 1, 479–497
    Eemeren, F. H. & Houtlosser, P. (2000). Rhetorical analysis within a pragma-dialectical framework. The Case of R. J. Reynolds. Argumentation, 14, 3, 293–305
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Houtlosser, P. (2002a). And always the twain shall meet. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 3–11
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Houtlosser, P. (2002b). Strategic maneuvering: Maintaining a delicate balance. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 131–59
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Houtlosser, P. (2002c). Strategic maneuvering with the burden of proof. In: F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam/Newport News, VA: Sic Sat/Vale Press, 13–28
    Eemeren, F. H. van & Houtlosser, P. (2003). A pragmatic view of the burden of proof. In: F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemands (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat
    Eemeren, F. H., Meuffels, B. & Verburg, M. (2000). The (un)reasonableness of the argumentum ad hominem. Language and Social Psychology, 19, 4, 416–435
    Ehninger, D. & Brockriede, W. (1963). Decision by Debate. New York: Dodd, Mead
    Feteris, E. T. (1999). Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation. A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
    Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against Method. London: Verso Editions/NLB
    Furbank, P. N. (1977). E. M. Forster. A Life. London: Secker & Warburg
    Garssen, B. (2001). Argument schemes. In: F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 81–99
    Gilbert, M. A. (1979). How to Win an Argument. New York: McGraw-Hill
    Gilbert, M. A. (1997). Coalescent Argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    Golden, J. L. (1986). The universal audience revisited. In: J. L. Golden & J. J. Pilotta (eds.), Practical Reasoning in Human Affairs. Studies in Honor of Chaim Perelman. Dordrecht: Reidel, 287–304
    Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Goodwin, J. (2002). Designing issues. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 81–96
    Govier, T. (1985). A Practical Study of Argument. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
    Govier, T. (1987). Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation. Dordrecht: Foris Publications
    Govier, T. (1999). The Philosophy of Argument. Newport News, VA: Vale Press
    Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In: P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics. Volume 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41–58
    Grice, P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
    Grize, J.-B. (1996). Logique naturelle et communications. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France
    Groarke, L. (2002). Toward a pragma-dialectics of visual argument. In: F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam/Newport News, VA: Sic Sat & Vale Press, 137–151
    Groot, A. D. (1984). The theory of science forum: subject and purport. Methodology and Science, 17, 230–259
    Grootendorst, R. (1987). Some fallacies about fallacies. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 331–342
    Haack, S. (1978). Philosophy of Logics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Habermas, J. (1971). Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einer Theorie der kommunikativen Kompetenz. In: J. Habermas & H. Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie. Was Leistet die Systemforschung? Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 107–141
    Habermas, J. (1998). On the Pragmatics of Communication. M. Cooke (ed.), Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
    Hamblin, Ch. L. (1970). Fallacies. London: Methuen. Reprinted with a preface by J.Plecnik and J. Hoaglund. Newport News, VA: Vale Press
    Hansen, H. V. & Pinto, R. C. (eds., 1995). Fallacies: Classical Background and Contemporary Developments. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press
    Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In: J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 299–346
    Hohmann, H. (2002). Rhetoric and dialectic: some historical and legal perspectives. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 41–51
    Houtlosser, P. (1994). The speech act “advancing a standpoint.” In: F. H. van Eemeren & R. Grootendorst (eds.), Studies in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: Sic Sat, 165–171
    Houtlosser, P. (2002). Indicators of a point of view. In: F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam/Newport News, VA: Sic Sat & Vale Press, 169–184
    Iseminger, G. (1986). Relatedness logic and entailment. Journal of Non-Classical Logic, 3, 5–23
    Jackson, S. (1992). “Virtual standpoints” and the pragmatics of conversational argument. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation Illuminated. Amsterdam: Sic Sat, 1, 260–269
    Jackson, S. & Jacobs, S. (1982). The collaborative production of proposals in conversational argument and persuasion: A study of disagreement regulation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 18, 77–90
    Jacobs, S. (1987). The management of disagreement in conversation. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht/Providence, RI: Foris Publications, 229–239
    Jacobs, S. (1989). Speech acts and arguments. Argumentation, 3, 345–365
    Jacobs, S. (2002). Messages, functional contexts, and categories of fallacy: Some dialectical and rhetorical considerations. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 119–130
    Jacobs, S. & Jackson, S. (1982). Conversational argument: A discourse analytic approach. In: J. R. Cox & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 205–237
    Jacobs, S. & Jackson, S. (1983). Speech act structure in conversation: Rational aspects of pragmatic coherence. In: R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (eds.), Conversational Coherence. Form, Structure, and Strategy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 47–66
    Jarvie, I. C. (1976). Toulmin and the rationality of science. In: R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend & M. W. Wartofsky (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Dordrecht: Reidel, 311–333
    Johnson, R. H. (2000). Manifest Rationality. A Pragmatic Theory of Argument. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    Johnson, R. H. & Blair, J. A. (1993). Logical Self-Defense. 1st ed. 1983. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson
    Johnstone, H. W., Jr. (1968). Theory of argumentation. In: R. Klibansky (ed.), La philosophie contemporaine. Florence: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 177–184
    Kahane, H. (1973). Logic and Philosophy (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
    Kauffeld, F. J. (2002). Pivotal issues and norms in rhetorical theories of argumentation. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer Academic, 97–118
    Kienpointner, M. (1992). Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion vom Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart/Bad Cannstatt: Frommann/Holzboog
    Kinneavy, J. L. (1971). A Theory of Discourse. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
    Krabbe, E. C. W. (2002). Meeting in the house of Callias: An historical perspective on rhetoric and dialectic. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 29–40
    Kraus, M. (2002). Theories and practice of the enthymeme in the first centuries B.C.E. and C.E. In: A. Eriksson, Th. H. Olbricht & W. Überlacker, Rhetorical Argumentation in Biblical Texts. Essays from the Lund 2000 Conference. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press, 95–111
    Kreckel, M. (1981). Communicative Acts and Shared Knowledge in Natural Discourse. London: Academic Press
    Kruger, A. N. (1975). Argumentation and Debate: A Classified Bibliography. 2nd ed., 1st ed. 1964 as A Classified Bibliography of Argumentation and Debate. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press
    Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
    Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman
    Leff, M. (2002). The relation between dialectic and rhetoric in a classical and a modern perspective. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 54–64
    Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Levy, P. (1981). Moore. G. E. Moore and the Cambridge Apostles. Oxford: Oxford University Press
    Locke, J. (1961). Of Reason. In: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Book IV, Chapter XVII, 1690. J. W. Yolton (ed.). London: Dent
    Lorenzen, P. & Lorenz, K. (1978). Dialogische Logik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft
    Mill, J. S. (1863/1972). Utilitarianism, Liberty, Representative Government. Selections from Auguste Comte and Positivism. H. B. Acton (ed.). London: Dent
    Naess, A. (1953). Interpretation and Preciseness. A Contribution to the Theory of Communication. Oslo: Skrifter utgitt ar der norske videnskaps academie
    Naess, A. (1966). Communication and Argument. Elements of Applied Semantics. London: Allen & Unwin. English translation of Om meningsytring. En del elementaere logiske emner (1947), Oslo: Universitetsforlaget
    O'Keefe, D. J. (1990). Persuasion. Theory and Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
    O'Keefe, D. J. (1997). Standpoint explicitness and persuasive effect: A meta-analytic review of the effects of varying conclusion articulation in persuasive messages. Argumentation and Advocacy, 34, 1, 1–13
    O'Keefe, D. J. (1998). Justification explicitness and persuasive effect: A meta-analytic review of the effects of varying support articulation in persuasive messages. Argumentation and Advocacy, 35, 2, 61–75
    Paul, R. (1987). Critical thinking in the strong sense and the role of argumentation in everyday life. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht/Providence: Foris Publications, 379–382
    Perelman, Ch. (1979). The New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications. Dordrecht: Reidel
    Perelman, Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l'argumentation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. English translation (1969) as The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame/London: University of Notre Dame Press
    Pike, K. (1967). Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of the Structure of Human Behavior. 's-Gravenhage: Mouton
    Pinto, R. C. (2001). Argument, Inference and Dialectic. Collected Papers on Informal Logic with an Introduction by Hans V. Hansen. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
    Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In: J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–102
    Popper, K. R. (1971). The Open Society and Its Ennemies (5th ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press
    Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective Knowledge. An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Popper, K. R. (1974). Conjectures and Refutations. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
    Quintilianus (1920). Institutio oratoria. H. E. Butler (ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press
    Ray, J. W. (1978). Perelman's universal audience. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64, 361–375
    Rees, M. A. van (1992a). The Use of Language in Conversation. An Introduction to Research in Conversation Analysis. Amsterdam: Sic Sat
    Rees, M. A. (1992b). The adequacy of speech act theory for explaining conversational phenomena: A response to some conversation analytical critics. Journal of Pragmatics, 17, 31–47
    Rees, M. A. van (1998). The diagnostic power of the stages of critical discussion in the analysis and evaluation of problem-solving discussions. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat, 693–697
    Rescher, N. (1975). Introduction to Logic (5th ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press
    Richards, I. A. (1976). Complementarities. Uncollected Essays. John Paul Russo (ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
    Sanders, R. E. (1980). Principles of relevance: A theory of the relationship between language and communication. Communication and Cognition, 13, 77–95
    Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361–382
    Schiappa, E. (2002). Evaluating argumentative discourse from a rhetorical perspective: Defining “person” and “human life” in constitutional disputes over abortion. In: F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 65–80
    Schlesinger, G. N. (1986). Relevance. Theoria, 52, 57–67
    Scriven, M. (1976). Reasoning. New York: McGraw-Hill
    Scult, A. (1985). A note on the range and utility of the universal audience. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 22, 84–87
    Scult, A. (1989). Perelman's universal audience: One perspective. In: R. D. Dearin (ed.), The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman. Statement and Response, Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 153–162
    Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (1992). Analysing Complex Argumentation. The Reconstruction of Multiple and Coordinatively Compound Argumentation in a Critical Discussion. Amsterdam: Sic Sat
    Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2001). Argumentation, explanation and causality: An exploration of current linguistic approaches to textual relations. In: T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord & W. Spooren (eds.), Text Representation. Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 231–146
    Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
    Taylor, T. J. & Cameron, D. (1987). Analyzing Conversation. Rules and Unities in the Structure of Talk. Oxford: Pergamon
    Tindale, C. W. (1999). Acts of Arguing. A Rhetorical Model of Argument. New York: SUNY
    Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press
    Toulmin, S. E. (1972). Human Understanding. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
    Toulmin, S. E. (1976). Knowing and Acting. An Invitation to Philosophy. New York: Macmillan
    Toulmin, S. E., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1979). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan
    Tracy, K. (1982). On getting the point: Distinguishing “issues” from ‘events’, an aspect of conversational coherence. Communication Yearbook, 5, 279–301
    Trapp, R., Yingling, J. M. & Wanner, J. (1987). Measuring argumentative competence. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht/Providence: Foris Publications, 253–262
    Walton, D. N. (1987). Informal Fallacies. Towards a Theory of Argument Criticisms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
    Walton, D. N. (1989). Informal Logic. A Handbook for Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    Walton, D. N. (1992). Slippery Slope Arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press
    Walton, D. N. (1995a). Arguments from Ignorance. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press
    Walton, D. N. (1995b). A pragmatic Theory of Fallacy. Tuscaloosa/London: The University of Alabama Press
    Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    Walton, D. N. (1996). Fallacies Arising from Ambiguity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
    Walton, D. N. (1997a). Appeal to Expert Opinion. Arguments from Authority. University Park, PA. The Pennsylvania State University Press
    Walton, D. N. (1997b). Appeal to Pity. Argumentum ad Misericordiam. Albany, NY: SUNY Press
    Walton, D. N. (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press
    Walton, D. N. (1999). Appeal to Popular Opinion. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press
    Walton, D. N. (2000). Scare Tactics. Arguments that Appeal to Fear and Threats. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
    Walton, D. N. & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment and Dialogue. Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany, NY: SUNY Press
    Weddle, P. (1987). Informal logic and the deductive-inductive inference. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht/Providence, RI: Foris Publications, 383–388
    Wenzel, J. W. (1979). Jürgen Habermas and the dialectical perspective on argumentation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 83–94
    Wenzel, J. W. (1980). Perspectives on argument. In: J. Rhodes & S. E. Newell (eds.), Dimensions of Argument. Proceedings of the Summer Conference on Argumentation. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, 112–133
    Wenzel, J. W. (1987). The rhetorical perspective on argument. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986. Dordrecht/Providence, RI: Foris Publications, 101–109
    Werth, P. (1981). The concept of “relevance” in conversational analysis. In: P. Werth (ed.), Conversation and Discourse. London: Croom Helm, 129–155
    Whateley, R. (1848). Elements of Logic, 9th ed. (1st ed. 1826). London: Longmans
    Willard, Ch. A. (1983). Argumentation and the Social Grounds of Knowledge. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press
    Wintgens, L. J. (1993). Rhetoric, reasonableness and ethics: An essay on Perelman. Argumentation, 7, 451–460
    Wisse, J. (1989). Ethos and Pathos from Aristotle to Cicero. Amsterdam: Hakkert
    Woods, J. & Walton, D. N. (1982). Argument. The Logic of the Fallacies. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson
    Woods, J. & Walton, D. N. (1989). Fallacies. Selected Papers, 1972–1982. Dordrecht/Providence, RI: Foris Publications

    Metrics

    Full text views

    Total number of HTML views: 0
    Total number of PDF views: 0 *
    Loading metrics...

    Book summary page views

    Total views: 0 *
    Loading metrics...

    * Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

    Usage data cannot currently be displayed.

    Accessibility standard: Unknown

    Why this information is here

    This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

    Accessibility Information

    Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.