Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T19:01:43.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

Christopher W. Tindale
Christopher W. Tindale
Affiliation:
University of Windsor, Ontario
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception , pp. 225 - 237
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, Jonathan E. 2002. Belief’s Own Ethics. Cambridge, ma: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler, Jonathan E. 2006. “Epistemological Problems of Testimony,” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/testimony-episprob/ (visited, August 11, 2010).Google Scholar
Aikin, Scott F. 2008. “Perelmanian Universal Audience and the Epistemic Aspirations of Argument,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 41 (3): 238–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexy, Robert 1989. A Theory of Legal Argumentation: The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification. Ruth, Adler and Neil, MacCormick (trans.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Allard-Nelson, Susan 2001. “Virtue in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: A Metaphysical and Ethical Capacity,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 34 (3): 245–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, James 2001. Inference from Signs. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angenot, Marc 2008. Dialogues de sourds: traité de rhétorique antilogique. Paris: Mille et une nuits/Fayard.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 2007. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. George, A. Kennedy (trans. Introduction, Notes, & Appendices). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1984. “Poetics,” Bywater, I. (trans.). In Barnes, Jonathan (ed.) The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1984. “Prior Analytics,” Jenkinson, A. J. (trans.). In Barnes, Jonathan (ed.) The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1997. Topics: Books I and VIII, with Excerpts from Related Texts. Robin, Smith (trans,). Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asen, Robert 2005. “Pluralism, Disagreement, and the Status of Argument in the Public Sphere,” Informal Logic 25 (2): 117–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asen, Robert and Brouwer, Daniel C. 2001. “Introduction: Reconfigurations of the Public Sphere,” in Asen, Robert and Brouwer, Daniel C. (eds.) Counterpublics and the State. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
Bach, Kent 1999. “The Myth of Conventional Implicature,” Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 327–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baier, Annette C. 1995. Moral Prejudices. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Holquist, Michael (ed.), Emerson, C. and Holquist, M. (trans.). University of Austin Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jonathan 2007. Truth, etc. Six Lectures on Ancient Logic. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baynes, Kenneth 2001. “Practical Reason, the “Space of Reasons,” and Public Reason,” in Rehg, William and Bonham, James (eds.) Pluralism and the pragmatic Turn: The Transformation of Critical Theory. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Andrew, Swenson-Wright, John and Tybjerg, Karin 2008. Evidence. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Benhabib, Seyla 1992. Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Berger, John 2011. Bento’s Sketchbook. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Bett, Richard 1998. “The Sceptics and the Emotions,” in Sihvola, Juha and Engberg-Pedersen, Troels (eds.) The Emotions in Hellenistic Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: pp. 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, Wayne C. 1974. Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent. University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert 1994. Making it Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert 2000. Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, Robert 2008a. Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, Robert 2008b. “Responses,” in Stekeler-Weithofer (ed.), pp. 209–29.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth 1950. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 1994. “Enthymeme: Aristotle on the Logic of Persuasion,” in Furley, David J. and Nehamas, Alexander (eds.) Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays. Princeton University Press, pp. 3–55.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 2008. “Kinêsis vs. Energeia: A Much-read Passage in (but not of) Aristotle’s Metaphysics,” in Sedley, D. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy XXXIV, pp. 219–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camus, Albert 1972. Neither Victims nor Executioners, World Without War Publications.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn 2005. “Relevance Theory, Grice and the neo-Griceans: a Response to Laurence Horn’s ‘Current Issues in Neo-Gricean Pragmatics’,” Intercultural Pragmatics 2: 303–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Siobhan 2005. Paul Grice, Philosopher and Linguist. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chastian, C. 1975. “Reference and Context,” in Gunderson, K. (ed.) Language, Mind and Knowledge. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 194–269.Google Scholar
Cialdini, Robert B. 1984. Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul 2004. Analysing Political Discourse. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Andy and Chalmers, David 1998. “The Extended Mind,” Analysis, 58: 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coady, C. A. J. 1992. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Code, Lorraine 2006. Ecological Thinking: The Politics of Epistemic Location. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colebrook, Claire 2004. Irony. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Neta 2002. Argument and Change in World Politics: Ethics, Decolonization, and Humanitarian Intervention. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosswhite, James 1996. The Rhetoric of Reason: Writing and the Attractions of Argument. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Crosswhite, James 2013. Deep Rhetoric: Philosophy, Reason, Violence, Justice, Wisdom. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damasio, Antonio R. 1994. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. London: Picador.Google Scholar
Damasio, Antonio R. 1999. The Feeling of what Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1980. Actions and Events. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel 1995. Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life. New York: Touchstone.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrida, Jacques 1974. Of Grammatology. Spivak, G. C. (trans.). Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques 1982. Margins of Philosophy. Bass, A. (trans.). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques 1988. Limited Inc. Samuel, Weber (trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
De Sousa, Ronald 1987. The Rationality of Emotion. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, John 1927. The Public and its Problems. Denver: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto 2003. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfield & Nicolson.Google Scholar
Ede, Lisa 1989. “Rhetoric versus Philosophy: The Role of the Universal Audience in Chaim Perelman’s The New Rhetoric,” in Dearin, Ray D. (ed.) The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman: Statement & Response. New York: University Press of America, pp. 141–51.Google Scholar
Ede, L. and Lunsford, A. 1984. “Audience addressed/audience invoked: The role of audience in composition theory and pedagogy,” College Composition and Communication 35: 155–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. 2010. Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Extending the Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Grootendorst, Rob 1984. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Grootendorst, Rob 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Grootendorst, Rob 1995. “Perelman and the Fallacies,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 28: 122–33.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Grootendorst, Rob 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Houtlosser, Peter 1999. “Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse,” Discourse Studies 1 (4): 479–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Houtlosser, Peter 2000. “Rhetorical Analysis within a Pragma-dialectical Framework. The Case of R. J. Reynolds,” Argumentation 14 (3): 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H. and Houtlosser, Peter 2002. “Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Maintaining a Delicate Balance,” in van Eemeren, F. H. and Houtlosser, Peter (eds.) Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 131–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., et al. 1996. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ekman, Paul 1992. “An Argument for Basic Emotions,” Cognition and Emotion 6: 169–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endres, Ben 1996. “Habermas and Critical Thinking,” Philosophy of Education Year Book, www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-Yearbook/96_docs/endres.htmlGoogle Scholar
Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi 2008. On Reason: Rationality in a World of Cultural Conflict and Racism. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fahnestock, J. 2000. “Aristotle and Theories of Figuration,” in Gross, Alan G. and Walzer, Arthur E. (eds.) Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 166–84.Google Scholar
Farrell, Thomas B. 1993. Norms of Rhetorical Culture. New Haven: Vale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faulkner, Paul 2000. “The Social Character of Testimonial Knowledge,” The Journal of Philosophy 97: 581–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, E. M. 1936. “Roger Fry: An Obituary Note’” from Abinger Harvest, London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd., pp. 50–53.Google Scholar
Fortenbaugh, W. W. 1975. Aristotle on Emotion: A Contribution to Philosophical Psychology, Rhetoric, Poetics, Politics and Ethics. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Foss, Sonja and Griffin, Cindy 1995. “Beyond Persuasion: A Proposal for an Invitational Rhetoric,” Communication Monographs. 62: 2–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, David A. 2004. “Argumentation Studies in the Wake of the New Rhetoric,” Argumentation and Advocacy 40: 267–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Nancy 1992. “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy,” in Calhoun, Craig (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 109–142.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy 2001. “Recognition without Ethics,” Theory, Culture and Society 18 (2–3): 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, James 2005. Acceptable Premises: An Epistemic Approach to an Informal Logic Problem. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Freese, J. H. 1926. Aristotle: Art of Rhetoric. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fricker, Elizabeth 1987. “The Epistemology of Testimony,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 61 (July). Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher: 57–83.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg 1975. Truth and Method. New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Shaun 2009. “Philosophical Antecedents of Situated Cognition,” in Robbins, Philip and Aydede, Murat (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge University Press, pp. 35–51.Google Scholar
Garver, Eugene 2009. “Aristotle on the Kinds of Rhetoric,” Rhetorica 27: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd 2001. “I Think, Therefore I Err,” Social Research 72 (1): 1–24.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd 2007. Gut Feelings: The Intelligence of the Unconscious. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Michael A. 1997. Coalescent Argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Glover, Jonathan 1988. I: The Philosophy and Psychology of Personal Identity. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Gómez, Carlos Miquel 2012. Interculturality, Rationality and Dialogue: In Search for Intercultural Argumentative Criteria for Latin America. Würzburg: Echter Verlag.Google Scholar
Goodnight, Thomas G. 2003. “Predicaments of Communication, Argument, and Power: Towards a Critical Theory of Controversy,” Informal Logic 23 (2): 119–137.Google Scholar
Goodwin, J. 1995. “Perelman, Adhering, and Conviction,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 28: 215–33.Google Scholar
Govier, Trudy 1997. Social Trust and Human Communities. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Govier, Trudy 1998. Dilemmas of Trust. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Govier, Trudy 1999. The Philosophy of Argument. Newport News, VA: Vale Press.Google Scholar
Grandy, Richard and Warner, Richard (eds.) 1986. Philosophical Grounds of Rationality: Intentions, Categories, Ends. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul 2001. Aspects of Reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, Paul and Scarantino, Andrea 2009. “Emotions in the Wild: The Social Perspective on Emotion,” in Robbins and Aydede (eds.), pp. 437–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimaldi, William 1980. Aristotle, Rhetoric I: A Commentary. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
Groarke, Leo A. 1996. “Logic, Art and Argument,” Informal Logic 18 (2&3): 105–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, Alan G. 2010. “Rhetoric, Narrative, and the Lifeworld: The Constriction of Collective Identity,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 43: 118–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, Alan and Dascal, Marcelo 2001. “The Conceptual Unity of Aristotle’s Rhetoric,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 34 (4): 275–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, Alan G. and Dearin, Ray D. 2003. Chaim Perelman. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Gross, Daniel 2006. The Secret History of Emotion: From Aristotle’s Rhetoric to Modern Brain Science. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action. 2 volumes, Thomas, McCarthy (trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1988. On the Logic of the Social Sciences. Shierry Weber, Nicholsen and Stark, Jerry A. (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Thomas, Burger and Frederick, Lawrence (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Christian, Lenhardt and Shierry Weber, Nicholsen (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1992. “Further Reflections on the Public Sphere,” in Calhoun, Craig (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 421–61.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1993. Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics, Ciaran, Cronin (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, William, Rehg (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 2000. “From Kant to Hegel: On Robert Brandom’s Pragmatic Philosophy of Language,” European Journal of Philosophy 8 (3): 322–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 2003a. Truth and Justification. Fultner, B. (trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 2003b. The Future of Human Nature. William, Rehg, Hella, Beister and Max, Pensky (trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Stuart 1973. Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse. Birmingham: Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies.Google Scholar
Hamblin, C. L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of the Partial Perspective,” Feminist Studies 14 (3): 575–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, Russell 2002. Trust and Trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell 2006. Trust. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hardwig, John 1985. “Epistemic Dependence,” The Journal of Philosophy 82: 335–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardwig, John 1991. “The Role of Trust in Knowledge,” The Journal of Philosophy 88: 693–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, Gilbert 2003. “Aspects of Reason II,” The Philosophical Quarterly 53: 280–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, Gerard A. 2001. “Prisoners of Conscience and the Counterpublic Sphere of Prison Writing: The Stones that Start the Avalanche,” in Asen, Robert and Brouwer, Daniel C. (eds.) Counterpublics and the State. Albany, NY: State University New York Press, pp. 35–58.Google Scholar
Heider, Karl G. 1988. “The Rashomon Effect: When Ethnographers Disagree,” American Anthropologist 90: 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermerén, Göran 1992. “Allusions and Intentions,” in Iseminger, Gary (ed.) Intention and Interpretation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 203–220.Google Scholar
Hesse, Mary 1995. “Habermas and the Force of Dialectical Argument,” History of European Ideas 21 (3): 367–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko 1986. “Logic of Conversation as a Logic of Dialogue,” in Grandy and Warner (eds.), pp. 259–76.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, David 1995. “Does the Traditional Treatment of Enthymemes Rest on a Mistake?” In Analysis and Evaluation: Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, vol. 2. van Eemeren, Frans H., et al. (eds.). Amsterdam: Sic Sat, pp. 113–29.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, David 2006. “Informal logic and the Concept of Argument,” in Jacquette, Dale (ed.), Philosophy of Logic, volume 5 of Dov M. Gabbay, Paul Thagard and John Woods (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, Elsevier: pp. 101–29.Google Scholar
Hitchens, Christopher 2010. Hitch 22: A Memoir. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd.Google Scholar
Hohendahl, Peter 2001. “Jürgen Habermas: “The Public Sphere” (1964),” New German Critique:45–48.Google Scholar
Holub, Robert C. 1984. Reception Theory: A Critical Introduction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence 1984. “Toward a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based and R-based Implicature,” in Schiffrin, Deborah (ed.), Meaning, Form and Use in Context (GURT ’84). Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 11–41.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence 2005. “Current Issues in Neo-Gricean Pragmatics,” Intercultural Pragmatics 2-2: 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David 2000. A Treatise on Human Nature. Norton, David Fate and Norton, Mary (eds.). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David 1977. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Steinberg, Eric (ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Hunter, Richard 2006. “Plato’s Symposium and the Traditions of Ancient Fiction,” in Lesher, James, Nails, Debra and Sheffield, Frisbee (eds.) Plato’s Symposium: Issues in Interpretation and Reception. Cambridge, MA: Center for Hellenic Studies, Harvard University Press. pp. 295–312.Google Scholar
Irwin, William 2001. “What is an Allusion?” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 59 (3): 287–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang 1978. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isocrates, 2000. “Against the Sophists,” in Isocrates I, Mirhady, David C. and Yun Lee, Too (trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press: 61–6.Google Scholar
Jauss, Hans Robert 1982. Towards an Aesthetic of Reception. Timothy, Bahti (trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Ralph H. and Blair, J. Anthony 1980. “The Recent Development of Informal Logic,” in Blair, J. A. and Johnson, R. H. (eds.) Informal Logic: The First International Symposium. Inverness, CA: Edgepress, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Johnson, Ralph 2000. Manifest Rationality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Johnson, Ralph 2009. “Revisiting the Logical/Dialectical/Rhetorical Triumvirate,” in Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA’09. Ritola, Juho (ed.). Windsor, ON: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation. CD-ROM, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Johnstone, H. W. Jr. 1978. Validity and Rhetoric in Philosophical Argument. University Park, PA: Dialogue Press of Man & World.Google Scholar
Johnstone, Steven 2011. A History of Trust in Ancient Greece. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, Walter and Olmsted, Wendy (eds.) 2006. A Companion to Rhetoric and Rhetorical Criticism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1951. Critique of Judgment. Bernard, J. H. (trans.). New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
Karon, Louise A. 1976. “Presence in ‘The New Rhetoric’,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 9 (2): 96–111.Google Scholar
Kasterly, James L. 2006. “Pathos: Rhetoric and Emotion,” in Jost and Olmsted, (eds.), pp. 221–37.Google Scholar
Kauffeld, Fred J. 1986. Accusing, Proposing, and Advising: The Strategic Grounds for Presumption and the Assumption of Probative Responsibilities. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Kauffeld, Fred J. 2009. “Grice’s Analysis of Utterance-Meaning and Cicero’s Catilinarian Apostrophe,” Argumentation 23: 239–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, George 2007. “Introduction” to On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Kennedy, George A. (Trans. Introduction, Notes, & Appendices). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kochin, Michael S. 2009. “From Argument to Assertion,” Argumentation 23: 387–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornprobst, Markus 2008. Irredentism in European Politics: Argumentation, Compromise and Norms. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine M. 1996a. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine M. 1996b. Creating the Kingdom of Ends. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine M. 2008. The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine M. 2009. Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusch, Martin 2002. Knowledge by Agreement: The Programme of Communitarian Epistemology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lackey, Jennifer 2008. Learning from Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lawson-Tancred, Hugh 1992. The Art of Rhetoric. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Lazarus, Richard S. 1984. “On the Primacy of Cognition,” American Psychologist 39 (2): 124–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarus, Richard S. 2001. “Relational meaning and Discrete Emotions,” in Scherer, Klaus R., Schorr, Angela, and Johnstone, Tom (eds.) Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods, Research. Oxford University Press, pp. 37–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leff, Michael 1983. “Topical Invention and Metaphoric Interaction,” The Southern Speech Communication Journal 48 (3): 214–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leff, Michael 2000. “Rhetoric and Dialectic in the Twenty-First Century,” Argumentation 14: 241–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighton, Stephen R. 1982. “Aristotle and the Emotions,” Phronesis 27: 144–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighton, Stephen R. 1985. “A New View of Emotion,” American Philosophical Quarterly 22: 133–41.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen 2000. Presumptive Meanings: A Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, John 1975. Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Nidditch, P. H. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, David 1990. After Bakhtin: Essays on Fiction and Criticism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Long, Richard 1983. “The Role of Audience in Chaim Perelman’s New Rhetoric,” Journal of Advanced Composition (4): 107–17.Google Scholar
Lukes, Steven 1982. “Of Gods and Demons,” Habermas – Critical Debates, Thompson, John B. and Held, David (eds.) Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 134–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, D. S.et al. 1996. “Search for Past Life on Mars: Possible Relic Biogenic Activity in Martian Meteorite ALH84001,” Science Magazine (August 16).Google ScholarPubMed
McKerrow, R. E. 1977. “Rhetorical Validity: An Analysis of Three Perspectives on the Justification of Rhetorical Argument,” Journal of the American Forensic Association 13 (3): 133–41.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Catriona and Stoljar, Natalie 2000. “Autonomy Refigured,” in Mackenzie, C. and Stoljar, N. (eds.) Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. Oxford University Press, pp. 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makowski, Piotr 2009. “Metaphysics of Practical Philosophy: The Concept of Capacity in Aristotle,” Studies on Supernaturalism. Berlin: Logos Verlag: 59–73.Google Scholar
Malcolm, Norman 1959. Dreaming. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Maneli, M. 1994. Perelman’s New Rhetoric as Philosophy and Methodology for the Next Century. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manguel, Alberto 2013. The Traveler, the Tower, and the Worm: The Reader as Metaphor. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercier, Hugo and Sperber, Dan 2011. “Why do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34: 57–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, Michel 2000. Philosophy and the Passions: Toward a History of Human Nature, Barsky, R. F. (trans.) University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Mickunas, A. 1987. “Perelman on Justice and Political Institutions,” in Golden, J. C. and Pilotta, J. J. (eds.) Practical Reasoning in Human Affairs. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Modrak, Deborah K. 1987. Aristotle: The Power of Perception. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Morton, Adam 2013. Emotion and Imagination. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Natanson, M. and Johnstone, H. W. Jr. 1965. Philosophy, Rhetoric and Argumentation. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Nightingale, Andrea Wilson 2004. Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy: Theoria in its Cultural Context. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Gorman, Ned 2005. “Aristotle’s Phantasia in the Rhetoric: Lexis, Appearance and the Epideictic Function of Discourse,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 38: 16–40.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, Daniel 1990. Persuasion: Theory and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Olmos, Paula 2006. “Making it Public: Testimony and Socially Sanctioned Common Grounds,” Informal Logic 27: 211–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ovid, 1916. Ovid iii: Metamorphoses, Books i-viii. Frank, Justus Miller (trans.). (Loeb Classical Library, No. 42). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Penco, Carlo 2008. “Keeping Track of Individuals: Brandom’s Analysis of Kripke’s Puzzle and the Content of Belief,” in Stekeler-Weithofer (ed.), pp. 163–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, Chaim 1949/2003. “First Philosophies and Regressive Philosophy,” Frank, David A. and Bolduc, Michelle K. (trans.). Philosophy and Rhetoric 36: 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, Chaim 1963. The Idea of Justice and the Problem of Argument. John, Petrie (trans.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaim 1967. Justice. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaim 1979. New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, Chaim 1982. The Realm of Rhetoric, William, Kluback (trans.). University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chain 1989. “The New Rhetoric and the Rhetoricians: Remembrances and Comments,” in Dearin, R. D. (ed.) The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman: Statement and Response. New York: University Press of America, pp. 239–51.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaim and Olbrechts-Tyteca, Lucie 1969. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, John, Wilkinson and Purcell, Weaver (trans.). University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. 1993. Warrant: The Current Debate. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plato, 1986. Phaedrus. Rowe, C. J. (trans.). Oxford: Aris & Phillips.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary 2002. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quante, Michael 2007. “The Social Nature of Personal Identity,” Journal of Consciousness Studies 14: 56–76.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1953. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” in From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 20–46.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1966. Ways of Paradox. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Quintilian, 1980. Institutio Oratoria : Books i-iii. Butler, H. E. (trans.). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ray, John W. 1978. “Perelman’s Universal Audience,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 64: 361–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redding, Paul 1989. “Habermas’ Theory of Argumentation,” Journal of Value Inquiry 23 (1): 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rée, Jonathan 1999. I See a Voice: Language, Deafness & the Senses – A Philosophical History. London: Harper Collins Publishers Limited.Google Scholar
Rehg, William 2003. “Habermas, Argumentation Theory, and Science Studies: Toward Interdisciplinary Cooperation,” Informal Logic 23 (2): 161–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehg, William 2009. Cogent Science in Context: The Science Wars, Argumentation Theory, and Habermas. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reid, Thomas 1983. Thomas Reid’s Inquiry and Essays. Beanblossom, Ronald E. and Lehrer, Keith (eds.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A. 1936. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas 2000. “Let’s Argue! Communicative Action in World Politics,” International Organization 54 (1): 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, Philip and Aydede, Murat (eds.) 2009. The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rotenstreich, Nathan 1972. “Argumentation and Philosophical Clarification,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 5 (1): 12–23.Google Scholar
Roth, Wendy D. and Mehta, Jal D. 2002. “The Rashomon Effect: Combining Positivist and Interpretivist Approaches in the Analysis of Contested Events,” Sociological Methods & Research 31: 131–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubinelli, S. 2009. Ars Topica The Classical Technique of Constructing Arguments from Aristotle to Cicero. Springer.Google Scholar
Rushdie, Salman 2012. Joseph Anton: A Memoir. Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf Canada.Google Scholar
Ryan, Eugene 1984. Aristotle’s Theory of Rhetorical Argumentation. Montreal: Editions Bellarmin.Google Scholar
Saul, Jennifer M. 2002. “What is Said and Psychological Reality: Grice’s Project and Relevance Theorists’ Criticisms,” Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 347–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiappa, Edward 1999. The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Scult, Allen 1976/1989. “Perelman’s Universal Audience: One Perspective,” Central States Speech Journal 27: 176–80. Reprinted in Ray Dearin (ed.) The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman: Statement and Response. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, pp. 153–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid 1997. Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1999. Reason before Identity. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2004. “Capabilities, Lists, and Public Reason: Continuing the Conversation,” Feminist Economics 10: 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2006. Identity and Violence. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Sidgewick, Alfred 1883. Fallacies: A View of Logic from the Practical Side. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co.Google Scholar
Siegel, Harvey 1997. Rationality Redeemed?: Further Dialogues on an Educational Ideal. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael 1987. “The Humean Theory of Motivation,” Mind (96): 36–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, A. and Bricmont, J. 1998. Intellectual Imposters: Postmodern Philosophers’ Abuse of Science. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Solomon, Robert C. 1977. The Passions. New York: Anchorage Books.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan and Wilson, Deidre 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Spivey, Michael 2007. The Continuity of the Mind. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stampe, Dennis W. 1967. On the Acoustic Behavior of Rational Animals. Photocopy. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Stekeler-Weithofer, Pirmin (ed.) 2008. The Pragmatics of Making it Explicit. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Surowiecki, James 2004. The Wisdom of the Crowds. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Thagard, Paul 2000. Coherence in Thought and Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, Paul 2005. “Testimony, Credibility, and Explanatory Coherence,” Erkenntnis 63: 295–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, Paul 2006. Hot Thought: Mechanisms and Applications of Emotional Cognition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, Paul 2012. The Cognitive Science of Science: Explanation, Discovery, and Conceptual Change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 1999a. Acts of Arguing. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 1999b. “The Authority of Testimony,” ProtoSociology 13: 96–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 2004. Rhetorical Argumentation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 2006a. “Perelman, Informal Logic and the Historicity of Reason,” Informal Logic 26 (2): 341–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 2006b. “Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise,” Argumentation 20: 447–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 2010. Reason’s Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument. Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. 2011. “Out of the Space of Reasons: Argumentation, Agents, and Persons.” Pragmatics and Cognition 13 (3): 383–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, Christopher W. and Gough, James 1987. “The Use of Irony in Argumentation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 20: 1–17.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen 1958. The Uses of Argument (2nd edition 2003). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen 1972. Human Understanding. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen 1990. Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2004. “A Critique of Levinson’s View of Q- and M-inferences in Historical Pragmatics,” A Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, Amos and Kahneman, Daniel 1974. “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,” Science 185: 1124–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Gelder, T. 1995. “What might cognition be, if not computation?” Journal of Philosophy 91: 345–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Radziewsky, Katharina and Tindale, C. W. 2012. “Arguments for Rhetorical Arguments: A Response to Aikin,” Cogency 4 (1): 91–119.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas 1998. Ad Hominem Arguments. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas and Krabbe, Erik 1995. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Wanderer, Jeremy 2008. Robert Brandom. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Weidemann, Hermann 1989. “Aristotle on Inferences from Signs,” Phronesis 34: 343–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whately, Richard 1963. Elements of Rhetoric. Ehninger, Douglas (ed.) Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Willard, C. A. 1990. “Authority,” Informal Logic 12: 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan 1981. “On Grice’s Theory of Conversation,” in Werth, Paul (ed.) Conversation and Discourse: Structure and Interpretation. London: Croom Helm, pp. 155–78.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan 1986. “On Defining Relevance,” in Grandy and Warner (eds.), pp. 243–58.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan 2012. Meaning and Relevance. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Emily 2007. The Death of Socrates. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion 1997. “Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communication,” in Bonham, James and Rehg, William (eds.) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Christopher W. Tindale, University of Windsor, Ontario
  • Book: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception
  • Online publication: 05 May 2015
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316181645.013
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Christopher W. Tindale, University of Windsor, Ontario
  • Book: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception
  • Online publication: 05 May 2015
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316181645.013
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Christopher W. Tindale, University of Windsor, Ontario
  • Book: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception
  • Online publication: 05 May 2015
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316181645.013
Available formats
×