Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1999 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1999 5:00 PM
Abstract
Given a sort of trade-off between normative and descriptive analyses of argumentation, theorists have chosen either the perspective of the evaluating observer or that of the participant-like "co-interpreter" of argumentation. However, the evaluational perspective neglects the dialogical, self-organizing nature of arguing, whereas the participant perspective fails to capture the normative goal-directedness of persuasion and conflict resolution. Since arguers are both participants in argumentation as w ell as well as observers of it, I will propose a method, based on normative pragmatics, of combining both perspectives.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
Eveline T. Feteris, Commentary on Ruhl
Reader's Reactions
Eveline T. Feteris, Commentary on Ruhl (May 1999)
Included in
Observer and participant perspectives in the analysis of argumentation
Given a sort of trade-off between normative and descriptive analyses of argumentation, theorists have chosen either the perspective of the evaluating observer or that of the participant-like "co-interpreter" of argumentation. However, the evaluational perspective neglects the dialogical, self-organizing nature of arguing, whereas the participant perspective fails to capture the normative goal-directedness of persuasion and conflict resolution. Since arguers are both participants in argumentation as w ell as well as observers of it, I will propose a method, based on normative pragmatics, of combining both perspectives.
