Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Start Date
3-6-2009 9:00 AM
End Date
6-6-2009 5:00 PM
Abstract
This paper will examine chronically derailed church-state separation arguments in order to explore the extent to which rhetorical and dialectical approaches can be reconciled. I will consider broader conceptions of rhetoric than those employed to date in studies of strategic manoeuvring. While rhetorical appeals, such as claims of persecution, can terminally polarize church-state arguments, they may also serve as means for recovering from dialectical derailment.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
Frans H. Van Eemeren, Commentary on Battistelli
Reader's Reactions
Frans H. Van Eemeren, Commentary on Battistelli (June 2009)
Included in
Rhetoric, Dialectic and Derailment in Church-State Arguments
University of Windsor
This paper will examine chronically derailed church-state separation arguments in order to explore the extent to which rhetorical and dialectical approaches can be reconciled. I will consider broader conceptions of rhetoric than those employed to date in studies of strategic manoeuvring. While rhetorical appeals, such as claims of persecution, can terminally polarize church-state arguments, they may also serve as means for recovering from dialectical derailment.
