Location
Brock University
Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1997 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1997 5:00 PM
Abstract
This paper addresses a specific form of argumentation, pragmatic argumentation, in which a certain action, choice or decision is justified by referring to the favourable consequences of the action (and the unfavourable consequences of the alternative action). The paper starts with a survey of the ideas on legal argumentation developed in argumentation theory, analytical philosophy and legal theory. The various ideas are brought together in a pragma-dialectical perspective in order to give a systematic survey of the various conceptions of pragmatic argumentation and to decide which further lines of research must be developed.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
Leo Groarke, Commentary on Feteris
Reader's Reactions
Leo Groarke, Commentary on Feteris (May 1997)
Included in
The Soundness of Pragmatic Argumentation: Does the End Justify the Means?
Brock University
This paper addresses a specific form of argumentation, pragmatic argumentation, in which a certain action, choice or decision is justified by referring to the favourable consequences of the action (and the unfavourable consequences of the alternative action). The paper starts with a survey of the ideas on legal argumentation developed in argumentation theory, analytical philosophy and legal theory. The various ideas are brought together in a pragma-dialectical perspective in order to give a systematic survey of the various conceptions of pragmatic argumentation and to decide which further lines of research must be developed.
