Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1999 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1999 5:00 PM
Abstract
Most studies of reason-giving have focussed on formal, planned situations rather than on how reason-giving functions in relatively unplanned discourse. This study looks at reason-giving by respondents to an anonymous telephone public-opinion survey, e xploring the relationship between fact, policy, and value claims and the types of reasons used to support those claims. The results resonate with two important areas in argumentation theory: argument fields and critical thinking. Further, I suggest that reason-giving can serve as a method for individuals to present themselves as human and thoughtfully reasonable.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
Fred Kauffeld, Commentary on Cheng
Reader's Reactions
John Hoaglund, Commentary on Campolo (May 1999)
Included in
Reasons for reason-giving in unplanned discourse
Most studies of reason-giving have focussed on formal, planned situations rather than on how reason-giving functions in relatively unplanned discourse. This study looks at reason-giving by respondents to an anonymous telephone public-opinion survey, e xploring the relationship between fact, policy, and value claims and the types of reasons used to support those claims. The results resonate with two important areas in argumentation theory: argument fields and critical thinking. Further, I suggest that reason-giving can serve as a method for individuals to present themselves as human and thoughtfully reasonable.
