Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules /

In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Eemeren, Frans van (Author), Garssen, Bart (Author), Meuffels, Bert (Author)
Corporate Author: SpringerLink (Online service)
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:English
Published: Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands, 2009.
Series:Argumentation Library, 16
Subjects:
Online Access:Full Text via HEAL-Link
Table of Contents:
  • Theoretical Background and Organization of the Study
  • Considerations Regarding the Design of the Study
  • Ad Hominem Fallacies: An Exemplary Study
  • The Confrontation Stage: The Freedom Rule
  • The Opening Stage: The Obligation-to-Defend Rule (I)
  • The Opening Stage: The Obligation-to-Defend (II)
  • The Argumentation Stage: The Argument Scheme Rule
  • The Concluding Stage: The Concluding Rule
  • Conventional Validity of the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules.