Debating multiple positions in multi-party online deliberation
-
Marcin Lewiński
Abstract
Dialectical approaches traditionally conceptualize argumentation as a discussion in which two parties debate on “two sides of an issue” (pro and con). However, many political issues engender multiple positions. This is clear in multi-party online deliberations in which often an array of competing positions is debated in one and the same discussion. A proponent of a given position thus addresses a number of possible opponents, who in turn may hold incompatible opinions. The goal of this chapter is to shed extra light on such “polylogical” clash of opinions in online deliberation, by examining the multi-layered participation in actual online debates. The examples are drawn from the readers’ discussions on Osama bin Laden’s killing in online versions of two British newspapers: The Guardian and The Telegraph. As a result of the analysis, a distinction between sides, positions, and cases in argumentative deliberation is proposed.
Abstract
Dialectical approaches traditionally conceptualize argumentation as a discussion in which two parties debate on “two sides of an issue” (pro and con). However, many political issues engender multiple positions. This is clear in multi-party online deliberations in which often an array of competing positions is debated in one and the same discussion. A proponent of a given position thus addresses a number of possible opponents, who in turn may hold incompatible opinions. The goal of this chapter is to shed extra light on such “polylogical” clash of opinions in online deliberation, by examining the multi-layered participation in actual online debates. The examples are drawn from the readers’ discussions on Osama bin Laden’s killing in online versions of two British newspapers: The Guardian and The Telegraph. As a result of the analysis, a distinction between sides, positions, and cases in argumentative deliberation is proposed.
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction 1
-
Articles
- Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse in political deliberation 11
- Strategic maneuvering in European Parliamentary Debate 33
- Pursuing multiple goals in European Parliamentary Debates 47
- The place of counter discourse in two methods of public deliberation 75
- Deliberation digitized 101
- (How) do participants in online discussion forums create ‘echo chambers’? 127
- Debating multiple positions in multi-party online deliberation 151
- Subject index 177
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction 1
-
Articles
- Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse in political deliberation 11
- Strategic maneuvering in European Parliamentary Debate 33
- Pursuing multiple goals in European Parliamentary Debates 47
- The place of counter discourse in two methods of public deliberation 75
- Deliberation digitized 101
- (How) do participants in online discussion forums create ‘echo chambers’? 127
- Debating multiple positions in multi-party online deliberation 151
- Subject index 177
