Rhetoric in a dialectical framework: Fallacies as derailments of strategic manoeuvring
-
Frans H. van Eemeren
Abstract
The fallacies are one of the most significant research topics in the study of argumentation. After Hamblin (1970) revealed the inadequacy of the dominant Logical Standard Treatment of the fallacies, several kinds of alternative treatments have been developed. The “pragma-dialectical” alternative developed by van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984, 1992, 2004) involves replacing the logical standard definition of fallacies as “arguments that seem valid but are not valid” by a broader communicative definition of fallacies as pragmatic argumentative moves that are “violations of dialectical rules for critical discussion”. To account for the deceptive role the fallacies may have, van Eemeren and Houtlosser (2002) have taken this approach a crucial step further by bringing in the notion of “strategic manoeuvring”: the systematic combination in argumentative discourse of the pursuit of dialectical and rhetorical. Fallacies can be analysed as derailments of legitimate ways of strategic manoeuvring that can only be identified in contextualized argumentative discourse.
Abstract
The fallacies are one of the most significant research topics in the study of argumentation. After Hamblin (1970) revealed the inadequacy of the dominant Logical Standard Treatment of the fallacies, several kinds of alternative treatments have been developed. The “pragma-dialectical” alternative developed by van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984, 1992, 2004) involves replacing the logical standard definition of fallacies as “arguments that seem valid but are not valid” by a broader communicative definition of fallacies as pragmatic argumentative moves that are “violations of dialectical rules for critical discussion”. To account for the deceptive role the fallacies may have, van Eemeren and Houtlosser (2002) have taken this approach a crucial step further by bringing in the notion of “strategic manoeuvring”: the systematic combination in argumentative discourse of the pursuit of dialectical and rhetorical. Fallacies can be analysed as derailments of legitimate ways of strategic manoeuvring that can only be identified in contextualized argumentative discourse.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction: Rhetoric or how to integrate the different voices ix
-
Part I. Rhetorical Paradigms
- Rhetoric in the Mixed Game 3
- The selection of agency as a rhetorical device: Opening up the scene of dialogue through ventriloquism 23
- Dialogic rhetoric, coauthorship, and moments of meeting 39
- The rhetoric of 'dialogue' in metadiscourse: Possibility/impossibility arguments and critical events 55
- Rhetoric and ethic of dialog: Can conditions of performance serve as excluding criteria? 69
- Common ground and (re)defanging the antagonistic: A paradigm for argumentation as shared inquiry and responsibility 83
- What is the role of arguments? Fundamental human rights in the age of spin 95
- Logical and rhetorical rules of debate 119
- Rhetoric in a dialectical framework: Fallacies as derailments of strategic manoeuvring 133
-
Part II. Rhetoric in the Mixed Game: Communicative means, cultural values, and institutional games
- Strategic use of Korean honorifics: Functions of 'partner-deference sangdae-nopim' 155
- Irony as a rhetorical device in dialogic interaction 171
- Political rhetoric in visual images 185
- Sociological concepts and their impact on rhetoric: Japanese language concepts 195
- The rhetorical component of dialogic communication in Banks' annual reports 209
- Attention-influencing as a rhetorical strategy in German and Turkish Parliamentary debates 221
- Diatexts of media dilemmas: The rhetorical construction of euthanasia 235
- Recontextualization of concepts in European legal discourse 251
- A court judgment as dialogue 267
-
Part III. Round table discussion: Concepts of rhetoric, dialogue and argumentation
- Round table discussion 285
- General Index 309
- List of Contributors 315
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction: Rhetoric or how to integrate the different voices ix
-
Part I. Rhetorical Paradigms
- Rhetoric in the Mixed Game 3
- The selection of agency as a rhetorical device: Opening up the scene of dialogue through ventriloquism 23
- Dialogic rhetoric, coauthorship, and moments of meeting 39
- The rhetoric of 'dialogue' in metadiscourse: Possibility/impossibility arguments and critical events 55
- Rhetoric and ethic of dialog: Can conditions of performance serve as excluding criteria? 69
- Common ground and (re)defanging the antagonistic: A paradigm for argumentation as shared inquiry and responsibility 83
- What is the role of arguments? Fundamental human rights in the age of spin 95
- Logical and rhetorical rules of debate 119
- Rhetoric in a dialectical framework: Fallacies as derailments of strategic manoeuvring 133
-
Part II. Rhetoric in the Mixed Game: Communicative means, cultural values, and institutional games
- Strategic use of Korean honorifics: Functions of 'partner-deference sangdae-nopim' 155
- Irony as a rhetorical device in dialogic interaction 171
- Political rhetoric in visual images 185
- Sociological concepts and their impact on rhetoric: Japanese language concepts 195
- The rhetorical component of dialogic communication in Banks' annual reports 209
- Attention-influencing as a rhetorical strategy in German and Turkish Parliamentary debates 221
- Diatexts of media dilemmas: The rhetorical construction of euthanasia 235
- Recontextualization of concepts in European legal discourse 251
- A court judgment as dialogue 267
-
Part III. Round table discussion: Concepts of rhetoric, dialogue and argumentation
- Round table discussion 285
- General Index 309
- List of Contributors 315
