Artículo de publicación ISINegotiation and deliberation are two context types or genres of discourse
widely studied in the argumentation literature. Within the pragma-dialectical
framework, they have been characterised in terms of the conventions constraining
the use of argumentative discourse in each of them. Thanks to these descriptions, it
has become possible to analyse the arguers’ strategic manoeuvres and carry out
more systematic, context-sensitive evaluations of argumentative discussions.
However, one issue that still must be addressed in the pragma-dialectical theory—
and other contextual approaches to argumentation—is how to distinguish negotiation
and deliberation in practice. In this paper, I seek to develop criteria that can
help the analyst identify them in discourse. To this end, I characterise the felicity
conditions of the superordinate speech acts defining and structuring deliberation and
negotiation encounters
La argumentación por consecuencias en el debate legislativo chileno: preguntas críticas para evaluar su suficiencia Argumentation from consequences in Chilean lawmaking debates: critical questions for evaluating its sufficiency
This paper outlines a non-exhaustive inventory of presumptive argument schemes that can be used by legislators to rationally argue for and against the legitimacy of legislative ends. The inventory has both a descriptive and normative dimension. The inventory is descriptive because it is partly based on the empirical observation of arguments actually used by legislators in a sample of lawmaking debates. However, the inventory is also normative because – as I shall argue in this paper – the schemes identified in the sample are presumptive arguments schemes. They are therefore schemes with a claim to rationality, provided that certain conditions are met. The schemes included in the inventory are: the scheme of instrumental argumentation, the scheme from unintended consequences, the scheme from values, the schemes from model and antimodel, and the schemes from social demand.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.