Natural Normativity: Argumentation Theory as an Engaged Discipline

Gilbert, Michael A.

doi:10.22329/il.v27i2.472

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of course, before anyone else can say it, let me point out that this relies on intuition itself. I have, elsewhere, argued that there are restrictions on what we can believe and how arguments may work (Gilbert 2007), and these considerations apply here as well.…”

Section: Physics Rests On Reality Economics Rests On Models Astrolomentioning

confidence: 74%

The Kisceral: Reason and Intuition in Argumentation

Gilbert

2011

Argumentation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gilbert's four modes of communication include the logical, the emotional, the visceral and the kisceral, which last has not received much attention at all. This mode covers the forms of argument that rely on intuition and undefended basal assumptions. These forms range from the scientific and mathematical to the religious and mystical. In this paper these forms will be examined, and suggestions made for ways in which intuitive frameworks can be compared and valued.Keywords Kisceral Á Intuition Á Multi-modal argument Á Conceptual frameworks There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. Shakespeare, Hamlet 166. I Have Facts, You Have Axioms, She Has IntuitionsIn 1994 when I first wrote about multi-modal argumentation I described four modes arguers employ when putting forward arguments, making points, defending positions, and so on. The first three were the logical, the emotional, and the visceral, this last involving physical and contextual communication. The fourth A previous version of this paper entitled, ''Reason and Intuition: The kisceral mode of communication,''

show abstract

Section: Physics Rests On Reality Economics Rests On Models Astrolomentioning

confidence: 74%

The Kisceral: Reason and Intuition in Argumentation

Gilbert

2011

Argumentation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In his examination of goals in argumentation, Gilbert (1996Gilbert ( , 2007 distinguishes between goals forming the immediate strategic object of the encounter (task goals), and goals concerning the relationship between the arguers (face goals). In Gilbert's account, convincing someone of the acceptability of a claim in just one of the task goals that arguers can have.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pursuing multiple goals in European Parliamentary Debates

Mohammed

2013

JAIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I shed light on the multi-purposive nature of debates in the European Parliament. As a case in point, I examine a debate on immigration in the wake of a migratory crisis in the Italian island of Lampedusa in early 2011. I analyze the points of view argued for by MEPs, aiming at identifying the different institutional goals that are typically pursued and characterizing the ways in which these goals shape the argumentative exchanges. The link between the multiple goals communicators have and the discourse choices they make can be assumed on the basis of previous research (see Craig 1990;Jacobs et al. 1991;Tracy 1984;Tracy and Coupland 1990). In line with the pragma-dialectical view of argumentative discourse taking place in the context of more or less institutionalized argumentative activity types (van Eemeren 2010), institutional goals are understood as those goals that can be attributed to arguers on the basis of the type of activity in which they are engaged. In identifying the institutional goals, I follow Craig (1986Craig ( , 1990 and consider not only goals which are intentional, formal, and directly responsible for a certain discourse choice, but also goals which are functional, strategic, and only indirectly responsible for discourse choices. The analysis shows that the MEPs pursued three kinds of goals: goals that are 1) assigned to them by the occasion of the debate; 2) related to the powers of Parliament; and 3) associated with the different identities they assume in Parliament. While the pursuit of the occasion-related and powers-related goals gave rise to multiple simultaneous discussions, the pursuit of the identity-related goals guided the MEPs' choices and formulations in these discussions.

show abstract

“…In my terminology, this might amount to judgments/practice being guided by the theory in the weak sense which informs and shapes practice. Michael Gilbert (2007) also seems to begin in practice in his discussion of how to build normative controls on everyday argument. It is a kind of natural normativity, he argues, that grows organically from goals, context and ethos of situations in which argumentation happens.…”

Section: Deweyan Reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation in Theory and Practice: Gap or Equilibrium?

Kvernbekk

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Natural Normativity: Argumentation Theory as an Engaged Discipline

Cited by 10 publications

References 14 publications

The Kisceral: Reason and Intuition in Argumentation

The Kisceral: Reason and Intuition in Argumentation

Pursuing multiple goals in European Parliamentary Debates

Argumentation in Theory and Practice: Gap or Equilibrium?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About