Argumentation, Communication, and Context

In everyday life humans make decisions that decisively affect their future, individual and collective. They: vote in crucial issues; decide to adopt (or not) a set of global measures to preserve the environment; decide to start a certain medical treatment that has an uncertain outcome; switch off a machine supporting the life system of someone in deep coma; decide that someone is guilty and put that person in jail for years; choose (if they can) to pay a huge sum for their children’s education having the free public education at their disposal; buy and sell all sort of things and services. They do all that, and more, believing that they are serving their own best interests, or of their families, or of some group.

Albeit all these decisions are supposed to be rationally grounded, they are taken in a way that: tangles up reason and uncertainty; allows for better or worse; requires context sensitivity; calls for ceteris paribus considerations; is, in short, defeasible.

Conscious of the defeasible nature of their reasons for or against a particular standpoint, people verbally articulate these reasons and subject them to public discussion. These public argumentative transactions form the intersection plane of human reasoning with human verbal communication. They are present even when, trying to rationally ground a decision, we are thinking alone and in silence.

Context here makes all the difference between the classic un-parameterized approach to argument forms, solely based in the laws of Logic, and the modern approach that considerers real argumentations, where situated rational communicants do the best they can to justify their standpoints. The interpretation and analysis of agent’s utterances throughout these argumentative communication processes and the fair evaluation of what is the best justification of a given standpoint should, of course, be parameterized to the contexts of occurrence of those communication events.

Dialectics (including the Topics and the Sophistic Refutations) and Rhetoric were the two philosophical disciplines created by Aristotle to approach argumentation. They grew up separate ways, and more recently they rejoined forces under the title: Argumentation Theory. Dialectics approaches argumentations seeing them as processes of conflict solution of (at least) two antagonistic standpoints on a particular issue; Rhetoric approaches these same processes considering the persuasion mechanisms that they use and exploit. They complement each other.

The main purpose of our Project is to analyse, assess and confront the two most comprehensive, influential and well-accepted current Dialectic theories: the Pragma-dialectical Theory (PDT) of Frans van Eemeren and others, and the Argumentation Schemes Theory (AST) of Douglas Walton and others. more...


Research Group

Consultants

Back to previous page


Events

All Events

Felipe Oliveira, 26 October 2018, 11h

Reason-giving as an expressive speech act

October 26, 2018

Erich Rast, 28 September 2018, 11h, Sala 0.06ID

Value Seminar Talk by Erich Rast (IFILNOVA): Reasons for the…

September 28, 2018

Book Launch: Schizophrenia and Common Sense: explaining the relation between madness and social values with Thomas Fuchs

Schizophrenia and Common Sense: explaining the relation between madness and…

June 25, 2018

Workshop: Misunderstanding, disagreement, manipulation

The idea of the workshop is to explore the blurred…

June 22, 2018

Katharina Stevens, 18 June 2018, 14h

ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Argument-Design through Role-Taking"

June 18, 2018

Workshop: Communication and metaphors for health. An educational challenge

The workshop discusses the importance of communication and metaphors in…

June 01, 2018

Inês Hipólito, 30th May 11:00 - 12:00

Lisbon Mind & Reasoning RIP Seminar |"Perception as Cognition: Beyond…

May 30, 2018

Dima Mohammed, 28 May 2018, 16h

ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Proposals for the examination of networked…

May 28, 2018

Jakob Krebs, 16 May, 15h to 16h

Lisbon Mind & Reasoning RIP Seminar |"Pictorial Models, Imagination, and…

May 16, 2018

Mehmet Ali Üzelgün, 14 May 2018, 16h

ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Level, focus, and force of argumentative…

May 14, 2018

Virtualism and the Mind: Rethinking Presence, Representation and the Self

Lisbon Mind & Reasoning Workshop "Virtualism and the Mind"

April 23, 2018

João Leite, 16 April 2018, 16h

ArgLab Research Colloquium | "An Online Social Debating System"

April 16, 2018

Klaus Gärtner, 20 Mar, 2018, 14.30h to 15.30h

Lisbon Mind & Reasoning RIP Seminar |"4E Cognition: Radical or…

March 20, 2018

Javier Gonzalez de Prado Salas, 19 March 2018, 16h

ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Reasoning as a self-doubter"

March 19, 2018

Erich Rast, 16.3., Sala 1.05 ID, 16h

Value Seminar Session with Erich Rast, Sala 1.05 ID 16h

March 16, 2018

Value Seminar Marcin Lewiński, Sala 105 ID 16h

Value Seminar with Marcin Lewiński, Sala 1.05 ID 16h

March 09, 2018

Value Seminar Dima Mohammed, Sala 105 ID 16h

Value Seminar with Dima Mohammed, Sala 1.05 ID 16h

March 02, 2018

The 1st European Conference on Argumentation

International Conference | Argumentation and Reasoned Action

June 09, 2015

Institutions

IFIL FCSH/NOVA
Faculdade de Direito Universidade Nova de Lisboa
FCSH
UNL
FCT