Cover not available
Part of
Argumentation in Actual Practice: Topical studies about argumentative discourse in context
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
[Argumentation in Context 17] 2019
► pp. 299–320

Chapter 16
On philosophical argumentation

Towards a pragma-dialectical solution of a puzzle

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The pragma-dialectic concept of a disagreement
  • 3.First example: Dante, Aristotle, and others
  • 4.A few contemporary examples
  • 5.The proposed solution to the puzzle
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 23 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.17.16lea
References (43)
References
Aakhus, M., & Lewiński, M. (2017). Advancing polylogical analysis of large-scale argumentation: Disagreement management in the fracking controversy. Argumentation, 31(1), 179–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. (1969). Aristotle’s theory of demonstration. Phronesis, 14(2), 123–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blackford, R., & Broderick, D. (2017). Philosophy’s future: The problem of philosophical progress. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourget, D., & Chalmers, D. J. (2014). What do philosophers believe? Philosophical Studies, 170(3), 465–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burge, T. (1986). Individualism and psychology. Philosophical Review, 94(1), 3–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, D. J. (2011). Verbal disputes. Philosophical Review, 120(4), 515–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Why isn’t there more progress in philosophy? Philosophy, 90(1), 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. J. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collingwood, R. G. (1939). An autobiography. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham, CH: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferejohn, M. (1991). The origins of Aristotelian science. New Haven: Yale University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaos, J. (1960). De la filosofía [On philosophy]. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar
Grosjean, M. (2004). From multi-participant talk to genuine polylogue: Shift-change briefing sessions at the hospital. In Kerbrat-Orecchioni (Ed.), 2004, 25–52.Google Scholar
Harman, G. (2011). Quentin Meillassoux: Philosophy in the making. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, G. N., & Hill, K. T. (1995). Real life dictionary of the law. Los Angeles: General Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Hintikka, J. (1972). On the ingredients of an Aristotelian science. Noûs, 6(1), 55–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaspers, K. (1919). Psychologie der Weltanschauungen. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, H. W., Jr. (1959). Philosophy and argument. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
(1978). Validity and rhetoric in philosophical argument. University Park, PA: The Dialogue Press of Man & World.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1781). Critik der reinen Vernunft. Riga: Hartknoch.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (Ed.) (2004). Polylogue. Special issue of the Journal of Pragmatics, 36(1), 1–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kusch, M. (1995). Psychologism: A case study in the sociology of philosophical knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ladyman, J., & Ross, D. (2007). Every thing must go: Metaphysics naturalized. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewiński, M. (2014a). Argumentative polylogues in a dialectical framework: A methodological inquiry. Argumentation, 28(2), 161–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b). Practical reasoning in argumentative polylogues. Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación, 8, 1–20.Google Scholar
Marcoccia, M. (2004). On-line polylogues: Conversation structure and participation framework in internet newsgroups. In Kerbrat-Orecchioni (Ed.), 2004, 115–145.Google Scholar
Menary, R. (2010). Introduction: The extended mind in focus. In R. Menary (Ed.), The extended mind (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Overgaard, S., Gilbert, P., & Burwood, S. (2013). An introduction to metaphilosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Passmore, J. (1961). Philosophical reasoning. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
Pigliucci, M. (2017). The nature of philosophy: How philosophy makes progress and why it matters. New York: Author (Amazon Kindle).Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (1975). Philosophical papers, vol. 2: Mind, language, and reality. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Redding, P. (2007). Analytic philosophy and the return of Hegelian thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rescher, N. (1978). Philosophical disagreement: An essay towards orientational pluralism in metaphilosophy. The Review of Metaphysics, 32(2), 217–251.Google Scholar
(1985). The strife of systems: An essay on the grounds and implications of philosophical diversity. Pittsburgh: The University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
(2001). Philosophical reasoning: A study in the methodology of philosophizing. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stoljar, D. (2017). Philosophical progress: In defence of a reasonable optimism. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strawson, G. (2004a). A fallacy of our age. The Times Literary Supplement, October 15.Google Scholar
(2004b). Against narrativity. Ratio (new series), XVII, 428–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Things that bother me: Death, freedom, the self, etc. New York: New York Review Books.Google Scholar
Weber, Z. (Ed.) (2011). Philosophy’s future. Special Issue of Essays in Philosophy, 12 ([URL]).Google Scholar
Williamson, T. (2018). Doing philosophy: From common curiosity to logical reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar