In:Exploring Dialogue: Selected essays on argumentation by Erik C. W. Krabbe with contributions by Jan Albert van Laar
Edited by Erik C.W. Krabbe and Jan Albert van Laar
[Argumentation in Context 23] 2026
► pp. 399–407
Subject index
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
A
A
- abandonment of discussion/of reasonable dialogue (fallacy) 95, 111, 387, 390
- absurdity 241, 335
- absurdum constant248
- ACADEMIC1 272, 274, 275, 281, 283
- accent (fallacy) 40, 41, 84, 87
- acceptance/negation of acceptance (speech acts) 290, 296
- accident (fallacy) 41, 84
- active criticism 5, 6, 22, 27, 57, 58, 59, 73, 78
- activity type204
- ad baculum:
- fallacy 55, 100, 315, 348
- strategy 348, 356, 365, 368, 369, 370
- ad hominem (fallacy),
19, 23, 38, 60, 197,
380
- abusive61
- ad ignorantiam (fallacy), 19, 69, 71
- ad misericordiam:
- fallacy100
- strategy 357, 365, 369
- ad populum,
7, 94, 100, 108–110, 113,
118, 153
- legitimate or fallacious 106, 108
- subtypes 104, 105
- ad verecundiam (fallacy),
53, 55, 58, 71, 94, 100, 109, 110, 314, 315, 327,
336
- probandi,315
- agenda of the opening stage188
- alternative fact 377, 389
- Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)378
- ambiguity dialectic162
- America first378
- amphiboly (fallacy) 40, 41, 75, 87, 88
- answerer
32, 37, 38, 71, 81, 82–86, 144, 148, 150, 151, 152,
159, 160, 175,
193, 194–197, 199,
203, 204, 205,
232, 271, 273, 274, 280, 283, 349
- difficult, ill-tempered, peevish (duskolos) 197, 232, 283
- apodeixis (Aristotle) 319, 329
- appeal to popular sentiments 104, 105, 108, 109, 114, 379
- appraisal theory (of emotion) 99, 103
- argument(ation) scheme (appropriate) 9, 162, 170, 189, 230, 384
- argument(ation) scheme rule
104, 170, 173, 384
- renumbered173
- argumentation stageSee under stages (of critical discussion)
- argumentation (the complex speech act) 93, 305, 306
- Aristotelian perfect language42
- asking too much 357, 366, 368, 369
- assertion 112, 114, 128–132, 137–139, 209, 212–214, 217, 221, 226, 229, 232, 321, 324, 329, 365
- asserting the consequent (fallacy)17; See also consequence/consequent fallacy.
- assignment rules 263, 264
- Athenian academic debate 6, 81, 86
- attack(ed):
- conclusive(ly) 290, 293, 300, 301, 306
- successful(ly) 277, 279, 306, 293, 298
- austere concept of proof 328, 339
- Axelrod’s advice370
- axiomatic proof
315, 333
- informal316
- axiom of parallels 335, 336
- axiom system 252, 312, 315
B
- babbling (state of) 83–85, 89
- balanced/unbalancedSee under strategy.
- barn raising metaphor192
- basic argument(ative step)19
- basic premise 9, 102, 162, 184–186, 188, 189
- begging the question (fallacy) 84, 272, 334 ; See also circular argumentation; petitio principii (fallacy).
- belittlement 354, 363, 364, 369
- blunder
13, 19, 54, 55, 231, 327, 330, 332–334, 338, 339, 340
- linguistic 83–85
- branch (finite)251
- bullshit 14, 377, 378, 379, 381, 387–389, 390
- burden of criticism 10, 209, 210, 230
- burden of proof
22, 24, 57, 73, 108,
109, 112, 114,
129, 130, 133,
134, 137, 202,
209–212, 218,
222, 225, 229–232, 315, 321, 324, 327, 334
- evading the 108, 109, 210, 232, 334
- principle of 314, 315
- shifting of the 69, 230, 231
- burden of questioning210
C
- calculus of rational sentiments47
- CB (system) 272, 280–283
- CD1 (system) 276, 278, 279, 297, 298, 299, 301–303
- chain of arguments 239, 248, 321, 322
- challenge:
- argued 214–216, 222, 230
- bound 214, 215, 216, 217, 221
- counter– 5, 221, 222
- pure 5, 213, 214, 216, 221
- charge of non-argumentation
95–97, 103,
104, 110, 111, 112, 113, 116, 118
- defending a 115, 116
- reactions to a 114, 119
- CHNOPS-assumption/presumption 215, 219, 222, 229
- circular argument(ation) 12, 289, 301, 302, 303 ; See also begging the question (fallacy); circulus vitiosus in probando/ in definiendo (fallacies); petitio principii (fallacy).
- circulus vitiosus in probando/ in definiendo (fallacies)316
- closure rules255
- code of conduct 2, 3, 12, 18, 20, 94, 169, 171, 173, 271, 276, 288, 326, 382
- combat metaphorSee war metaphor: (war on unreason/combating unreason).
- combination of words (fallacy) 40, 84, 87
- commitment:
- dark-side 104, 129, 135, 136, 140
- light-side129
- type of 8, 128, 129, 130, 140
- commitment rules 130, 274
- commitment store 136, 158, 274, 275, 282
- common folks ad populum, 104–106
- common principles (koinoi)89
- common sense380
- common task (koinon ergon) 194, 196–198, 201, 205, 233
- company (of discussants) 5, 24, 57, 61, 148, 177, 240, 321, 323, 330
- competitive argumentation 192, 200
- completeness:
- Aristotle’s claims 4, 85, 86, 87
- proofs for dialectic systems284
- completion problem 9, 186, 188, 189
- compromise 183, 344, 345, 347–349, 355, 357, 358, 359, 360, 366, 367, 369, 370, 372, 386
- concession, initial
38, 163, 219, 242, 243,
249, 261, 283,
284, 321, 322
- mere 128–130, 132, 137, 321
- fixed 133, 135, 218, 219, 227, 230–232
- free 133, 136, 219, 220, 222–227
- mutable153
- conciliation 355, 357, 365, 366, 368
- concluding stageSee under stages (of critical discussion).
- conclusive attack/defenseSee under attack(ed); defense.
- conclusively attacked/defendedSee under attack(ed); defense.
- conflict of (expressed) opinions
18, 150, 320
- pure (simple, nonmixed) 21, 23
- single 21, 23
- confrontation stageSee under stages (of critical discussion).
- connection criticismSee under criticism.
- connection premise 211, 215, 218, 219, 227–230, 231
- consequence/consequent (fallacy) 17, 41, 42, 84
- consequentia mirabilis,335
- consistency/inconsistency 27, 130, 152, 184
- conspiracy theory385
- constructive logicSee intuitionistic/constructive logic.
- contentious argumentsSee eristic/contentious/polemical arguments.
- contentious dialogue/discussionSee eristic/contentious dialogue/discussion.
- contentious tactics197
- contexts of proof 327, 330
- control layer163
- cooperative argumentation192
- cooperative principle (Grice) 17, 191
- corner (premise)283
- counterargument(ation)
6, 22, 52, 57, 59, 73, 191, 209,
213–215, 216,
223, 224, 226,
230, 232, 364
- request for 221, 222, 224, 225, 229, 231
- counterconsiderations 212–218, 220, 221, 223–225, 229, 230, 233, 360
- countercriticism 210, 211, 218, 220, 221, 226, 229–233
- counterexample
17, 19, 25, 32, 229,
321
- assignment 18, 19
- method 3, 24, 26, 27, 49, 178
- situation 18, 19, 24, 26, 27, 42
- countermodel 19, 20, 25 ; See also counterexample: assignment.
- crackpot (theory, –view) 377, 381
- critical discussion:
- pragma-dialectical model, norm, rule, theory of/for 7, 9, 12, 13, 18, 59, 65, 93, 94, 162, 173, 181, 183, 187, 201, 204, 205, 212, 214, 222, 223, 230, 233, 270–272, 276, 279, 280, 283, 285, 288–290, 292–295, 297, 302, 303, 304, 305, 326, 332, 336, 339, 340, 349, 382, 383, 390
- type of dialogue 4, 5, 7, 10, 13, 18, 53, 55, 58, 61, 67, 68, 69, 71, 72, 74, 108, 124–127, 128, 134, 137, 140, 145, 150, 157, 158, 162, 166, 167, 170, 171, 178, 186, 223, 224, 233, 313, 314, 320, 322, 323, 329, 330, 390 ; (see also persuasion dialogue).
- critical rationalism224
- critical reaction
10, 57, 211–215, 217, 220, 224, 230–233, 391
- focus of a 211, 212
- illocutionary force of a 211, 212
- level of a 211, 212
- norm appealed to in a 211, 212
- criticism:
- active 5, 6, 22, 27, 57, 58, 59, 73, 78
- connection 5, 21, 57, 72, 73, 211, 214, 220, 227, 229, 230
- fallacy 5, 6, 22, 57, 58, 59, 66, 70, 73, 74, 78, 93, 117, 164
- tenability 5, 21, 57, 73, 168, 211, 213, 220, 222, 226, 229
D
- daddy-gets-angry 356, 365
- declarative sentence 241, 249, 250
- deductive argument(ation)
9, 53, 166, 167–169, 171,
174, 175, 178
- Aristotle 82, 83, 272, 319
- deductive criteria 9, 166–171, 173, 174, 175, 177
- deductive move 166, 167, 176, 177, 178
- deductive reasoning175
- Aristotle 83, 329
- deductive tableau
255, 256
- closed255
- defense (defended):
- conclusive(ly) 170, 278, 279, 293, 294, 296, 300, 301, 306, 384
- successful(ly) 215, 224, 277, 278, 279, 293, 294, 296, 298, 300, 301, 306, 385
- deliberation dialogue 128, 204, 346, 386, 390
- demarcation problem 8, 157, 162, 164
- demonstration:
- Aristotle (apodeixis) 144, 145, 329
- (new rhetoric) formal 51, 54, 55
- (informal proof) mere 319, 320, 332
- denial214
- strong 212, 214–216, 220, 223
- weak 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 223, 224, 226
- derailment 13, 154, 327. 330, 332–337, 339
- Deutch’s recommendations170
- dialectic systemSee dialectical system.
- dialectical division of tasks223
- dialectical egalitarianism225
- dialectical foundationalism225
- dialectical obligation 10, 95, 209, 210, 219, 347
- dialectical shiftSee shift (dialectical).
- dialectical system 5, 7, 11, 12, 21, 64, 65, 66, 70, 78, 161, 162, 201, 229, 238–240, 244, 246, 248, 251, 252, 254, 256, 258, 261, 263, 269, 270–272, 276, 281, 285, 289, 297, 303, 321–323 ; See also dialogue game; formal system of dialogue rules; system of formal dialectic.
- dialogue:
- explicit 322, 360
- implicit 74, 320, 326, 360
- permissive 128, 129, 133, 137, 140, 206
- rigorous 129, 137, 140, 206
- dialogue game
11, 199, 238,
241, 245, 318
- completely formalized66
- formal vs. material 239, 240
- dialogue logic 198, 199, 203, 269
- dialogue rules 3, 11, 27, 130, 229, 238, 239, 240, 243, 244, 246, 248, 318
- dialogue sequent 249, 251, 252, 254
- didactic (demonstrative) discussion 196, 198
- difference of opinion
9, 182–187, 203, 204, 209,
217, 224, 305,
326, 328, 344,
346
- resolution (on the merits) of a 7, 9, 93, 107, 108, 110, 146, 181, 199, 201, 204, 205, 210, 222, 223, 233, 326, 327, 338, 347, 348, 359
- difficult answerer (duskolos)See under answerer.
- directiveness
217, 218
- degrees of 213–216
- types of 216, 217
- discussion rule 9, 10, 161, 183–185, 187, 189
- dividing281
- division of words (fallacy)84
- dominating 251, 253
- Dutch oil company (NAM)350
E
- effect:
- constructive 367, 369, 370
- destructive 367, 370
- immediate367
- mediate 367–369
- effective:
- constructively 349, 367, 368
- destructively 349, 367, 368
- element (of an argumentation)
276, 277, 278, 279, 293, 294, 295, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301
- fixed 276, 277, 293, 294, 297, 298, 300, 301
- link(ing) 277, 278, 291, 293, 294, 295, 298, 299, 300, 301
- elementary argument 41, 132, 273, 274, 276, 277, 293, 297, 298, 300, 302
- emotion:
- as a device for obtaining concessions 7, 101, 103–107
- as a presentational device 7, 101–103, 107
- enteuxis (encounter) 145, 146, 149, 150
- enthymeme 145, 148, 172
- equity problem 8, 158, 162
- equivalence (of types of systems) 11, 238, 248, 257, 261
- equivocation (fallacy)
3, 6, 71, 74–77, 112, 161, 162
- (Aristotle) 40, 41, 83, 85, 87, 88
- erasure263
- eristic/contentious/polemical arguments 83, 144, 196
- eristic/contentious dialogue/discussion 117, 144, 195–198, 204, 218, 330, 386, 387, 390
- ethical fallacy383; See also ad verecundiam (fallacy).
- ethos 94, 100, 146, 149
- Euthydemus (Plato) 158, 159, 193
- evading the burden of proof (fallacy)See under burden of proof.
- examination dialogue
144–146
- Socratic89; See also peirastic.
- examinational (peirastical) arguments 83, 89
- expert examination dialogueSee examination dialogue; peirastic.
- extended (version of) pragma-dialectical theory 10, 13, 201, 202, 205, 326, 327–329
- external stability adjustment 138–140, 232
F
- fairness, unfairness
14, 99, 345–347, 349, 358, 359–361, 372
- in strategies 362–366, 371, 372
- fake news 14, 377, 379, 381, 388–390
- fallacies dependent on the use of language 42, 87
- fallacy
2, 5, 8, 18, 19, 23, 49, 50,
54–56, 61,
76
93, 108, 127,
131, 164, 171,
172, 174, 197,
212, 231, 313,
314, 315, 327, 329, 333, 339, 344, 345, 368, 381–383
- ambiguity 4, 40, 41, 75, 88
- (Aristotle) 4, 6, 30–38, 40–42, 82, 86, 88, 90
- charge 27, 75, 95, 97, 111, 114, 116, 118, 119, 161, 178, 212, 220, 226, 383, 390
- criticism(see under criticism)
- formal 4, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 28
- false analogy (fallacy)98
- false/invalid proof
337, 342
- (Aristotle) 84, 86
- fault231
- Fermat’s last theorem 328, 336
- figure of speech/form of expression (fallacy) 4, 6, 30, 31, 32, 35–39, 40–42, 84, 87, 88
- finitary/nonfinitary: dialectic system 244–247
- (foundations for) mathematics317
- fixity problem 9, 188, 190
- fobbing off 353, 363
- force of justification/ refutation 169, 277, 291–294, 298, 306
- formal dialectic 2, 10–12, 61, 64, 65, 69, 161, 198, 200, 201, 211, 229, 238, 240, 269, 270–272, 274–276, 278–281, 284, 285, 289, 297–299, 303
- formal dialectic(al) systemSee dialectical system.
- formal dialogue 239, 240
- formal fallacy/fallaciousness 3, 4, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 28
- formal paraphrase (method) 24, 27, 28
- formal system316
- formal system of dialogue rules 3, 11, 238, 239, 243, 244, 246, 318 ; See also, dialectical system; dialogue game; system of formal dialectic.
- formal validitySee under validity.
- formal winning strategy240
- formalization/formalizing 12, 54, 55, 65, 66, 78, 175, 269, 270–273, 275, 276, 279, 283, 288, 289–304, 316–318, 328, 339
- form of expressionSee figure of speech/form of expression.
- Freeman’s manual/ book 185, 186
- fresh (parameter) 254–256
- From Expert Opinion (argumentation scheme) 227–229, 282, 386
- fundamental theorem of arithmetic336
G
- game theory 347, 348
- global approach 345, 358
- Gorgias (Plato)143
- Greek game281
- Gricean rules202
- Grice’s cooperative principle 17, 191
- ground level 8, 57, 74, 157, 158, 160–164, 188–90, 212, 214, 225, 383
- gumnasia (training), 145
H
- Hamblin-type dialogue/ system 129, 272, 274, 278, 280, 281, 298
- hasty generalization (fallacy)9
- homo homini lupus-model204
- Huizinge 350, 354
- hyperbole (tactics)377
- hypothetical syllogism (rule of inference)323
I
- identification procedure (I) 276–278 ; See also intersubjective identification procedure (IIP).
- ignoratio elenchi (fallacy),
23, 71, 94, 178, 327,
339
- (Aristotle) 41, 84, 86
- immanent dialectical approach/view
53, 61
- on fallacies74
- immediate consequence 281, 282
- index(ed)/ indices 262–266
- individual variables241
- induction:
- (Aristotle) 82, 148, 194
- mathematical (e.g. tree induction) 253, 254, 258, 262, 338
- inductive generalization game281
- infinite regress (problem), metadialogues
8, 157, 162–164
- opening stages 186, 189, 190
- information-seeking dialogue/discussion 150, 204, 330, 331, 348
- initial concession 38, 140, 163, 219, 242, 243, 249, 261, 283, 284, 321, 322
- initial position 11, 12, 239, 241–243, 244–250, 257, 261, 264, 266
- initial thesis 130–32, 134, 137, 241, 243, 247, 261–263, 265, 284 ; See also under standpoint: initial.
- inquiry (dialogue) 128, 144, 146, 149, 151, 196, 204, 205, 320, 330, 346, 385, 386, 390 ; See also under dialogue.
- internal stability adjustment 132, 137, 138
- interpersonal (dialectical, conversational) reasoning 99, 100, 144, 342, 393
- intersubjective explicitization procedure 171, 291, 306
- intersubjective identification procedure (IIP) 290–294, 297–99, 306 ; See also identification procedure (I)
- intersubjective linking procedure (ILP) 291, 293, 297–299
- intuitionistic/constructive (first order) derivability 11, 249, 252
- intuitionistic/constructive (deductive) logic 11, 238, 247–249, 252, 254, 255, 288, 289, 318, 319, 339
- invalid(ity)See valid(ity/invalid(ity).
- Ipse dixisti! 243, 247, 257–259 ; See also You said so yourself!
K
- key list 275, 279, 281, 283, 300
- König’s Lemma266
- krupsis (concealment) 84, 194, 282, 334
L
- LG 283, 284
- linguistic manipulation techniques377
- link (between premises and conclusion) 228, 277, 278, 291, 293–295, 298–301
- loaded terms (fallacy of)382
- local thesis 249, 250, 252, 257, 260
- locution rules 274, 278, 290, 299
- logic 4, 11, 13, 17, 19, 20, 26, 30, 41–43, 46, 49–51, 53–55, 57, 58, 102, 184, 188, 189, 198, 199, 203, 238, 245, 247–249, 252, 254, 255, 269, 281, 283, 285, 288, 310, 311, 316, 317, 323, 339, 376, 390
- logical analogy (the method of) 3, 24, 27, 43, 49, 178
- logical constant 11, 239–241, 242, 319
- logical rule 11, 137, 178, 239, 241, 242, 246, 247, 249
- logical self-defense 87, 376, 377
- logicism317
- logos, 94, 100, 144, 146, 149, 152
- Lorenzen-type system 129, 130, 272, 283–285
M
- making one question out of twoSee many questions.
- many questions (fallacy) 5, 41, 56, 70, 71, 131
- many-leveled dialogue systems 74, 161
- material dialogue 239, 240
- mathematical argument 327–29, 336
- mathematical induction 11, 338
- mathematical proof 2, 13, 55, 312, 314, 318, 319, 326–328–330, 332, 336, 340
- mathematical universes339
- Meijer commission 350, 357
- Meinongian underworld 38–39
- Meno (Plato)331
- meta-arguments161
- metadialogue (dialectical rules for) 114, 158, 160, 161, 163, 164, 189
- metamathematics 310, 317, 318
- micro-derailment337
- mild objection214
- misleading 351, 352, 360, 362, 388, 389
- mob appeal 104, 106
- modus ponens, 172, 253, 284, 316
- modus tollens, 218, 219, 224
- monological:
- argument 320–22
- proof 321–323
- more tangents337
- move (elementary) 296, 297, 303, 304
- negotiation (dialogue) 10, 14, 67, 68, 108, 128, 152, 158, 160, 163, 183, 189, 193, 204, 330, 345, 346, 347, 349, 358, 359, 361, 363, 366, 368, 369, 372, 386
N
- NAM350
- new dialectic 198, 204
- node (final) 251, 255, 256, 259
- non causa (fallacy) 41, 84
- non sequitur (fallacy) 3–4, 16, 23, 25–28, 31, 40–42, 71, 88, 178
- non-argumentation
93–96, 104,
108–120
- advantages of 95, 101, 116
- charge of,; dialectic of 95–97, 103, 104, 110–116, 118, 119
- fallacy of 7, 94
- drawbacks of criticizing117
O
- obligation game 280–281
- Oliver-Massey asymmetry thesis 3, 16, 17, 27
- On Sophistical Refutation (Aristotle) 4, 6, 8, 30, 81, 83, 87, 90, 142, 144, 147, 195, 270–272, 285
- opening stageSee under stages (of critical discussion).
- opportunity (sufficient) 277, 294, 298, 301
- opponent 4–5, 7, 9–11, 13, 26, 28, 52–54, 67, 68, 73, 75, 93, 102–107, 109–119, 125, 126, 130, 132–134, 163, 164, 167–170, 173, 178, 187, 198, 199, 209–211, 213–233, 241, 283, 284, 320–323, 347–348, 358, 360–366, 368–370, 372, 381, 384, 391
- optimism 379, 380, 391
- orderly conduct 290, 295
- original version (of the model of critical discussion) 296, 297, 300, 302–304, 276, 289–292
- overarching principle (Wlodarczyk)196
P
- parameter 111, 211, 234, 241, 242, 254–256
- Paris accord 378, 393
- Paris Peace Conference183
- path251
- pathos, 94, 100, 146, 149, 152
- peirastic 6, 89, 196 ; See also examination dialogue.
- peirastical (examinational) arguments 83, 89
- permissive persuasion dialogueSee under persuasion dialogue: permissive.
- personal (mental, cerebral) reasoning100
- persuasion dialogue
18, 19, 21, 27, 55–57, 124,
128–130, 145,
147, 149, 150,
153, 154, 158–160, 162–164, 166,
178, 183, 184,
188, 204, 330, 331, 346, 358,
359, 366, 382,
385–387
- permissive 129, 130, 137, 205, 349
- rigorous 129, 130, 137, 140, 178, 205/206
- pessimism 377, 379
- petitio principii (fallacy) 19, 41, 84 ; See also begging the question (fallacy); circular argumentation.
- P-liberalized (variant, system) 244, 245, 247
- P-no loss strategy262
- point of order 22, 112, 118, 383
- polemical argumentsSee eristic/contentious/polemical arguments.
- polylogue346
- post-truth379
- pragma-dialectical model of critical discussionSee critical discussion.
- pragma-dialectical rule 2, 18, 41, 65, 66, 69, 94, 170, 171, 173, 204, 222–223, 230, 272, 276, 288, 289, 382, 383, 390
- pragma-dialectics 10, 59, 67, 93, 94, 150, 154, 198, 201–203, 205, 211, 270–272, 279, 280, 288, 303, 326, 349 ; See also extended (version of) pragma-dialectical theory; standard (version of) pragma-dialectical theory.
- predecessor251
- presumption 54, 70, 104, 105, 133–135, 138–141, 214, 215, 219, 222–233
- principle of parrhesia,315
- prisoner’s dilemma370
- problematic premise (fallacy) 48, 49, 59, 390
- procedural rules 272, 384
- profile of dialogue
3, 5, 21, 22, 42, 46, 50, 52,
54, 56, 57, 65, 66, 95, 96, 120,
131, 133, 136,
178, 218, 226
- normative/empirical 65, 68, 71, 76, 77
- concrete/abstract 68, 75
- proof
11–13, 22,
24, 35, 37, 46, 51,
55, 57, 58, 69, 73,
108–110, 112,
114, 129, 130,
133, 134, 137,
145, 148, 172,
202, 209–212, 218, 222, 225,
229–311–232, 248,
249, 253, 254,
256, 266, 310–324, 327–339, 342,
343
- axiomatic313
- canonical 319, 320
- formal 316–318, 328
- immediate and intuitive 311, 312, 318
- informal (mathematical, axiomatic) 313, 314, 319, 320, 339
- mathematical 2, 13, 55, 312, 314, 318, 319, 326–332, 336, 340
- proof by enthymeme148
- proof by example148
- proof by lack of space on the blackboard (fallacy)336
- proof theory
230, 310, 317
- general317
- reductive317
- proponent 5–7, 10, 11, 67, 73, 75, 108–119, 125, 126, 130, 134, 163, 167–170, 199, 209–233, 240, 241, 250, 257, 283, 284, 295, 321–323, 338, 339
- propositional content 112, 116, 119, 212, 277, 291–294, 296, 303, 305, 306
- protagonist 67, 184–187, 201, 204, 205, 209, 276, 280, 290–294, 295–298, 299, 300, 302, 303, 305–307, 322, 329
- Protagoras (Plato) 8–10, 143, 149–154, 159–60, 164, 175, 176, 193, 194
- P-strategy diagram251
- public controversy 2, 13, 14, 344–346–351, 354, 358, 360–362, 367, 369–372, 378
- purported proof of Euclid’s fifth postulate (Saccheri) 335, 336
- pushmi-pullyu 354, 363
- P-winning strategy (diagram) 245, 251, 252, 254, 256–260, 261, 262, 266
Q
- quasi-logical argument 4, 5, 45, 46, 50–56, 61
- quasi-ontological statements39
- quasi-platonic statements39
- quasi-referential ‘The’-phrases39
- questioner 32–34, 37, 38, 71, 81–82–85, 88, 144, 148, 150–152, 159, 160, 175, 193–197, 199, 203–205, 271, 273, 274, 280, 283, 349
- quid pro quo, 357, 358, 366, 368
R
- rationalization 355, 357, 358, 364, 368
- reasoning
4, 18, 36–43, 53, 82, 99–100, 102, 104, 107, 113, 116, 144,
145, 148, 159, 168, 170, 173,
177, 178, 195,
203, 228, 229,
310, 314, 317–319, 322, 327–330,
384
- persuasive functions of 221, 330
- probative functions of 330, 331
- explanatory functions of 330–332
- reductio ad absurdum, 51, 58, 144, 335
- reductio ad impossibile,273
- reductio ad nauseam (fallacy)335
- reduction rule255
- refutation 37, 42, 83, 84, 86, 87, 89, 144, 159, 169, 187, 196, 274, 275, 285, 291, 306, 387
- rejection 214, 220, 223, 224, 226, 229, 232, 332, 361 ; See also under denial: strong
- relevance rule for critical discussion 94, 104, 169, 170, 383, 384
- request
10, 111, 112, 118, 209,
212–214, 216,
220, 231–233, 290
- for counterargumentation 221, 224–226, 229
- for explanation 221–226, 229
- for validation 222, 225, 226, 230
- resolution (of a difference of opinion) on the merits 7, 18, 68, 93, 107, 108, 110, 125, 226, 128–230, 140, 146, 149, 150, 153, 157, 162, 181, 187, 192, 201, 204, 205, 211, 222–224, 233, 320, 326, 344, 347–349, 355, 358, 359, 367, 369, 370, 372, 384
- respondent 81, 191–194, 203, 347
- retaining one’s rights 290, 294–296, 306
- retraction of commitment 7, 8, 25, 57, 58, 70, 76, 125–140, 214, 219, 220, 222, 225, 232, 295, 297, 303, 383
- retraction rule 7, 8, 127–130, 137, 139, 140
- rhetoric 8, 13, 61, 64, 94, 100, 142, 143, 145–154, 202, 280, 285, 327, 334, 339, 344, 347, 376, 386
- Rhetoric (Aristotle) 8, 142, 143, 145, 147–149, 172
- rhetoric of belonging 104–106
- rigorous persuasion dialogueSee under persuasion dialogue: rigorous.
- root251
- round, open
261–264
- closed 261, 263–266
- even262
- odd262
- rule of inference323
- rules for critical discussion 94, 173, 204, 222, 223, 230, 272, 276, 289
- rules for winning and losingSee under winning and losing.
S
- secundum quid (fallacy) 41, 84
- self-gratulatory argument 5, 45, 47, 49, 50, 61
- shelving 354, 364
- shift (dialectical)
14, 23, 61, 68, 69, 71, 119, 148,
152, 154, 222,
228, 386, 390
- illicit 108, 154, 386
- licit 154, 386, 387
- internal68
- shifting the burden of proof (fallacy) 69, 231
- singular proposition38
- singular term 35–39, 42, 177, 283
- solution 6, 32, 48, 85, 90
- Sophistical Refutations (Aristotle) 4, 6, 8, 30, 31, 81, 83, 85–87, 89, 90, 142, 144, 147, 195, 196, 270–272, 285
- soundness 171, 174, 249, 314
- speech act 65, 93, 101, 124, 129, 134, 146, 173, 211–213, 222, 270, 290, 291, 295–297, 303, 306, 307, 314
- speech event 153, 154, 344–346, 348, 368, 371
- speeches 8, 143, 146–154, 159, 160, 326, 378
- spinning 352, 362
- spreading282
- stages (of critical discussion)181
- argumentation 9, 12, 13, 95, 109, 162, 181, 182, 184, 186–190, 276, 279–301, 288–296, 297, 300, 305–307, 315, 322, 326, 334
- concluding 9, 13, 60, 182, 201, 279, 290, 300, 327, 338
- confrontation 9, 13, 162, 181, 182, 291, 326, 332
- opening 9, 13, 81, 109, 134, 162, 170, 181–183, 184–190, 218, 219, 276, 291, 326, 333
- standard (version of) pragma-dialectical theory 10, 201, 202
- standpoint:
- initial 67, 69, 93, 94, 101, 109, 115, 116, 119, 168–170, 182, 188, 201, 271, 272, 276–278–280, 290–299–303, 305, 306, 315; (see also initial thesis)
- opposing 212, 213, 215, 230
- starting point rule390
- statement
11, 21, 39, 41, 42,
130, 241–242–244,
248–250, 252,
257, 258, 260–263, 265, 319
- elementary 239, 241, 243, 244, 246, 258
- logically complex241
- status problem 9, 188, 190
- strategic advice 213, 215–217, 220–224, 233, 303
- strategic maneuvering 10, 13, 154, 205, 206, 326–327–330, 332, 333, 337, 339, 348, 349
- strategy
10, 14, 345, 347, 381, 388
- A-/B-351
- balanced/unbalanced 14, 349, 359, 360, 362–364, 368, 369, 371
- blaming 351, 353, 355
- constructive 367, 369
- constructively effective 349, 367, 368
- cooperative 349, 368, 369, 371
- destructive 367, 368
- destructively effective 349, 367, 368
- fair359
- obstructive 348, 350, 369–371
- partial347
- tolerant/intolerant 14, 349, 359, 361–363, 365, 366, 369, 371
- transparent/opaque 14, 349, 357, 359–361–366, 368, 369, 371
- unfair 349, 351, 358, 360–366, 368, 369
- winning 11, 12, 50, 240, 245, 247–249, 251, 252, 254, 256, 257–262, 266, 321, 323
- straw man (fallacy) 69, 70, 132, 133, 209, 229, 231, 382
- strong critical strategy 50, 52, 54
- structural rule 11, 231, 239, 245, 251, 252, 254, 256, 258, 261, 262, 274, 278, 299
- subdiscussion 21, 187, 326
- subdispute 186, 187
- subordinated model 205, 206
- successful (attack, defense) 215, 216, 221, 223, 224, 277–279, 290, 293, 294, 296–298, 300–302, 306, 324
- successfully defended 215, 277–279, 293, 294, 296, 298, 300, 301, 306, 385
- successor 251–255, 266
- support relation302
- surplus value 55, 319, 320, 324
- syllogism 148, 272, 319, 323, 329
- system H 189, 281, 299
- system of formal dialectic 69, 271, 272, 274, 276, 278, 298 ; See also dialectical system; dialogue game; formal system of dialogue rules.
- systematically misleading expressions 39, 88
T
- ten commandments 12, 271, 272, 288
- tenability criticism 5, 21, 57, 73, 168, 211, 213, 220, 222, 226, 229
- terminal rule 243–246, 248, 257 ; See also winning and losing.
- testing procedure 186, 291, 306
- the immortality argument 58, 60, 61
- The New Rhetoric (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca) 4, 50, 51, 53–55, 61
- theory of categories (Aristotle) 4, 32, 39, 42
- theory of descriptions 38, 39
- thesis (initial)See initial thesis.
- third man (argument) 4, 37, 38
- thwarting (fallacy)232
- tolerant/intolerantSee under strategy.
- Topics (Aristotle) 6, 8, 10, 12, 81–84, 90, 142, 144, 145, 149, 192, 194–198, 232, 233, 270–272, 280–283, 285
- transparent/opaqueSee under strategy.
- tree
19, 56, 131, 251, 253, 254
- tree diagram 251, 255, 316 finitely branching, 266
- trivialization 353, 362, 363, 369
- tu quoque (fallacy) 61, 390
- type I system 245–247
- type II system 243, 245–247
- type of dialogue 3, 8, 10, 14, 68, 71, 128, 129, 131, 137, 140, 145, 160, 162, 163, 198, 204, 205, 269, 349, 386, 390 ; See also deliberation dialogue; eristic/contentious dialogue/discussion; information-seeking dialogue/discussion; inquiry (dialogue); negotiation (dialogue); persuasion dialogue.
U
- undermining propaganda 390, 391
- unexpressed premise 9, 170–173, 175, 177
- unreason (age of) 14, 377–380, 382, 384, 386, 388, 390, 391
V
- valid(ity)/ invalid(ity)
3, 9, 16–20, 23–28, 31, 41, 49,
53, 54, 108, 116, 148,
164, 167, 168,
170–178, 184,
199, 200, 202,
219, 240, 272–274, 311, 327, 329, 332–334, 337, 378
- formal(ly) 16, 18, 19, 20, 25, 176
- deductive(ly) 116, 148, 167, 171, 175, 177, 219, 378
- logical(ly) 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 199
- material(ly) 176, 177
- validity rule for critical discussion 170, 173, 327
W
- war metaphor:
- (argument is war)192
- (war on unreason/combating unreason) 380, 381
- Watergate379
- weak moves231
- weaponizing (words, stereotypes)377
- weasel words377
- Why-Because system with questions (Hamblin) 125, 127, 281
- winning and losing
111, 199, 200, 232, 238, 244, 246, 279, 300, 321
- rules for 244, 274, 279, 300
- winning remark 243, 244, 246, 248, 250, 258 ; See also ipse dixisti!; You said so yourself!
- winning strategy 11, 12, 192, 240, 245, 247, 248, 251, 252, 254, 257–262, 266, 321, 323
Y
- You said so yourself! 125, 243, 258 ; See also ipse dixisti!
- Your Turn 277–279, 298–302
