Article published in:
Controversy and Confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theoryEdited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
[Controversies 6] 2008
► pp. 231–247
Rhetoric of science, pragma-dialectics, and science studies
Published online: 17 December 2008
https://doi.org/10.1075/cvs.6.15kut
https://doi.org/10.1075/cvs.6.15kut
Cited by
Cited by other publications
de Donato Rodríguez, Xavier & Jesús Zamora Bonilla
2014. Scientific Controversies and the Ethics of Arguing and Belief in the Face of Rational Disagreement.
Argumentation 28:1 ► pp. 39 ff. 
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2013.
In Handbook of Argumentation Theory,
► pp. 1 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2013.
In Handbook of Argumentation Theory,
► pp. 1 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2014.
In Handbook of Argumentation Theory,
► pp. 517 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2014.
In Handbook of Argumentation Theory,
► pp. 677 ff.
Zemplén, Gábor Áron
2019. Diagrammatic carriers and the acceptance of Newton’s optical theory.
Synthese 196:9 ► pp. 3577 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 september 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.