A case study of a short televised debate between a climate scientist and an advocate for climate skepticism
provides the basis for developing a contemporary conception of sophistry. The sophist has a high degree of argumentative content
knowledge – knowledge of a domain selected and structured in ways that are most germane for its use in making arguments. The
sophist also makes the deliberate choice to argue for a disreputable view, one that goes against the views of the majority, or of
the experts. Sophistry, drawing as it does on argumentative skill, is difficult to manage. The best approach is likely to refuse
debate; but if debate is unavoidable, then the sophist must be met with equal skill. It will be hard to develop such skill,
however, as long as the sophist’s view is thought to be disreputable.
2018, September24. Taking fire from both sides [Blog post]. Retrieved from [URL]
Boykoff, M.
2007Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area, 39(2), 470–481.
Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M.
2004Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125–136.
C-SPAN
2009U.N. Climate Change Opening Ceremony. Retrieved from [URL]
Ceccarelli, L.
2011Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, rhetoric, and public debate. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 14(2), 195–228.
Collins, H., & Evans, R.
2002The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235–296.
2001Did the sophists aim to persuade?Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 19(3), 275–291.
Glassman, M.
2015Stopping the spin cycle: ‘Merchants of Doubt’ debunks deceit. Documentary Magazine 2015(Winter).
Goodnight, G. T.
1982The personal, technical and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 181, 214–227.
Goodwin, J.
2002Designing issues. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis (pp. 81–96). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Goodwin, J.
2005Designing premises. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Argumentation in practice (pp. 99–114). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins.
Goodwin, J.
2018Effective because ethical: Speech act theory as a framework for scientists’ communication. In S. Priest, J. Goodwin, & M. Dahlstrom (Eds.), Ethics and practice in science communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodwin, J., & Honeycutt, L.
2009When science goes public: From technical arguments to appeals to authority. Studies in Communication Sciences, 9(2), 19–30.
Gore, D. C.
2011Sophists and sophistry in the Wealth of Nations. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 44(1), 1–26.
Hamblin, C. L.
1993Fallacies. Newport News, VA: Vale Press.
Hawhee, D.
2002Agonism and arete. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 35(3), 185–207.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
2007Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Retrieved from [URL].
Jackson, S.
1998Disputation by design. Argumentation, 121, 183–198.
Jackson, S.
2015Design thinking in argumentation theory and practice. Argumentation, 29(3), 243–263.
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W.
2003The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260.
Leff, M.
1986Textual criticism: The legacy of G. P. Mohrmann. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 72(4), 377–389.
Lewiński, M., & Aakhus, M.
2014Argumentative polylogues in a dialectical framework: A methodological inquiry. Argumentation, 28(2), 161–185.
2009Climate Depot’s TV Debate in Copenhagen: UK Warming Prof. falsely claims ‘5000 leading climate scientists’ in UN IPCC – Morano Counters: ‘You need to apologize and retract that immediately’. Retrieved from [URL]
Olivier, B.
2007Pseudo-communication and the return of the sophist: Thank you for smoking, at first sight. Communicatio, 33(2), 45–62.
Olson, R.
2010a#17) Interview with Marc Morano, Part I: “The Muhammad Ali of Global Warming ‘Debating’”. Retrieved from [URL]
Olson, R.
2010b#18) Interview with Marc Morano, Part II: Naming Names (Bill McKibben, Exxon Mobil, George Monbiot, Al Gore, John Kerry, Joe Romm, Dan Weiss, Robert Murtha, Mike Mann, Ed Begley, Jr., Andy Revkin, and Ralph Cicerone). Retrieved from [URL]
Olson, R.
2010c#19) Analysis: Why Marc Morano is such a good communicator. Retrieved from [URL]
Parsons, D.
2017Deconstructing a climate change skeptic: A podcast with Marc Morano. Retrieved from [URL]
Richardson, J. H.
2010This man wants to convince you global warming is a hoax. Esquire. Retrieved from [URL]
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S.
2010Comparing the argumentum model of topics to other contemporary approaches to argument schemes: The procedural and material components. Argumentation, 24(4), 489–512.
2009, December12). Developing
World Told to Make Sacrifices to Save the Planet [Video File]. Retrieved
from [URL]
Whedbee, K. E.
2008Making the worse case appear the better: British reception of the Greek sophists prior to 1850. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 11(4), 603–630.
Zarefsky, D.
2014Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation Rhetorical perspectives on argumentation: Selected essays by David Zarefsky (pp. 87–101): Springer International Publishing.
Cited by
Cited by 7 other publications
Ceyhan, Gaye D. & Deniz Saribas
2022. Research trends on climate communication in the post-truth era. Educational and Developmental Psychologist 39:1 ► pp. 5 ff.
2022. Discussing the Silence and Denial around Population Growth and Its Environmental Impact. How Do We Find Ways Forward?. World 3:4 ► pp. 1009 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. 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.