Defining Rhetorical Argumentation

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Defining Rhetorical Argumentation. / Kock, Christian Erik J.

I: Philosophy and Rhetoric, Bind 46, Nr. 4, 10.12.2013, s. 437-464.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Kock, CEJ 2013, 'Defining Rhetorical Argumentation', Philosophy and Rhetoric, bind 46, nr. 4, s. 437-464. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437

APA

Kock, C. E. J. (2013). Defining Rhetorical Argumentation. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 46(4), 437-464. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437

Vancouver

Kock CEJ. Defining Rhetorical Argumentation. Philosophy and Rhetoric. 2013 dec. 10;46(4):437-464. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437

Author

Kock, Christian Erik J. / Defining Rhetorical Argumentation. I: Philosophy and Rhetoric. 2013 ; Bind 46, Nr. 4. s. 437-464.

Bibtex

@article{7b2428306e984f8a839e9e137b0d5e04,
title = "Defining Rhetorical Argumentation",
abstract = "This article argues for a definition of rhetorical argumentation based on the theme of the argumentation, i.e., the issue in dispute - rather than its aim (e.g., to {\textquoteleft}win{\textquoteright}) or its means (e.g., emotional appeals). The principal thinkers in the rhetorical tradition, from Aristotle onwards, saw rhetoric as practical reasoning, i.e., reasoning on proposals for action or choice, not on propositions that may be either true or false. Citing several contemporary philosophers, the article argues that such a definition acquits rhetorical argumentation of any culpable unconcern with truth and explains certain peculiar properties of it that tend to be under-theorized in argumentation theory.",
keywords = "Faculty of Humanities, rhetoric, truth, practical, deliberation, argumentation",
author = "Kock, {Christian Erik J}",
year = "2013",
month = dec,
day = "10",
doi = "10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "437--464",
journal = "Philosophy and Rhetoric",
issn = "0031-8213",
publisher = "Pennsylvania State University Press",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining Rhetorical Argumentation

AU - Kock, Christian Erik J

PY - 2013/12/10

Y1 - 2013/12/10

N2 - This article argues for a definition of rhetorical argumentation based on the theme of the argumentation, i.e., the issue in dispute - rather than its aim (e.g., to ‘win’) or its means (e.g., emotional appeals). The principal thinkers in the rhetorical tradition, from Aristotle onwards, saw rhetoric as practical reasoning, i.e., reasoning on proposals for action or choice, not on propositions that may be either true or false. Citing several contemporary philosophers, the article argues that such a definition acquits rhetorical argumentation of any culpable unconcern with truth and explains certain peculiar properties of it that tend to be under-theorized in argumentation theory.

AB - This article argues for a definition of rhetorical argumentation based on the theme of the argumentation, i.e., the issue in dispute - rather than its aim (e.g., to ‘win’) or its means (e.g., emotional appeals). The principal thinkers in the rhetorical tradition, from Aristotle onwards, saw rhetoric as practical reasoning, i.e., reasoning on proposals for action or choice, not on propositions that may be either true or false. Citing several contemporary philosophers, the article argues that such a definition acquits rhetorical argumentation of any culpable unconcern with truth and explains certain peculiar properties of it that tend to be under-theorized in argumentation theory.

KW - Faculty of Humanities

KW - rhetoric

KW - truth

KW - practical

KW - deliberation

KW - argumentation

U2 - 10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437

DO - 10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0437

M3 - Journal article

VL - 46

SP - 437

EP - 464

JO - Philosophy and Rhetoric

JF - Philosophy and Rhetoric

SN - 0031-8213

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 45966749