Institutional and Institutionalized Fallacies: Diversifying Pragma-Dialectical Fallacy Judgments
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Publication date | 2020 |
| Host editors |
|
| Book title | OSSA 12: Evidence, Persuasion & Diversity |
| Series | Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference |
| Event | OSSA 12: Evidence, Persuasion & Diversity |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Publisher | Windsor, ON: OSSA |
| Organisations |
|
| Abstract | To improve argumentative discourse, it is necessary to make fallacy judgments that take into consideration the social practice in which argumentation occurs. In this paper, I propose four meta-categories for fallacies to study the connection of fallacies to their institutionalized discourse. Using the first 2016 U.S. Presidential Debate as a case study, I show how this framework can be used to propose improvements to argumentative contexts. |
| Document type | Conference contribution |
| Language | English |
| Related publication | Institutionalized argumentative reasonableness: Commentary on Menno Reijven’s “Institutional and Institutionalized Fallacies: Diversifying Pragma-Dialectical Fallacy Judgments” |
| Published at | https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA12/Wednesday/18/ |
| Downloads |
Institutional and Institutionalized Fallacies_ Diversifying Pragm
(Final published version)
|
| Permalink to this page | |
