Argumentative Norms: How Contextual Can They Be? A Cautionary Tale

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

It is true, as van Eemeren and Garssen say, that argumentation always occurs in context: to engage in argumentation, an arguer must be in some context or other. But are argument norms similarly contextual? That is, are the norms governing argument quality relative to or dependent upon the context in which the argument is either asserted or evaluated? Let contextualism be the view that criteria of argument quality vary by context: According to contextualists, whether an argument is good or not, and how good it is, depends upon the context in which it is either uttered or evaluated. In this paper I defend contextualism, but only within limits.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationArgumentation Library
PublisherSpringer Nature
Pages205-215
Number of pages11
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Publication series

NameArgumentation Library
Volume28
ISSN (Print)1566-7650
ISSN (Electronic)2215-1907

Keywords

  • Argument Evaluation
  • Argument Norm
  • Argumentation Scheme
  • Argumentation Theorist
  • Rational Justification

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Philosophy
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Language and Linguistics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Argumentative Norms: How Contextual Can They Be? A Cautionary Tale'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this