What Makes an Argument Strong?
It is widely believed that Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s theory of argumentation is vulnerable to the charge of relativism. This paper provides a more charitable interpretation of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s normative views, one that properly considers the historical trajectory of their work...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Windsor
2024-03-01
|
| Series: | Informal Logic |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/8222 |
| _version_ | 1797258808074960896 |
|---|---|
| author | Blake D. Scott |
| author_facet | Blake D. Scott |
| author_sort | Blake D. Scott |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
It is widely believed that Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s theory of argumentation is vulnerable to the charge of relativism. This paper provides a more charitable interpretation of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s normative views, one that properly considers the historical trajectory of their work and a wider range of texts than existing interpretations. It is argued that their views are better characterized as a form of “contrastivism about arguments” than any kind relativism. This more accurate depiction contributes to ongoing efforts to revive interest in Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s work as well as build bridges with trends in contemporary argumentation theory.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T22:59:25Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-deec50d412044750b8411e28dcf68605 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0824-2577 2293-734X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T22:59:25Z |
| publishDate | 2024-03-01 |
| publisher | University of Windsor |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Informal Logic |
| spelling | doaj.art-deec50d412044750b8411e28dcf686052024-03-17T17:00:00ZengUniversity of WindsorInformal Logic0824-25772293-734X2024-03-0144110.22329/il.v44i1.8222What Makes an Argument Strong?Blake D. Scott0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0727-3330Institute of Philosophy, KU Leuven It is widely believed that Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s theory of argumentation is vulnerable to the charge of relativism. This paper provides a more charitable interpretation of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s normative views, one that properly considers the historical trajectory of their work and a wider range of texts than existing interpretations. It is argued that their views are better characterized as a form of “contrastivism about arguments” than any kind relativism. This more accurate depiction contributes to ongoing efforts to revive interest in Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s work as well as build bridges with trends in contemporary argumentation theory. https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/8222rhetoricaudiencereasonablepluralismrelativism |
| spellingShingle | Blake D. Scott What Makes an Argument Strong? Informal Logic rhetoric audience reasonable pluralism relativism |
| title | What Makes an Argument Strong? |
| title_full | What Makes an Argument Strong? |
| title_fullStr | What Makes an Argument Strong? |
| title_full_unstemmed | What Makes an Argument Strong? |
| title_short | What Makes an Argument Strong? |
| title_sort | what makes an argument strong |
| topic | rhetoric audience reasonable pluralism relativism |
| url | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/8222 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT blakedscott whatmakesanargumentstrong |