Catalog Search
 
Advanced Search

My shopping cart cart icon
Your cart is empty

My wish list wishlist icon
Your wish list is empty



Last update:
2 September 2010

© John Benjamins
Home

Controversy and Confrontation

Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory

Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
University of Amsterdam

2008. xiii, 278 pp.
Publishing status: Available

HardboundIn stock
978 90 272 1886 5 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00
Add to shopping cart

e-BookAvailable from e-book platforms
978 90 272 9087 8 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00
Ordering information

Add to wish list

The essays that are collected in Controversy and Confrontation provide a closer insight into the relationship between controversy and confrontation that deepens our understanding of the functioning of argumentative discourse in managing differences of opinion. Their authors stem from two backgrounds. First, the controversy scholars Dascal, Marras, Euli, Regner, Ferreira, and Lessl discuss historical controversies in science, both from a theoretical and an empirical perspective; Saim concentrates on a historical controversy; Fritz provides a historical perspective on controversies by analyzing communication principles. Second the argumentation scholars Johnson, van Laar, van Eemeren, Garssen and Meuffels address theoretical or empirical aspects of argumentative confrontation; Aakhus and Vasilyeva examine argumentative discourse from the perspective of conversation analysis; Jackson analyzes argumentative confrontation in a recent debate between scientists and politicians. Last but not least, two contributors, Kutrovátz and Zemplén, make an attempt to bridge the study of historical controversy and the study of argumentation.


Table of contents

Preface
vii–viii
List of contributors
ix–xiii
Controversy and confrontation in argumentative discourse
Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
1–26
Dichotomies and types of debate
Marcelo Dascal
27–49
Charles Darwin versus George Mivart: The role of polemics in science
Anna Carolina Regner
51–75
Scientific demarcation and metascience: The national academy of sciences on greenhouse warming and evolution
Thomas Lessl
77–91
Reforming the Jews, rejecting marginalization: The 1799 German debate on Jewish emancipation in its controversy context
Mirela Saim
93–108
Communication principles for controversies: A historical perspective
Gerd Fritz
109–124
On the role of pragmatics, rhetoric and dialectic in scientific controversies
Ademar Ferreira
125–133
A "dialectic ladder" of refutation and dissuasion
Cristina Marras and Enrico Euli
135–147
Responding to objections
Ralph H. Johnson
149–162
Pragmatic inconsistency and credibility
Jan Albert van Laar
163–179
Reasonableness in confrontation: Empirical evidence concerning the assessment of ad hominem fallacies
Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels
181–195
Managing disagreement in multiparty deliberation
Mark Aakhus and Alena Vasilyeva
197–214
Predicaments of politicization in the debate over abstinence-only sex education
Sally Jackson
215–230
Rhetoric of science, pragma-dialectics, and science studies
Gábor Kutrovátz
231–247
Scientific controversies and the pragma-dialectical model: Analysing a case study from the 1670s, the published part of the Newton-Lucas correspondence
Gábor Zemplén
249–273
Index
275–278