Starting from Sperber and Mercier’s theory (2011) on the relationship between reasoning and arguing, we will try to rethink the link between rhetoric and argumentation. Using Aristotelian rhetoric as a theoretical framework, we will focus on two related features: 1) the nature and the role of argumentation inferences in classical models of rhetoric; 2) the role of normativity in assessing a naturalistic description of what we make when we argue.

Are Humans Poor at Arguing? From ‘the Argumentative Theory of Reasoning’ back to a Rhetorical Theory of Argumentation

Mauro Serra;
2018-01-01

Abstract

Starting from Sperber and Mercier’s theory (2011) on the relationship between reasoning and arguing, we will try to rethink the link between rhetoric and argumentation. Using Aristotelian rhetoric as a theoretical framework, we will focus on two related features: 1) the nature and the role of argumentation inferences in classical models of rhetoric; 2) the role of normativity in assessing a naturalistic description of what we make when we argue.
2018
978-1-84890-284-8
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11386/4724494
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact